Epp Manifesto 2019
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions. -
EU-27 Watch No 8
EU-27 WATCH No. 8 ISSN 1610-6458 Issued in March 2009 Edited by the Institute for European Politics (IEP), Berlin in collaboration with the Austrian Institute of International Affairs, Vienna Institute for International Relations, Zagreb Bulgarian European Community Studies Association, Institute for World Economics of the Hungarian Sofia Academy of Sciences, Budapest Center for European Studies / Middle East Technical Institute for Strategic and International Studies, University, Ankara Lisbon Centre européen de Sciences Po, Paris Institute of International and European Affairs, Centre d’étude de la vie politique, Université libre de Dublin Bruxelles Institute of International Relations, Prague Centre d’Etudes et de Recherches Européennes Institute of International Relations and Political Robert Schuman, Luxembourg Science, Vilnius University Centre of International Relations, Ljubljana Istituto Affari Internazionali, Rome Cyprus Institute for Mediterranean, European and Latvian Institute of International Affairs, International Studies, Nicosia Riga Danish Institute for International Studies, Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies, Copenhagen University of Malta Elcano Royal Institute and UNED University, Madrid Netherlands Institute of International Relations European Institute of Romania, Bucharest ‘Clingendael’, The Hague Federal Trust for Education and Research, London Slovak Foreign Policy Association, Bratislava Finnish Institute of International Affairs, Helsinki Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Foundation -
Case Study: “We Don´T Want Islam in Czech Republic”
Case Study: We Don´t Want Islam in Czech Republic Jaroslav Valuch May 2018 Summary Martin Konvicka, co-founder and leader of the “We Don't Want Islam in Czech Republic” initiative (Islám v České republice nechceme – IVCRN) and one of its derivative movements, “Bloc Against Islam,” is currently under police investigation and awaiting trial for inciting hatred via comments on the Facebook page of the initiative. Inciting hatred against a group of persons or restricting their rights is a criminal offence according to the Czech legal code. This initiative started in 2009 as a very successful Facebook page community (the page had up to 160,000 followers in January 2016 before it was blocked by Facebook). It then morphed into a political movement with aspirations to gain representation in the Senate and parliament. At the height of his public political career, Konvicka and Bloc Against Islam received the endorsement of the President of the Czech Republic, who publicly supported the initiative by delivering a speech on their stage on November 17th 2015, the National Day of Fighting for Freedom and Democracy (anniversary of 1989 Velvet revolution). Konvicka decided to run in the Senate election in October 2016 with his new initiative called Alternative for Czech Republic (directly inspired by the German Alternative fur Deutschland). His run ended in failure, and he finished second from the bottom. Dangerous Speech Framework Analysis Social and Historical Context Since the rise of violent right-wing extremism after the Czech Velvet Revolution in 1989, measures to counter extremism (such as the training of security forces and the adoption of extremism and hate crime legislation) have been gradually implemented.1 The threat has received serious attention from even the highest political figures. -
(SRHR) in European Institutions. by Elena
Study for POLICY MAKERS on opposition to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in European institutions. by Elena Zacharenko Anti-gender mobilisations in Europe Study for policy makers on opposition to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in European institutions Author: Elena Zacharenko This study has been commissioned by Heidi Hautala MEP, Vice President of the European Parliament. Published in December 2020 Book cover illustration, design and layout by Laura Ospina - www.lauraennube.com 2 Table of CONTENTS Foreword from MEP Heidi Hautala.............................................................04 Executive summary.......................................................................................06 What is this study and who is it for? ........................................................... 08 Part 1: What drives the anti-gender movement?...........................................10 1.1 Origins and current manifestations...........................................................12 1.2 Global connections ..................................................................................13 1.3 The anti-gender movement in the EU...................................................... 16 1.4 Is it a backlash?........................................................................................23 1.5 Recommendations...................................................................................24 Part 2: Main anti-gender actors and their tactics at EU level........................26 2.1 Lobbying organisations -
