The State of the Right : Austria

Home , Alfons Gorbach, Hubert Gorbach, Leopold Figl, Norbert Steger, Proporz

February 2011 The state of the right: Austria

www.fondapol.org

Patrick MOREAU www.fondapol.org

The state of the right: Austria

Patrick MOREAU The Fondation pour l’innovation politique is a liberal, progressive and European Think tank

President: Nicolas Bazire Vice-president: Charles Beigbeder

Chief Executive Officer: Dominique Reynié [email protected] SUMMARY

The Austrian Right is represented by the Austrian People’s Party (OVP), and the Far Right by the Freedom Party of Austria (FPO). Founded in Vienna in 1945 by conservative Christian-Socialists, the OVP formed a coalition in the post-World War II government with the Social-Democratic Party of Austria (SPO) and the Austrian Communist Party (KPO). The latter eventually left the coalition in 1947, leaving the Conservatives and Social Democrats to share the leadership. Austria then entered a period of economic prosperity, thanks primarily to the economic policy of the conservative political duo, Julius Raab-Reinhardt Kamitz. The OVP won the absolute majority in the 1966 elections and governed alone. Its leadership was short-lived, however, since Social Democrat Bruno Kreisky led his party to victory in 1970. The OVP, perceived as outdated by an Austrian youth longing for change and tending to favour the Left, remained in the opposition for 17 years. From 1987 to 2000, an SPO-OVP Grand Coalition ruled Austria, while Jörg Haider’s FPO gained stronger electoral support. In the 1999 elections, the FPO obtained more votes than the OVP, thereby becoming the country’s second largest party. OVP leader Wolfgang Schüssel chose that moment to integrate the FPO into a small coalition government. Once in power, the Far Right used its credit and protestor base to help the OVP gain more popularity. Yet this strength was short-lived. The OVP-FPO coalition collapsed and the October 2006 early elections marked a failure for the OVP, as the SPO once again became Austria’s ruling party. The Far Right, on the other hand, made exceptional progress. Since then, the Social Democrats and the People’s Party have been co-habiting within Grand Coalition governments, with FPO steadily gaining ground. The OVP’s programmes have changed through the years. Although it defined itself in 1972 as a “progressive-centre party” rooted in the Christian-Social tradition, its 1995 “Vienna Programme” anchored the party more to the right and advocated tenets of economic liberalism. Since its founding in 1945, the OVP has been an organisational “umbrella,” endowing its federations and peripheral organisations with broad autonomy. The agenda of the FPO, founded in 1956, entailed put- ting an end to the sharing of power and posts between the OVP and SPO (the Proporz system), opposing European construction and “protecting the Austrian homeland” from immigration. During its term serving in the government, the party experienced an internal crisis which led to its scission and the creation, in April 2005, of the BZO – which Haider headed until his death in 2008. Austria’s Far Right is now governed by Hanz-Christian Strache’s FPO. The state of the right: Austria

Patrick MOREAU Docteur of History, Higher Doctor of Political science, Researcher at CNRS, UMR 7236 Université de Strasbourg

The Austrian People’s Party (Österreichische Volkspartei - OVP) is currently the ruling party within the framework of the Grand Coalition formed with the Social Democratic Party of Austria (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs - SPO). This coalition has experienced considerable tensions since 2009 due to the economic situation (the euro crisis), differences of opinion on policy (the Europe issue) and, lastly, the historic legacy of competition from the Far Right. The common government programme fails to conceal the partners’ malaise in a political system which a majority of voters perceive as blocked.

Austrian People’s Party (OVP)

An overview of OVP’s history: 1945-2010 In the wake of Austria’s Anschluss by the Third Reich in 1938, the elites of the Austro-Fascist era were arrested and sent to concentration camps. In Dachau, a group of politicians, among them Leopold Figl and Alfons Gorbach, examined the reasons for the failure of the First Austrian Republic and the idea of reforming a Christian Social Party was born. The name chosen ¬– the Austrian People’s Party – unders- cores the determination to create a social and political integration party based on Christian, as well as liberal, values. On 17 April 1945, the OVP was founded in Vienna and endowed with internal associations (Bünde) whose purpose was to open up the new organisation to all levels of society (see below).

7 8 fondapol | political innovation 23.11.1986 24.04.1983 06.05.1979 05.10.1975 10.10.1971 01.05.1970 06.03.1966 18.11.1962 10.05.1959 13.05.1956 22.02.1953 09.10.1949 25.11.1945 n-af opnns OPSOFO te atr en te Freedom the being latter (the OVP/SPO/FPO – components one-half successive four by Grand Coalition governments. governed The political system, reduced to two and was Austria 1961, April to 1953 April From anti-Marxism. was value common primary whose Nationalists and Liberals Catholics, of conglomeration a became Party The values. anti-Austrian upholding of it accusing by itself transform politically to lition. The VdU, with its German-National leanings, compelled the OVP 1949,coa- small a for partner quasi-mandatory a became Right Far the of As votes. the of 11.7% obtained VdU the while -5,8%), (44%, rity - VdU). The OVP won the election, but lost the absolute mandate majo- (VerbandIndependents of Federation the actor: tical Unabhängigen der poli- Right Far new a of emergence the saw elections Council National 1947.1949 in The government the from withdraw to KPO the causing lines, anti-Communist along SPO the with reconciliation of process a mandates, thusformingasecondconcentrationgovernment. of majority absolute an and 5.5%) KPO: and 44.6% (SPO: votes the of 49.8% won OVP the (Nationalrat), Council National the to elections 1945 theNovember During 1945. which December until office government, in remained “concentration” Austria) OVP/SPO/KPO of initial Party an by (Communist April 27 on proclaimed was Republic Table 1:1945-1986 N Source : ) and began and OVP’s(Obman) the leader became Raab Julius 1952, In In agreement with Stalin, whose army occupied the city, the Austrian

Austrian Interior Ministry (simplified table)

44,00% 44,80% 50,00% 42,60% 44,60% 50,40% 43,00% 48,40% 51,00% 42,10% 38,70% 43,10% 47,60% S PÖ ational Council Elections

46,00% 44,00% 42,90% 49,80% 44,20% 48,40% 43,20% 45,40% 44,70% 41,30% 41,30% 41,90% 43,10% ÖVP

Vd 10,90% 11,70% U 5,00% 5,50% 5,50% 6,50% 5,40% 5,40% 9,70% 6,10% 7,00% 7,70% / F PÖ

g 4,80% reens

o 3,30% 3,60% 3,60% 5,60% 5,60% 1,00% 1,30% 4,50% 4,20% 1,40% 1,40% 5,70% 1,10% thers its permanentneutrality. allies of their occupied zones. The new independent State at last declared USD 150 million to the Soviet Union, in exchange for evacuation by the new Fascist or Nazi organisation. Lastly, the Austrian State agrees to pay any of activities the prohibit to and organisations Socialist National all dissolve to Austria obliges Germany.9 with Article union economic or political any into enter to not agrees Treaty,said Austria of 4 Article In configuration. political current its Republic Austrian the gave which TreatyState a signed allies May,its 15 and On Austria 1955. in zenith its reached Raab’spopularity debt. create not did era that of State the economic miracle remains today the OVP’s benchmark – a reminder that industries.nationalised of share The course”“Raab-Kamitz of Austria’s the enlarging while start-ups business promoted and budget the lidated 1950, 30%before conso- taxes, lowered Coalition Grand 1958.The in 1.1% to dropped over was which Inflation, (1952-1960). Kamitz Reinhard Minister Finance by promoted economy market social the by benefits betweenthemselves. and power office’s the divided had partners Coalition’s Grand the as inasmuch ineffective became – Austria,of party) VdU’s Party successor 1 OVP1963.the in of head the as appointment his precipitated elections OVP. Raab’s the failure to win his candidacy in for the Austrian Republic’s key 1963 presidential was 1963 year strategy.The this impose to unable was 1960s,but early the in FPO the with coalition a for calling as “Youngknown Turks,” reformers of group began a of leader Klaus, Grand Coalition’s continuation was hotly debated within the OVP. Josef 44% and FPO: 7%), the political climate within the party was poor. The SPO: 45.4%,(OVP: party leading Austria’sbecame OVP the that was lised industriesshouldplayinit. nationa- which role the and economy the modernise to how over SPO in Austria’s economy and by growing tensions between the OVP and the April.slowdown a by marked were government of years three next The 11 on Chancellor Federal as Raab replaced and OVP the of head the a reform and a debate on programmes. In 1960, Alfons Gorbach became drawal. Within the party, an increasing number of voices were calling for . See Ernst Trost: Österreich ist frei –Leopold Figl und der Weg zumStaatsvertrag (Vienna: 2005). This period corresponds to Austria’s economic golden age, buoyed age, golden economic Austria’s to corresponds period This lhuh h otoe f h 1 Nvme 16 gnrl election general 1962 November 18 the of outcome the Although with- Raab’s in resulted elections 1959 the in defeat OVP’s The 1

9 The state of the right: Austria 10 fondapol | political innovation ticised the SPO’sthe ticised policy,economic OVPthe allowed which votes gain to party on every level, including its finances. In 1983, Mock effectively cri- the of charge took and (Bünde), associations internal the over primacy new party management body, the “presidium,” imposed the Federation’s a created OVPchairman, the as appointed been had who Mock, Alois 1979, In scene. political the on came actors new as 1983 in schism a experienced majority.system absolute political Austria’s its and 5.5%) general elections, the SPO lost some ground (47.6%; OVP: 43.2%; FPO: 1983 the In media. the to Church.over-exposure by disadvantaged and Catholic ageing the with reconcile OVP’swas grew.the Kreisky popularity on, to went time as Nonetheless, managed SPO the that in reactionary.increasingly be to latter’sThe greater the all were problems “Bruno”OVP seemed the while youth, resist. left-wing politically a of idol to the became attempted Church, Catholic the by backed OVP, the which society Austrian for transformation of period a was 1983, as acommunicatorandpolitician. Kreisky’stalent with compete to unable years, 17 for party opposition wing.OVPFPO’san national The the remained German in widespread very be to continued anti-Semitism anti-Zionist,but and one practicing many.surprised which was,fact,Kreisky non- in Jewish,Bruno a albeit choice a – FPO’sgovernment the minority with a support,constitute to decided, Kreisky and votes the of 48.4% with elections, general 1970 March the won SPO society.The the transform to anxious were and Left the to more and more leaning were who youths of idol the became quated. Kreisky, like Willy Brandt in Germany or anti- Olof Palme in and Sweden, started reactionary anti-liberal, as OVP – the perceive people increasingly to young –particularly opinion Public agenda. moderni- sation a adopt to party his forced who Kreisky, Bruno intelligent raised taxes. the public, however, with afteritadopted unpopulareconomicmeasuresand lost favour Itquickly emerged. government OVP first the 1966, votes and 85 mandates, and the SPO joined the opposition. On 18 April the of 48.35% won party 1966.The April in triumph political greatest young to open OVP’s man the to contributed image,he this people’sby a concerns.Bolstered and modernizer a as himself described Klaus forming asmallcoalitionwiththeFPO. of idea the abandoned but 1963, April 2 on Chancellor became Klaus h Kesy r, hc sand or oenet fo 17 to 1970 from governments four spanned which era, Kreisky The highly the chairman its as appointed SPO the 1966, in part, its For Coalition.Duringthe Vranitzkythird, fifth (1990-1997)fourthand and were gainingground. (Grüne) Greens the and FPO the support, losing were circles political Conservative and Democrat Social traditional the While components. SPO-OVP GrandCoalition. tance from a large fringe of the OVP. The only remaining option was an resis- Haider,encountered with coalition a wanted who Mock, 1986. disliked Haider and terminated the SPO-FPO coalition on 25 November Chancellor,openly become Vranitzky,Haider.had Franz with who do to what of question the gained faced OVPthen the and SPO notice.The more (4.8%) Party Alternative Green the and personality Haider’s which in (9.7%), FPO the were winners (SPO: two votes election’s the That 43.1%). of 41.3% won only party the OVP: the for defeat a of somewhat were elections general 1986 November skills.The logical crisis, gave the OVP an opportunity to acquire both economic and ideo- industries’ nationalised the by about brought problems economic with government,confronted Sinowatz Justice).The and (Defence ministries other two managing party his Industry,with and TradeCommerce, of chairman, latter’sMinister Federal Steger,and Vice-Chancellorbecame Norbert then and The FPO. the with negotiated a Lacking Sinowatz 1986.majority, June 16 until position the in stayed who Sinowatz, – ALO), whoobtained1.4%ofthevotesin1983. Österreichs Liste (Alternative Austria of List Alternative the of logists eco- the – emerged actor seats).promising (43.2%,+1.4%,+4 Another *Alliance for the Future of Austria (Bündnis Zukunft Österreich) Source :Austrian Interior Ministry Table 2:1990- 2008 National Council Elections 01.10.2006 17.12.1995 24.11.2002 03.10.1999 09.10.1994 07.10.1990 28.09.2008 From 1987 to 2000, Austria was governed by an SPO-OVP GrandSPO-OVP an by governed was Austria2000, to 1987 From four had system political Austrian the decades, two next the For Fred to Chancellor of post the left and withdraw to decided Kreisky