Protecting Cultural Heritage As a Common Good of Humanity: a Challenge for Criminal Justice
International Scientific and Professional Advisory Council of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme PROTECTING CULTURAL HERITAGE AS A COMMON GOOD OF HUMANITY: A CHALLENGE FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE Edited by Stefano Manacorda Arianna Visconti Selected papers and contributions from the international Conference on «Protecting Cultural Heritage as a Common Good of Humanity: A Challenge for Criminal Justice» Courmayeur Mont Blanc, Italy 13-15 December 2013 STEFANO MANACORDA Professor of Criminal Law, University of Naples II, Italy; Visiting Professor, Queen Mary University of London, UK; ISPAC Deputy Chair and Director ARIANNA VISCONTI Researcher in Criminal Law, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy ISBN 978-88-96410-03-5 © ISPAC, 2014 Via Palestro 12, 20121 Milano, Italy; phone: +39-02-86460714; E-mail: [email protected] ; Web Site: http://ispac.cnpds.org/ The views and opinions expressed in this volume are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the United Nations or the organizations with which the authors are affiliated. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by print, photocopy, microfilm or any other means without prior written permission from CNPDS/ISPAC. Acknowledgements ISPAC wishes to thank the “Fondazione Centro Internazionale su Diritto, Società e Economia” and its President, Dr. Lodovico Passerin d’Entrèves, for their generous contribution towards the publication of this book. CONTENTS Preface STEFANO MANACORDA p. 9 Keynote Address JOHN SANDAGE p. 17 Part I – Illegal Traffic in Cultural Property: The Need for Reform Patrimonio culturale e beni comuni: un nuovo compito per la comunità internazionale UGO MATTEI p. -
Internal Politics and Views on Brexit
BRIEFING PAPER Number 8362, 2 May 2019 The EU27: Internal Politics By Stefano Fella, Vaughne Miller, Nigel Walker and Views on Brexit Contents: 1. Austria 2. Belgium 3. Bulgaria 4. Croatia 5. Cyprus 6. Czech Republic 7. Denmark 8. Estonia 9. Finland 10. France 11. Germany 12. Greece 13. Hungary 14. Ireland 15. Italy 16. Latvia 17. Lithuania 18. Luxembourg 19. Malta 20. Netherlands 21. Poland 22. Portugal 23. Romania 24. Slovakia 25. Slovenia 26. Spain 27. Sweden www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 The EU27: Internal Politics and Views on Brexit Contents Summary 6 1. Austria 13 1.1 Key Facts 13 1.2 Background 14 1.3 Current Government and Recent Political Developments 15 1.4 Views on Brexit 17 2. Belgium 25 2.1 Key Facts 25 2.2 Background 25 2.3 Current Government and recent political developments 26 2.4 Views on Brexit 28 3. Bulgaria 32 3.1 Key Facts 32 3.2 Background 32 3.3 Current Government and recent political developments 33 3.4 Views on Brexit 35 4. Croatia 37 4.1 Key Facts 37 4.2 Background 37 4.3 Current Government and recent political developments 38 4.4 Views on Brexit 39 5. Cyprus 42 5.1 Key Facts 42 5.2 Background 42 5.3 Current Government and recent political developments 43 5.4 Views on Brexit 45 6. Czech Republic 49 6.1 Key Facts 49 6.2 Background 49 6.3 Current Government and recent political developments 50 6.4 Views on Brexit 53 7. -
Britain's European Question and an In/Out Referendum
To be or not to be in Europe: is that the question? Britain’s European question and an in/out referendum TIM OLIVER* ‘It is time to settle this European question in British politics.’ David Cameron, 23 January 2013.1 Britain’s European question It came as no surprise to those who follow the issue of the European Union in British politics that David Cameron’s January 2013 speech on Europe excited a great deal of comment. The EU is among the most divisive issues in British politics. Cameron himself drew on this to justify his committing the Conservative Party, should it win the general election in 2015, to seek a renegotiated position for the UK within the EU which would then be put to the British people in an in/out referendum. Growing public frustrations at UK–EU relations were, he argued, the result of both a longstanding failure to consult the British people about their country’s place in the EU, and a changing EU that was undermining the current relationship between Britain and the Union. As a result, he argued, ‘the democratic consent for the EU in Britain is now wafer-thin’. Cameron’s speech was met with both criticism and praise from Eurosceptics and pro-Europeans alike.2 In a speech at Chatham House backing Cameron’s plan, the former Conservative prime minister Sir John Major best captured some of the hopes for a referendum: ‘The relationship with Europe has poisoned British politics for too long, distracted parliament from other issues and come close to destroying the Conservative Party. -
Cultural Heritage in the Realm of the Commons: Conversations on the Case of Greece
Stelios Lekakis Stelios Lekakis Edited by Edited by CulturalCultural heritageheritage waswas inventedinvented inin thethe realmrealm ofof nation-states,nation-states, andand fromfrom EditedEdited byby anan earlyearly pointpoint itit waswas consideredconsidered aa publicpublic good,good, stewardedstewarded toto narratenarrate thethe SteliosStelios LekakisLekakis historichistoric deedsdeeds ofof thethe ancestors,ancestors, onon behalfbehalf ofof theirtheir descendants.descendants. NowaNowa-- days,days, asas thethe neoliberalneoliberal rhetoricrhetoric wouldwould havehave it,it, itit isis forfor thethe benefitbenefit ofof thesethese tax-payingtax-paying citizenscitizens thatthat privatisationprivatisation logiclogic thrivesthrives inin thethe heritageheritage sector,sector, toto covercover theirtheir needsneeds inin thethe namename ofof socialsocial responsibilityresponsibility andand otherother truntrun-- catedcated viewsviews ofof thethe welfarewelfare state.state. WeWe areare nownow atat aa criticalcritical stage,stage, wherewhere thisthis doubledouble enclosureenclosure ofof thethe pastpast endangersendangers monuments,monuments, thinsthins outout theirtheir socialsocial significancesignificance andand manipulatesmanipulates theirtheir valuesvalues inin favourfavour ofof economisticeconomistic horizons.horizons. Conversations on the Case of Greece Conversations on the Case of Greece Cultural Heritage in the Realm of Commons: Cultural Heritage in the Realm of Commons: ThisThis volumevolume examinesexamines whetherwhether wewe cancan placeplace -
Hungary: an Election in Question
To: Schmoozers From: Kim Lane Scheppele Re: Elections and Regrets 16 February 2014 I had hoped to join you all in beautiful downtown Baltimore, but I can’t come next weekend. The reason why I can’t is connected to the ticket I’m submitting anyhow. The Hungarian election is 6 April and I’m working flat out on things connected to that election. My ticket explains the new Hungarian election system, which I argue is rigged to favor the governing party. Hence the length: you can’t make an accusation like that without giving evidence. So, in a series of five blog posts that will (I hope) appear on the Krugman blog, I have laid out why I think that the opposition can’t win unless it gets far more than a majority of the votes. For those of you who haven’t been following Hungary, this new election system is par for the course. The government elected in 2010 has been on a legal rampage, remaking the whole legal order with one key purpose in mind: to keep itself in power for the foreseeable future. Toward that end, the government pushed through a new constitution plus five constitutional amendments and 834 other laws (including a new civil code, criminal code and more). As I have been documenting for the last several years, the governing party is expert at designing complex legal orders to achieve very particular results. For my writings on this, see http://lapa.princeton.edu/newsdetail.php?ID=63 . So my dissection of the new Hungarian electoral framework is what I’m submitting as my ticket for the Schmooze. -
50 YEARS of EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT HISTORY and Subjugated