42,80% 36,50% 34,90% 33,20% 29,26% 35,34% 38,10% S PÖ

42,30% 26,90% 25,98% 28,30% 34,33% 32,10% 27,70% ÖVP f

22,00% 22,90% 26,90% 10,00% 11,04% 16,60% 17,54% PÖ g

11,05% 10,43% 9,50% 4,80% 4,80% 7,30% 7,40% reens

10,70% 4,11% BZÖ*

6,80% 5,60% 6,09% 3,70% 1,70% 4,13% 7,20% thers 11 The state of the right: Austria 12 fondapol | political innovation system, the of electorate’s rejection the factors: main four to reduced be can they OVP, yet the of weakening this behind reasons many are itstraditionalof constituents particularly– workersthe FPO.to– There would remain futile until 2002 and that the SPO was also losing a fringe polls,theresults Right’s at however, Far democratictheshowedthatparties’ efforts The elections. the in FPO the against up stand and ranks its stabilise to managed OVP the (1997-2000), government Klima the 2. of Austrians to rally around the government, and that the FPO,thedespite thatgovernment, andthe around rally to Austriansof internationalthatfactthebanked on pressure majoritywouldcause the European Community countries. Schüssel weighed the fourteen risks by carefully opposed and was FPO,which the with alliance an seek to not or whether to as arose again questionmargin. Thegreater a by win to expected been had polls) the on (based FPO,which the of level the at OVP.withinthe OVPhavingthekeptfor gratefulhim partywas to The country’ssecond strongestparty, the defeatingtheOVP by416votes(26.9%, +5%). became FPO The 1945. since score worst its 26.9% OVP – the (-1.3%) and (-4.9%) votes the of 33.1% only won SPO the mined inaccordancewiththeMaastrichtcriteria. Inthe1999elections, policy,deter economic its and Coalition Grand OVP-SPO the petuate per to decision Klima’s Chancellor OVP challenged costs, integration pean immigration. neutrality,of trans-Euro- end and the markets about the of opening the concerns collective of advantage took crusade, anti-European his for topic Haider,population.this the seized of who sectors all among high remained Europe about scepticism Yetoption. this of constituents favour in voted Austrian the of three-fourths membership, Community European on referendum 1994 the of occasion the On excellence. par hoped to regain its popularity by presenting itself as the European party OVP.the of that SPO,the to contrast In OVP,the programme,a lacking play in it was a key factor in the democratic parties’ weakness, including lastly, the lack of a charismatic leader capable of competing with Haider. and,programme OVP’s newthe of vacuity construction,the European The influence on the country’s economic and civilian life. See below. Despite his electoralDespitehisdefeat, strengthenedSchüsselenjoyeda position In 1997, the electorate, incensed by a deadlocked system and European should Austria role what and Union European the of question The is the AustrianthesystemtheProporz underis which 2 h pplto’ srn ad esset eevtos about reservations persistent and strong population’s the PO and the OVP share politicaltheirexertsharepowerand OVP the and SPO Proporz - - unstable. Schüssel therefore decided to hold the 1 October 2006 early 2006 October 1 the hold to decided therefore Schüssel unstable. increasingly coalition the made government, Schüssel the in remained Österreich Zukunft (Bündnis Austria of Future the for Alliance the founded and FPO the left Haider 2005,April,In government. the dominated pletely Social Affairs.However,of Minister Federal as OVPHaubner the com- for Transport,and TechnologyMinister Ursula Innovation Federal and as Gorbach Vice-ChancellorHubert appointed and FPO weakened The 2007. January 11 to 2003 February 28 from lasted which government, Schüssel second the in participate to agreeing by error strategic second a committed Haider -16,9%). (10.1%, losses drastic experienced FPO the while ground, gained also +2.5%) (9.4%, Greens (36.5% the and +3.3%) SPO The +15.4%). (42.3%, party leading Austria’s became OVPelections.The early for call to and line party his impose to tunity oppor this seized Schüssel decline. of phase a entered FPO,which the inside crisis a initiating thereby resignation, Riess-Passer’s Chancellor detriment oftheSPO-Greenopposition. the government’s to ratings, higher the with episode this about from emerged policy.Schüssel anti-democratic nothing was there proved 2000,September committee in a lifted after were sanctions Community European ire. international appease and pitfalls political avoid to ment govern- Austrian the enable would that practice government sual-type consen- a on bet was He FPO. the of government’s“corruption” the on wagered tactician, better a be to proved who chancellor.Schüssel, FPO first the become to elections next the on banked and lines, party security and anti-migration anti-European, his adopt OVPto the force could he however,that certain, was He ultimatum. Haider a of event the in Coalition Grand a to return possible a up brought OVPhad the chancellor, since become immediately not could he that knew Haider known. not still are FPO the with alliance an for opted Schüssel why ministries: Finance, Justice, Defence, Social Security and Transports. of Public Services and Sports, while the FPO was entrusted with five other Riess-Passer, Haider’s Susanne government, “right Schüssel arm,” first became the Vice-Chancellor Inand Minister coalition. small a for opted thus Heright. order.him democraticestablishedproved future the The being anti-European and xenophobic, would not again call into question Haider realised too late that he had been trapped and called for Vice- The reasonswhyHaidlerdidnotaskforthechancellorpositionand – BZO). The difficulties confronting this new party, which new this confronting difficulties The BZO). – - 13 The state of the right: Austria 14 fondapol | political innovation 08 icue, te ta OPs ieCaclo Ewn rl – in – charge ofFinances–sixOVP Pröll ministers. Erwin Vice-Chancellor OVP’s than other included, 2008, positions. The Faymann government, which took office on 28 December tried to regain momentum by keeping Schüssel and his friends then out party of key The Coalition. Grand new a in Right Far the with alliance an form to than option other no had and cornered was OVPit realised the election’saftermath, the In (+6.6%). 10.7% BZO the and (+6.5%) votes the of 17.5% obtained Far FPO The the gains: (-0.6%). exceptional 10.3% made Right Greens the and (-8.3%), 25.9% OVP the (-6.8%), 29.2% only garnered SPO The Coalition. Grand SPO/OVP the to become had electorate the allergic how revealed which disaster increases.price culative political a was election 2008 September 28 The of government. The twopartiesagreedtoholdearlyelections. press Gusenbauer’sSPO’sand the style anti-Europeanism denouncing a release issued Molterer July, 7 on response, In treaties. European of ratification the on referendums holding supported it that announced it when apart break momentum.to lost it soon caused very SPO tion The ministries.coali- other The six of charge took and Finance,and of Minister Vice-Chancellor Molterer appointed OVP The 2008. December and wasreplacedby Wilhelm Molterer, oneofhisloyalsupporters. on the Grand Coalition. On 9 January 2007, Wolfgang Schüssel resigned agreement an reached SPO OVPand the negotiations, of months after 2007, January 8 On 4.1%). BZO: and +1.3%; 11.4%, (FPO: votes the of 15% with ground its held Right Far the while (+1.5%), 11% tured once to cap- (35.3%,-1.1%).Greens become Austria’sparty The again leading SPO the allowing thereby (-7,9%), votes the of 34.3% only elections, which brought a resounding defeat to the OVP, which obtained 1990s withinthe 1995 “Vienna Programme.” the in recast was 1972 Programm”which the “Salzburg– – opposition Party adopted a benchmark programme only in 1972, while it was in governmental the of name the consensus, to pursue a policy in in OVP,direct conflict with its programmes. The the compelled often has model to the management of political power. Sustaining the “Grand Coalition” burden a of OVPsomewhat The programmes its considered always has The OVP’s programmes and values The election campaign’s main theme was inflation (3.5%) and spe- and (3.5%) inflation was theme main campaign’s election The 2 to 2007 January 11 from lasted government Gusenbauer The (people’sparty),lastly,and a “Christian-Democrat” group. ” integrating socially a Europe, in “Austrian party an was economy.”marketsocial the“ecological and ofsociety” It andopen of the OVP proclaimed itself to be the “party of the liberal Rule of Law and conservative with neo-liberal values. It promoted five main principles and 1972,may nonetheless becalled “neo-conservative”because itcombined neutral role with regard to, or in response to, European construction. relations with the Catholic Church. Lastly, the OVP stressed the country’s privileged notion any withprogramme, togetherthe from dropped was The family remained the conservatives’ ideal, but the housewives concept Women were promised true equality in terms of opportunities and rights. models.”existence social experience youths”“new to of the “right ting promo approach, conservative traditional its abandoned constituents, young to OVP,appealcitizens.bility” limitedtowardsThe its of aware vative conser a by replaced centre” was the positioning progressist“in 1972 participation, accountability, sustainability, justice, security and tolerance. principles:liberty,tenaround revolved service, partnership, subsidiarity, FPO’sGerman-Nationalistthe positions. programmetoresponse The a Catholicbackvoters,win theto Austriantion nationalist rhetoric being in Austrian society until they have been socially and culturally integrated. tendencies.Immigrantworkers, a “necessaryevil,” place no havewould tners must control the system to avoid excessive monopolistic or socialist Every citizen would be free to consume and work at will, but social par portrayed as a third alternative option between capitalism and socialism. extend cannot beyond privateownership.” rights participation of limits the that sense the in tive restric- remains democratisation and OVP’sparticipation “The of view upon direct democracy. Nonetheless, this partnership’s limits were clear: democracy”a partnerships”relying “dynamic in of a “society create to service, partnership, division of tasks and participation,” and its goal was rooted in the Christian-Social tradition. Its slogan was “liberty, equality,

4 3. . All quotes arefrom the Grundsatzprogramm. See: http://www.oevp.at/download/000298.pdf. All quotes arefrom the Salzburger Programm. The 1995 “Vienna Programme,” which took up a few themes from themes few a up Programme,”“Vienna1995took The which In its efforts to win more voters, the party spoke of its “new responsi economy,the for As OVPthe defended economy”marketsocial“the In 1972, the OVP defined itself as a “progressive-centre party” a “progressive-centre as itself defined OVP the 1972, In Weltanschauung (worldview), indicativeOVP’s the of determina 4 Volkspartei The party’sThe ” - - - - - 3

15 The state of the right: Austria 16 fondapol | political innovation numerous internal andperipheralassociations, withbroad autonomy. federations,regional its endowing umbrella organisational its as well as an as served has it 1945, in founding its Since strata. social Austrian need tobeexamined. economy Austrian the in globalisation of role the and pensions system, of Austria’shealth condition the economy,good of relatively future the the Lastly,it).despite to response proper the and (terrorism issues rity secu - and migration international and national with deal to party the required 2008 in breakthrough electoral Right’sstrong Far ralism. The intervention State neo-libe- of OVProle the the compelled reassess now to have necessary made which crises euro and bank The revamped. being currently is it and 2010 until survive to vague sufficiently been has platform, xenophobic FPO’s the pre-empt and “socialism”SPO’s of theirregionandhomeland.” citizens themselves “as see should Austrians that fact the OVPstressed the but light, positive a in seen be to continued Community European Austria,”immigration.”the limiting also strictly but of “imperative The maintained its “efforts to promote the integration of foreigners living in OVP, however, popularity.The in rise party’s this for accounted tion sector.immigra- economic on the FPO’spositions in The and privatisations competition strengthening for called OVP the time, same the At text, but the previous rejection of abortions was, as in 1972, reaffirmed. dren) remained the ideal. “Alternative” lifestyles were dropped from the chil- two and couple (a family nuclear the but office, public in serving pleading for gender equality and the introduction of a quota for women and moralendeavours. educational their for Churches the praised sparingly.It used be should democracy, OVP described referendums as “useful tools,” yet ones which talents,their in unequal abilities, interests.and preferences direct for As are beings OVP,human the to According component. “justice”the of gramme. To use but a few examples, equality is dropped and made a part The OVP’s organisational structure Overall, this programme, designed to distinguish the OVP from the OVPfrom the distinguish to designed programme, this Overall, Austrian society was still marching towards equality, as the OVP was pro- 1972 the with differences ideological noticeable were There h OP s a is OVP The pol’ pry rpeetd n every in represented party) (people’s Volkspartei elections of representatives to the Chamber of Labour (Arbeiterkammer), – OGB – which has 1.3 million members). In the 2009 national round of Gewerkschaftsbund (Österreichische Federation Union TradeAustrian the of group splinter a is Employees Salaried Workersand Austrian of League the bodies: professional the within representation strong its by executive trainingprogrammes. and analysis political education, public www.polak.at),provides which OVP’sOVP– the (Politischeder is Academy Political Akademie tioned men- be should list.which this organisation to Another added be could organisations not directly affiliated to the party, but with close ties to it, other Many self-financed. largely OVP,is the which from independent legally are associations these Seniors of All members). (Austrian 305,000 with Alliance, seniors and Employees) and Workers Austrian of (League workers (OVP-Frauen), women members), 270,000 Farmers, Austrian of (League farmers Alliance) Economic (Austrian employers members) 100,000 about Party,with People’s(Young youths to cater associations national internal party’s The levels. local, and regional as well as national, the at other each with ties friendly and close enjoying groups and associations internal of network vast a OVPhas take.The which body, shall party this the which positions political and strategies daily the decides in concentrated are a powers and All body presidium. supervisory limited national a top, the at Presidium, the body, remarkably largeconstituencyinthecountry. OVPa the has that shows 168,000,respectively) and 523,000 totalling members CSU and CDU parties political conservative the with bitants, inha- million (81 Germany of to parison inhabitants) million (8 Austria com- affiliations. A quadruple or triple double, with members account into takes figure 700,000 the members,since million 1.2 is body tional organisa- complex this concerning figures available few the combining 10,000 and the Greens only 4,600.only Greens the and 10,000 BZO 40,000,the FPO members,the 300,000 2008,about had,in SPO trade and farmers unions. It is by far the country’s largest party, since the bers, six internal associations ( Bünde), closely related organisations and mem- party of consisting 622,000) 2002: and 695,000 1986: 720,000; 5. See the website derS The OVP’s loyal constituency in the country can be accounted for accounted be can country the in constituency OVP’sloyal The political highest party’s the with pyramid a like built is OVP The In 2008, the OVP had some 700,000 members (1945: 490,000, 1970: tandard.at, 31.10.2008. 5 The total membership attained by attained membership total The 17 The state of the right: Austria 18 fondapol | political innovation f h pltcl ytm atclry oie b vtr bcue f the of because often which clientelism oppressive an masks system.term Proporz This voters by noticed particularly system political the of blocking a to led has Coalitions Grand of continuation long-term The 8 OVP capturesanaverageof80%thevotes. about has the elections, OBB) national Chamber Agricultural the In members. – 250,000 Bauerbund (Österreichischer Farmers Austrian The Austrian political system vs. Proporz responsible forpropagandaandprogrammes). tions, not to mention the specialised sections with staffs of varying sizes 50 in the regional offices, up to 80 people in each of the regional federa- Club, Parliamentary the in 25 headquarters, main the in members staff full-time 60 (2004: staff sizeable a maintain to and campaigns intensive highly conduct to able is party the associations, above-mentioned the with relations financial its of because 3,353,321; doubt 1,973,839).Yet, no 2008: 2006: euros; 1,001,453 (2004: low (too) very are paper, on least at Donations, 19,752,742). 2008: 23,605,049; 2006: euros; 14,338,891 (2004: costs campaign of reimbursements obligatory its to OVP’s well-known. not is status financial OVP’s according vary receipts votes. the of 55.8% won Democrats Social the while the OVP garnered 2.6 million votes (24.94% of the votes and 212 seats), 7 6. with the SPO from 1983 to 1987, and with the OVP from 2000 to 2006. OVP governed once from 1966 to 1970. The Far Right (FPO) co-governed OVP dual coalitions. The SPO governed alone from 1970 to 1983, and the kened bytheparties’exerciseofpower. structure bicameral wea- is a – organisation federal a and Senate) and Deputies of of (Chamber consisting – system political Austrian The . . Politik inÖsterreich, pp. 480 à498. See Die ÖVP, p. 348. ee Josef Kramer and KramerJosef See 462 to 479. FerdinandSee Kaarhofer, “Arbeitsnehmerorganisationen,“ Dachs–in: G Despite a legally required annual accounting of party financing, the financing, party of accounting annual required legally a Despite This Since1945,governments, Austria27had haswhichSPO/were of 17 ménage à trois situation is the key dilemma of Austrian politics. G erd H ovorka, “Interessenorganisationovorka, – DachsLandwirtschaft,” derin: The The A us t rian rian F ar ar R igh 7 8 erlich(eds.), t 6 The League of League The PolitikÖsterreichin pp., G erlich…, gency ofFPO-styleparties. into itself, xenophobia, etc. These factors condition and favour the emer withdraw to tendency change, economic of and unemployment of fear discontent, collective problems: well-known from suffering was bours, in many democracies. Obviously Austrian society, like many of its neigh- system traditional parties’ the affecting changes structural the signalled in Westernparties Europe,National-Populist powerful electorally most tory anditsconstituencybase. his- its of overview brief a for calls system the political in Austrian tion posi- outstanding Right’s Far the for reasons the BZO.Understanding the and FP the by garnered votes the including after elections general his until death in Haider 2008) brought the Far Right to its by 1999 level: 28% in the 2008 (headed BZO the of 2005, April in creation, the and – Strache Heinz-Christian by headed now – FPO the of split the to led FPO. one- which the crisis for internal votes An electorate the of quarter than Today, more 1999. to 1983 from steadily increased share gical ramifications:theFarRight’s votehasbecometrivialised. psycholo- some had has mechanism electoral coalition.This FPO-BZO OVP- an or OVP-FPO an between choose to have will OVP the while (SPO-Greens-BZO), coalition three-pronged a consider to the needs future, SPO the In problem. the solve to nothing did BZO) and (FPO camps two into split latter’s2005 Right.The Far the with ally to than and SPO are not in the majority, they have no other political alternative Moreover,system.OVP this the end if to desire proclaimed his on part become amemberofonepartyortheother. to order in favour a ask politics,to in or career a seek to citizens forces h pltcl ytm a md psil b te V ad P parties, SPO and OVP the by possible made was system political the into integration gradual FPO’sideology. The its of result a as isolated extremely was it Vienna.Yetin and Carinthia in located constituency its of most with tendencies, National-German and liberal with party a sheds lightonthepresent. The FPO’s history can be divided into four major periods, each of which History of the Austrian Far Right The FPO’s rise to power in 2000, which, in 2010, was still one of the the of review A Right’sFar Austrian their that shows results election Jörg Haider’s successes at the polls since 1986 are based for the most In the first period, the FPO was, at the time of its founding in 1956, in founding its of time the was, at FPO period, the first the In - 19 The state of the right: Austria 20 fondapol | political innovation Carinthia GerhardDörfler. of President Minister by and Scheuch Uwe charismatic the by headed (see below). Lastly, the FKP party emerged from a BZO scission in 2009, death in 2008 left the field open for Strache, who began his rise to power Haider’s17.5%. FPO the and voters the of 10% than more won BZO the 2008, In succeeded. plan Haider’sSPO. the with coalition in land his governing politician rational a as – Carinthia of President Minister as role his in – also constituency,but province’s his about cared who a as of thought be to strove He reputation. his restoring on focused and strategy changed then immigration.Haider and Europe led a non-stop campaign to listen to the voters’ collective concerns about and organisations auxiliary community-based its restructured finances, control