European Parliament – 50th birthday QA-70-07-089-EN-C series 1958–2008 Th ere is hardly a political system in the modern world that does not have a parliamentary assembly in its institutional ‘toolkit’. Even autocratic or totalitarian BUILDING PARLIAMENT: systems have found a way of creating the illusion of popular expression, albeit tamed 50 YEARS OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT HISTORY and subjugated. Th e parliamentary institution is not in itself a suffi cient condition for granting a democratic licence. Yet the existence of a parliament is a necessary condition of what 1958–2008 we have defi ned since the English, American and French Revolutions as ‘democracy’. Since the start of European integration, the history of the European Parliament has fallen between these two extremes. Europe was not initially created with democracy in mind. Yet Europe today is realistic only if it espouses the canons of democracy. In other words, political realism in our era means building a new utopia, that of a supranational or post-national democracy, while for two centuries the DNA of democracy has been its realisation within the nation-state. Yves Mény President of the European University Institute, Florence BUILDING PARLIAMENT: BUILDING 50 YEARS OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT HISTORY PARLIAMENT EUROPEAN OF YEARS 50 ISBN 978-92-823-2368-7 European Parliament – 50th birthday series Price in Luxembourg (excluding VAT): EUR 25 BUILDING PARLIAMENT: 50 YEARS OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT HISTORY 1958–2008 This work was produced by the European University Institute, Florence, under the direction of Yves Mény, for the European Parliament. Contributors: Introduction, Jean-Marie Palayret; Part One, Luciano Bardi, Nabli Beligh, Cristina Sio Lopez and Olivier Costa (coordinator); Part Two, Pierre Roca, Ann Rasmussen and Paolo Ponzano (coordinator); Part Three, Florence Benoît-Rohmer; Conclusions, Yves Mény. -
PDF (Fine Gael Manifesto 2020)
A future to Look Forward to Taoiseach’s Foreword Our economy has never been stronger. There are more people at work than ever before, incomes are rising, poverty is falling and the public finances are back in order. We have a deal on Brexit that ensures no hard border, citizens’ rights will be protected and the Common Travel Area will remain in place. The Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive have reconvened. However, it’s not enough. Brexit is not done yet. It’s only half-time. The next step is to negotiate a free trade agreement between the EU, including Ireland, and the United Kingdom that protects our jobs, our businesses, our rural and coastal communities, and our economy. Progress on health and housing is gathering momentum. I meet people every day and I know the worry, frustration and concerns around the pace of progress in health and housing. In this manifesto we lay out our plans to build on what has been done, with a particular focus on home ownership and universal healthcare. An improving economy and the careful management of our public finances, along with the sensitive stewardship of the upcoming Brexit trade negotiations, will enable us to drive that momentum and provide more houses, more hospital beds, more nurses and Gardaí, deliver climate action, and drive tax reform. We’ve been able to make good progress, but I know it’s not enough. I want us to do much more. I want people to start feeling the growing strength of our economy in their pockets – I want people to see it in their payslips and in their towns and parishes. -
What Happened to France's European Dream?
1 FROM FOUNDING FATHERS TO RELUCTANT EUROPEANS; WHAT HAPPENED TO FRANCE’S EUROPEAN DREAM? Lecture delivered by Lara Marlowe, France correspondent for The Irish Times, to the Association of Franco-Irish Studies annual conference, National Concert Hall Dublin, 23 May 2014 The European project is threatened by public apathy and indifference. It is suffocated by the complexity of EU institutions, thwarted by national egotism, and threatened by the rise of populist, europhobic parties. Exit polls last night showed that Geert Wilders’ anti-Europe Freedom Party performed poorly, but we won’t know until Sunday night whether europhobe parties will, as predicted, led the polls in France and Britain. Over the decades I’ve lived in Paris, I’ve watched friends, neighbours and colleagues fall out of love with Europe. In preparing this lecture, I’ve tried to understand why. For weeks, I’ve been asking French people how they feel about Europe. THE DISILLUSIONED At the National Front’s May Day rally, an elderly lady with white hair, a retired accountant, told me how immigrants “invaded” her neighbourhood in Montmartre. “There’s no more work; there’s nothing,” she said. “I want une Europe choisie – a chosen Europe. At the very least, I want people who join Europe to be at our level. Our shops are closing because everything is made by the Chinese. I miss the franc terribly. I want us to be sovereign in our own country, not taking orders from Brussels.” A few nights ago, I had dinner with a French businesswoman who votes for centrist, pro- European parties.