of the FPO from 2006 to 2008. He consolidated the party and its Heinz-Christian Strache, often referred to as a young Haider party.clone, took marginal a but nothing 2006 was BZO the in time that by Coalition that showed Grand OVP-SPO the of establishment and lition coa- OVP-BZO the of end The failure. organisational an initially was pro-Saddam slips. and anti-Semitic excessive Haider’s by expedited was collapse sational organi- masses.FPO’sand the political of concerns the gauge to ability least temporarily – lost what had made him so successful since 1986: his at – who Haider Jörg by weakened also was phase.It decline a entered party the and election Council National 2002 the of occasion the on a trap for both the FPO and Haider. The FPO’s voter support plummeted and xenophobiaissue. strengthened FPO’s anti-establishment image by taking on the European he on, 1993 From citizens. ordinary the “people”and of interests best the for advocate an Hood”as modern-day “Robin a of reputation the acquire to inequalities,managed and weaknesses,scandals,favouritism succes- system’s impressive the denounced Haider, an who began. victories and electoral 1986,of sion in party the of head elected being political system. the into integration FPO’s the completed 1983 of coalition SPO-FPO partner.small coalition The their pressure to means a as it used which The fourth period was marked by the founding of the BZO,which the of founding the by marked was period fourth The The third period is that of association with power, which constituted after power to rose Haider young when began period second The paterfamilias dooia ast n ae tl onpeet n 2011. in omnipresent an still are were and themes asset ideological These issues. immigration and security societal, on focused clearly profile political radical its with campaign FPO the and The FPO’s programme for the 2008 elections, “Our promise to Austria,” Programmes of the Far Right (Die Carinthia Freitheitlichen inKärnten-FKP). in Party Freedom the and BZO the FPO, the groups: 11 10. 9. leader” physique.leader” by, Austria’s economicandsocialsituation. threatened most or with, discontent most groups population or social strata of list the targets deliberately which anti-European, and nalist natio- homophobic security-conscious, xenophobic, populism, protest of model a is it that shows programme FPO’s of analysis an short, In system.preference national a by protected be would market labour The Austria. leave to have would they unemployment, long-term of event the In problems. health serious of case in them compensate not would which system security social reduced a to subject be would Foreigners if failed, wouldcausethemtobeexcludedfromtheeducationalsystem. ritual for expression slaughter. Right Teachablewhich,test language a take to have would children Far European traditional a animals,” to against women, abuses of freedoms of the press “violence and of speech, as well as as cruelty violations norms” “constitutional such to penalise and minarets, as such symbols” victory “politico-religious ban to wished it that announced FPO the system.”Muslims, social for the As of “parasites and criminals particularly homelands, their to foreigners of return” consequential and humane “a advocated FPO The gration. programmes, the party’s flagship theme for the 2008 elections was immi- on the Web – “Adios, Che” which was heard over 200,000 times and times 200,000 over heard was which “Adios,Che”– Web the on song a published He Guevara. Che figures, mythical Left’s the of one beautiful groupies. For the 2008 election campaign, and he decided to attack young by surrounded him show photos magazine his nightclubs, . See.: http://www.fpk.at/. Nina ”Österreich imWort.” See www.fpoe.at\fileadmin\Contentpool\Portal\wahl08\FP_-Wahlprogramm_NRW08.pdf: 2009). The Far Right is currently split ¬– but for how long? ¬– into three into ¬– long? how for but ¬– split currently is Right Far The Since 2005, Strache has managed to make the most of his “young his of most the make to managed has Strache 2005, Since H oraczekClaudiaandReiterer, Strache.Aufstieg.Hintermänner.HC SeineSein FeindeSeine(Vienna, 11 In the press, while Haider is photographed in gay in photographed is Haider while press, the In 9 10 A i previous in As 21 The state of the right: Austria 22 fondapol | political innovation The “With 3). (point preservation and universality its to contribute cantly signifi to citizens compel to and mentality insurance” “all-risk an of emergencethe curb toreformed be democracy.must Stateasocial The potentialfullwithinitsreach only can which order constantto call and strong a implies This 2). (point others principle,all conditions first the State.”shouldcitizensthe“dominate people, asFreedom, the to power posal “Man’sfreedom intangible”is (point 1), theBZOwishesreturn to pro theinvolvement.citizen broaderIn for calling bypolitics Austrian traditional parties’ system The and the ideas. party’s the points, ten in summarises, away fromtheFarRight’s conventionalthemes. traditional liberalthemes. Apriori, itseemedevidentthathadbroken change,emphasising as well as continuity of terms party’sin the policy of points main the out set Haider’sand Jörg legacy credited intellectual still preamble control.” Its liberal right-wing and reform for force “a Congress meeting in Vienna in May 2010.May in Viennain meeting Congress they consideredanoverlyextremeFPOparty. what for Coalition,vote Grande to the want of not nuance did who yet conti- the and immigration both to hostile protesters potential attract to strategy: Haider’s to adapted perfectly nonetheless was programme This issues. immigration and security to given importance greater the FPO’s,despite the than liberal more still was it but measures, populist less or more of series several encompassed Austria”you, of “Because entitled programme Its Coalition. Grand the of continuation the cost, his undisputabletalentsasacommunicatorandobviouscharisma. for credit deserves he dress,although and speak,smile to how man the taught Experts style. Haider 1990s’ the imitate to attempt intentional an is style Strache’s which to extent the understand not do obviously supporters young His politician”style. the “old to contrast welcome a his trendy clothes) attains a credibility to and political aura which seems to be (thanks and popular, sexy is he goal: its achieves and is pleasing style natural very (apparently) His world. the over all played later 13. Heimat means homeland 12. WEB.pdf http://www.bzoe.at/assets/files/Programm_BZOE_ in: Österreich,” Zukunft Bündnis des “Programm See: Thisimpression confirmedis programme’sthe in introduction, which A new programme was adopted on the occasion of an Extraordinary any at prevent, to was goal main BZO’s the elections, 2008 the In Heimat 13 , tradition and culture form the identity of the State and State the of identitythe formculture andtradition , Proporz are rejected in the name of the need to modernise 12 The party defined itself as itself defined party The - - does not include sympathiser groups in the party’s auxiliary organisations. ofcurrent members isnot known, itisestimated atabout 50,000, which periodallowed ittorecruit more members. Althoughthe official number it in the spring of 2011 remains to be seen. in the BZO’s ideology. What the BZO’s members and voters may think of racismliberal economic positioning can only point to a profound change conclusion,programme’sthe moderatetone, absenceStrache-typethe of integrated. In become to agree latter the country, that provided the to immigrants of European origin, except for the immigration of elites useful immigration,toincluding end an put to politicalwantsreasons,foryet the European Commission’s actions. The BZO defends the right to asylum integrate Turkey into the EU and of the latter’s rapid enlargement, and of a “Europeanoffavourhouse,” inexisting to policy thecritical of is but pro-Europeanand as itselfpresents BZO chapters,explanatorythe ten the technologies.environmentallyInfriendly of usesystematic the and autarchy” “energy an for advocates and genetics, and energy opposesnuclear BZO The preservation. nature and ecology around revolves vate sphere” is declared inalienable. Point 10, “Sustainable Development,” 8),anditshould beafforded “maximumautonomy.” Theright toa “pri of “family” is acknowledged (point 7) as the “core unit of society” (point State to be reduced to a minimal management and the service ownership,” for role. without calls freedom The “No 5, notion Point repression. of mustrespect dominant WesternChristian culture’s norms, underpenalty first demands of migrants is that they integrate into Austrian society.BZO immigration.the globalisation andWhatThey from protected be must theofpeople” andsuch “roots”arethekeythetofuture (point 4). They 15. 14 2004. in members 44,959 splinter parliamentary groups, innerworkingsand, lastly, funding. organisations, auxiliary trends, membership functions: currently party this how understand to easier it make they Special aspects of the FPO’s organisation deserve special attention in that Organisation and financing of Far-Right parties . A complete rebuilding of the FPO organisation on the national and regional levels is only partially attainable based upon available data. munes. com- several fromsupporters and members of comprisedgroups district into mainly but groups, local 2002,In thehad FPO 1,248 n coe 20, h FO a 5,9 mmes a cmae to compared as members, 51,296 had FPO the 2000, October In localgroups and237 15 t eetrl ucse i te 2008-2010 the in successes electoral Its supportpoints Today’s. membersFPO organisedare into 14 - 23 The state of the right: Austria 24 fondapol | political innovation and nineintheUpperHouse. the Upper House. In early 2011, the FPO thus had 37 seats in Parliament joined FPO’s Parliamentary Club, as did the two FKP members elected to ucs a te polls. the at growing FPO’ssuccess the with tandem in revival modest a experiencing be to seem they present, At structures. auxiliary these weakened greatly BZO the of scission ensuing the and crisis FPO’scampaigns.2002 The propaganda targeted conduct to and society citizens of Austrian strata all from represent to groups, these through managed, Until FPO etc. the 2002, seniors, graduates, university self-employed, the teachers, employers,professions, liberal students,women, people, young senting 17 16. and the FPO, the three FKP members elected to the National Council National FPO,the the to and elected members FKP three the FKP the between reached was agreement an After level. regional and this Chamber. workers’ organisation, OAAB), the FPO is party now the third-largest party conservative of the for 212 and – Gewerkschaftler) Sozialistischer FSG – the Social-Democrat Group of Socialist Trade Unionists (Fraktion the BZO,in Workersthe 2009 for the in (12 for seats Chamber 483 67 winning After (OGB). Federation Union TradeAustrian the of sation” organi- member a “union as 1999 July 1 since acknowledged been has which Arbeitnehmer), (freiheitlichen Employees Freedomite influential L Tyrol (2008) Total S Vorarlberg (2009) U Vienna (2010) Burgenland (2010) S Table 3:Members Elected to the Austrian Landtag (simplified table) ower teiermark (2010) alzburg (2009) pper . Martin Mitterer and Peter Zwanziger inthe Upper Chamber. organisations. The figures cited were gathered during interviews. auxiliaryparty’s the of constitutingmembersall of number availabletheconcerning internaldatais No

The organisations with Haiderian party “ties” included those repre- party those “ties”Haiderian included with organisations The The FPO is Austria’s third largest parliamentary force at the national A A ustria (2009) ustria (2008) S trutz, Maximilian Linder and Josef Jury were elected to seats in the National Council and Peterand NationalCouncil the in seatstoelected were Jury Josef and LinderMaximilian trutz,

16 n ntwrh eape s h increasingly the is example noteworthy One S 142 49 18 23 15 15 14 PÖ 5 3

ÖVP 157 22 20 28 31 16 14 13 13

F 69 27 PÖ 5 4 3 9 6 6 9

G reens 34 11 2 4 1 4 4 3 5 17

G BZÖ F ÖVP S aid increased by 70% (7 million euros in 2011 vs. 4.1 million n 2010, n million 4.1 vs. 2011 in euros million (7 70% by increased aid official FPO’s the party,since the for godsend a was Vienna’selection Club. Parliamentary Council’s National the to aid in million 3.5 and activities,Political Academy of support in million 2.3 by supplemented 2009. In 2011, it will receive 3 million euros of aid at the national level, few anddiscreet. (Schweizerische Party People’s Swiss Volkspartei are organisations two the between contacts ),official if even the of those on models campaigns Strache campaign. his anti-Islam its in supports FPO the which Citizens Initiative for Cologne (Bürgerbewegung pro Köln ) in Germany, the with are contacts current closest Its etc.).Party, People’sAtaka, Danish Front, National (the Europe in its activitiesrevolvearoundStrache’s meetingsandpartyevents. of most and campaigning street does rarely polling only FPO companies).The and experts (from analyses and information market political buying and advisors, of circle small a and apparatus central lean very a Web,maintaining the and media the of use massive making paigns, (and costly) conception of politics: employing PR firms for election cam- unwieldiness of the OVP and SPO parties – was committed to a the modern and strategy communications Haider’s from lesson a learned had staff.permanent who modest – federations’ Strache regional the double staffs group splinter and attachés deputies,parliamentary the life,since 4. Reimbursement of campaign costs. 3. 2. Political Academy aid. 1. Party aid which can be used for election campaigns. Table 4:2009 Party Funding (inmillions of euros) and 2008-2009 Trends PÖ PÖ rüne mentary Club financial reform). Club aid, up to 39% of which can be used for election campaigns (prior to the 2010 Parlia-

To finance its political activities, the FPO had 7,192,471 euros in had7,192,471 FPO the activities, political its finance To Far-Rightwith contacts numerous has party This groups and parties These parliamentary groups are essential to the party’s organisational

2,9 (+1,0) 1,9 (+1,0) 4,8 (-0,8) 1,8 (-0,1) 4,2 (-1,2) 1

2,2 (+0,5) 1,7 (+0,5) 2,8 (-0,6) 3,0 (-0,4) 1,7 (0) 2

in Belgium and the and Belgium in Belang Vlaams 2,8 (+0,2) 2,4 (+0,9) 4,0 (-0,4) 4,0 (-0,4) 2,1 (-0,4) 3

11,0 (-2,2) 11,8 (-1,7) 5,9 (+2,4) 7,9 (+1,7) 5,6 (-0,5) Total

2,5 4,2 1,5 1,5 3,7 4 25 The state of the right: Austria 26 fondapol | political innovation orsod o srn itleta tradition intellectual strong a to correspond That is why the BZO is trying to reorient itself along liberal lines which r 29 million). +2.9 or 18 20. 19. viduals to head the party the head to viduals BZO’s electoral base. The only solution is therefore to seek out new indi- new recruits it Haiderian the once was what reabsorbing is FPO as the as members,even time such until coverage media its in resides vival sur of hope and Vienna).only Upper Austria,Steiermark Its in (except the party is virtually absent Regardless,from the communal and regional political members.scene 3,000 of maximum a has it that estimated cautiously was it 2011, In decimated. was party the intact, practically remained which seats), (17 Council National the in group splinter tary outnumbered its assets. Besides its still-sound finances and its parliamen- benefit ofasubstantialfinancialcushion. the has now and debt regional more no has FPO,which the of paigns lature (Landtag ). The funds saved will be reinvested into the media cam- over by the FPO’s elected representatives in the commune and state legis- permanent staff and most of the FPO’s activities in the state (land) since the party maintains only a very limited mn-raiain o yuh, h club the youths, for mini-organisation a other the from pathisers sym- FKP the of most state, this of outside exist not should party this Since FKP. the to over went members BZO Haiderian Carinthia’s of nomous, it is represented in the FPO leadership. It is estimated that 90% model similar to that of the CDU-CSU. Although the FKP remains auto- politically materialise. . The number of National-Liberals inthe party. Ursula Vice-Chairpersons – three party’s the that certain is it Although economics. in expertise H (aged40),who was appointed Mayin 2010, formera is OVPmember new who alsoBZO’s defines liberal. The himself liberal. a as fide bona a and field his in expertundisputed an is economics,he on articles and books many of co-authorand authorthe 2010. As April in founded ORF’stheretired,PresidenteconomicAssociationthehe until is editor of Austria’sand for MiddleClasses BZO.Twoexamples: Walter T million (4.1 in2010, -0,4). ee: EugenMariaSee: ihrer I his ambition to open up to the liberal movement has facilitated the promotion of new senior officials in the In the aftermath of the FKP’s scission, the BZO’s shortcomings far shortcomings BZO’s the scission,FKP’s the of aftermath the In In 2010, the FKP decided to seek a rapprochement with the FPO, on a e managese economican advisorycompany (EbnerBiz Consulting SPO will receive 11.9 million euros (13.2 in 2010, -1.3); OVP 4 million (5.2 in 2010, -1,2), the deen, Vertreter und Institutionen, Bibliothek der Provinz, 2009. H aubner andaubner Schulak, H erbert 18 These funds are all the more significant for party for significant more the all are funds These onnleitner, head of the BZO’s list in Vienna – but not a party member – was, member– party a not but Vienna– Sonnleitner,in BZO’s thelist headof H erbert Unterköfler:erbert Wiener Die chreibner – are long-term are – Schreibner have joined the FPO. The FKP also has FPO.also the FKP joined The have länder 19 and to cater to disenchanted voter groups. voter disenchanted to cater to and freiheitlich activities will be taken H chule der Nationalökonomie.derSchule Eine aiderians, there is nonetheless an increasingnonetheless an is aiderians, there Kärnten-Jugendorganisation, ) andwishestoprofileGmbH) the BZO’s 20 oe ht a yt to yet has that one – G eneral ecretary, Christian EbnerChristianSecretary, G erald G G eschichte reens 3.7 G rosz, - ersnaie i the in representatives in all of Carinthia (farmers, workers and trade unions). It has 19 elected up set been have which of three only organisations, auxiliary four and in variouspolitical constellations. OVP continued to dominate the four Bundesländers’ politics and govern the 2010, In 2004. to 1945 from Salzburg in and 1999, to 1991 from Carinthia in 1964, to 1945 from Burgenland in case the also was This has managed to appoint the Minister-Chairman continuously since 1945. states (Upper Austria, Styria, Upper Austria, Tyrol, and Vorarlberg), and became thesecond-place Austrian party, beatingtheOVP by400votes. Council general elections, except in the 1999 election, in which the FPO The OVP and SPO have almost always fought for the top spot in National inevitable demise. elections, its modest war chest is bound to shrink, resulting in national the party’sand regional future in votes substantial garner to unable is it if but 2012, and 2011 in activities propaganda its pursue to position Club was1.5millioneurosin2008and2.552009. volume of over 4 million euros. The funding of the BZO’s Parliamentary a prosperity, with relative latter’s the confirms report financial official strategy.costly BZO’sa campaigns,2008 The media its intensifying by banner maybealikelymiddle-termoutcome. FPO the under resistance,reunification internal some lustre.Despite its losing be may image reputation Haider’s Jörg that signs the polls early at despite success significant its maintain to able be to seems party the context, this In Ragger). Christian and Dobernig Harald Scheuch, of Carinthia (Gerhard Dörfler) and three out of six other ministers (Uwe Minister-President the appoints FKP the since action, governmental its on depends party’smembers.influence The FKP remaining while Club, Parliamentary FPO’s the into integrated been have Council National (Upper Chamber). SinceDecember2009, itsthreerepresentativesinthe Geographical distribution of Austrian parties The OVP has been dominating politics in five beina to BZO appears the security, financial of degree this With voters liberal win to activists,decided of BZO lack the its of view In Balan c e of ele of e ct to f hm r i the in are whom of two Landtag, oral oral p ower wi ower t hin hin t he he Bundesländer, or federal A us t rian rian Bundesrat R igh t 27 The state of the right: Austria 28 fondapol | political innovation S S U Burgenland 2007 L Vorarlberg 2010 Carinthia 2009 Table 6:2005-2010 Communal Election Results for the Parties Vorarlberg 2009

Vienna 2010

Tyrol 2008 S

U Carinthie 2009 Burgenland 2010

L Table 5:2008-2010 Regional Elections Table: 2005-2010CommunalElectionResultsfortheParties and theGreens’lowrepresentationwoninfivefederal states. OVP.the FPO’sthe of OVPadvantage level,the took communal the At and SPO the between power of sharing equal almost an level: national BZO: 2%. Regional results translate into the same trend observed at the and 9% Greens: 16%, FPO: 34%, SPO: OVP:35%, results: following the in ower tyria 2010 alzburg 2009 pper ower tyria 2005 alzburg 2009 pper y optn te ainl en o ec prys lcin results election party’s each for mean national the computing By A A A ustria 2009 A ustria 2010 ustria 2009 ustria 2008

o te 0021 wne pro, e ban the obtain we period, winter 2010-2011 the for Bundesländer

OVP Minister-Chairman government and FPO ) OVP elected representatives, G Proportional, ( OVP Minister-Chairman OVP- S S S S 1 2 Minister-Chairman, Forced proportionality, OVP BZO-FKP Minister-Chairman Coalition with the Minister-Chairman G Ministers and 1 FPO Minister Minister-Chairman, 2 Forced proportionality, OVP G PO Minister-Chairman PO-OVP PO Minister-Chairman PO-OVP reens government, rand Coalition, ouvernement G S reen Minister PO Ministers, 1 FPO Minister, S

PO G 44,6 46,7 43,6 44,7 20,4 43,1 51,5 G G ÖVP rand Coalition, rand Coalition, rand Coalition, s

PO Mayor, S

PO S

PO; S PO

36,6 33,5 33,7 31,9 10,7

47,7 37,7 S PÖ PO-

40,5 50,8 46,8 36,6 34,6 38,7 16,8 54,4 14,0 ÖVP s

11,33 10,7 14,2 5,9 6,5 2,9 2,1 PÖ 44,3 48,3 10,0 39,4 25,5 28,8 15,5 24,9 41,7 PÖ

26,7 25,1 10,5 15,3 13,0 12,4 3,8 9,0 4,6 PÖ

rüne 6,9 3,3 2,0 3,4 1,3 5,1 7,3 G

10,6 12,6 10,7 reens 6,9 9,2 4,7 5,1 4,1 7,4

44,9 BZÖ 2,8 1,3 3,7

30,9

BZÖ

0,5 1,3 1,2 Other 18,4 6,3 4,0 70 years or older 60-69 45-59 30-44 Under 30 years of age Age groups Retirees (women) Women Non-working Working professionals (women) Retirees (men) Working professionals (men) Men 22. (the FPO and BZO). and FPO (the and the SPO (106,000 votes), with these transfers profiting the Far Right Grand Coalition, which led to heavy losses for the OVP (116,000 votes) the rejected country’sparties the leading to belonging electors of fringe the BZOalsogainedgroundwith10.7%, anincreaseof6.6%. The FPO’s results rose eleven points and it garnered 17.5% of the votes, (-0.1%). 10.4% Greens the and (-6%) 29.3% SPD the 2006), to pared humiliating defeat. The OVP obtained 26% of the votes (-8.3% as com- In September 2008, all of the democratic parties experienced a somewhat Socio-demographic distribution of Austria’s right-wing and Far Right parties munes withkeymanufacturingandserviceindustrysectors. com- and cities large in lies SPO’sstrength the while towns, small and communes rural in strong are OVP’sresults the that shows table This 21 Source : I Table 7:2008 Electoral Choices: Sociography (1) best electionresultsin2008amongretireesofbothgenders. the parameter “Working Professional” is included, the OVP obtained its If preferred. slightly women which party a 2006, in as OVPremained, n % . e Thomas See n h 20 gnrl lcin se rt Pasr Ptr . la (Ed.), Ulram A. PeterNationalratswahl Plasser, 2006 Fritz (Vienna, 2007). see election, general 2006 the On

Analyse_NRW_2008.pdf and (Vienna: 2008); gewählt?” warum Presseunterlage, wen hat Wer 2008. Wahlanalyse “Die Ulram, A. Peter and Plasser Fritz See

An analysis of voting trends between 2006 and 2008 shows that a that shows 2008 and 2006 between trends voting of analysis An

GfK Austria, election exit poll

fr n Braa oh (Ed.), Toth Barbara and ofer

22 A gender breakdown of voters shows that the that shows voters of breakdown gender A R, ainlasal i: http://www.sora.at/images/doku/SORA_IS in: Nationalratswahl, SORA, S 22 30 22 36 36 38 33 26 39 29 25 14 PÖ

Ven, 2008). Strategien. Sensationen Sieger. (Vienna, 2008. Wahl ÖVP 22 20 28 28 26 32 29 24 24 24 23 23

f 20 20 33 18 15 16 16 15 14 13 14 21 PÖ

g ehewhe. nlsn zur AnalysenWechselwahlen. rüne 10 11 11 16 14 13 14 2 5 5 2 8

21 BZÖ 11 11 10 11 11 10 10 10 15 13 9 9 A_ 29 The state of the right: Austria 30 fondapol | political innovation working intheprivatesector. individuals and youths workers, of parties the were BZO, the degree lesser a to and FPO, The educated. highly more the among members The Greens(Grüne)weregettingolderand, forthemostpart, recruited vote, the OVP did not win the support of any particular social category. farmers’ from Aside servants. civil and retirees of party preferred the the only was SPO number twoparty, whiletheFPOscoredexceptionalresults(34%). the category, worker every In (27%). employees and (35%) servants civil among votes most the won SPO farmers.The categories,self-employed notably all among OVPparty leading the was I Table 7:2008 Electoral Choices: Sociography (2) votes fortheOVP. most the cast which category the was 60”the group “over while tions, increasingly hard to recruit young members through its internal associa- it finding was obviously OVP The Right. Far the for voted group) age we find that 43% of young voters (one-third of whom were in the 30-44 FPO,the by garnered those to gory.BZO’s(10%) the scores adding By cate- 30” “under the among party popular most Austria’swas it since FPO, the benefited OVP– the by desired measure a – election national Source : Profession E foremen; S and unskilled workers F S managers; team leaders Civil servants liberal professions S H R n % ull-time farmers killed workers; emi-skilled elf-employed; employers; mployees etirees (men) ousewives

It is clear in the post-election political landscape that the SPO was SPO the that landscape political post-election the in clear is It the 2006, in as 2008, in that shows profession by breakdown The a in time first the for vote to year-olds 18 to 16 for possibility The

GfK Austria, election exit poll

S 38 32 25 35 27 19 21 PÖ 2

ÖVP 22 28 78 24 23 19 16 21

f 34 34 15 15 13 17 17 PÖ 8

g reens 15 13 21 4 6 3 5 1

BZÖ 1 22 11 18 10 8 6 9 1 The reasons for voting for the Right and the Far Right To explain the new power relations produced by the 2008 election, it is helpful to examine the voters’ motivations. Table 8 : Reasons for Voting for the OVP – Simplified Table (2008)

OVP Voters Traditional core voters 34 Reliable policy 21 Economic expertise 18

Opposed to new debt 14 Party programme/best party 7 Wilhelm Molterer 6 Against Faymann and the SPO 5 More favour for families 4 Dislikes other parties; “least evil” 4 Anti-inflation measures 2 Reduced tax burden for middle classes 2 Committed to security/Stiffer penalties 2 Stricter policy towards foreigners 1 Creates or saves jobs 1 European policy; professes faith in Europe 1 Other reasons 17

Source : GfK Austria, 2008 election exit poll

Those who voted for the OVP in 2008 did so primarily out of loyalty to the party, its past policy, and its economic expertise. The scorecard was nonetheless poor for the OVP, whose candidate, Molterer, did not appeal much to voters who were not very enthusiastic about the party’s programme, either. The commitment to Europe and security, which constituted the core focus of the party’s propaganda, no longer moti- vated voters. It was clear that the party was, in terms of capabilities, limited to its economic platform. The SPO, on the other hand, scored points because of its commitment to ordinary folk (17%) and social justice (16%). Party loyalty (36% of the votes) was also a dominant factor. To conclude, the 2008 election showed that the OVP was incapable of meeting voters’ expectations, whereas the Far Right knew how to exploit voters’ fears. It may be helpful to analyse this breakthrough by the FPO and the BZO by examining the voters’ motivations.

31 32 fondapol | political innovation panels show that the two electorates had the same opinions on many on opinions same the had electorates two the that show panels BZO and FPO Coalition.These Grand new a prevent to resolve voters BZO the matched and FPO the of case the in did it than role greater a played personality.programme” his “party The to attributed be also Carinthia,”in can policy which his “sound by second personality”and dictated – for every category of this party’s electorate – first by “Haider’s Table 10 :Reasons for Voting for the BZOSimplified – Table (2008) mobilise theFPO’s electorate. “Strach’s personality” and “Opposed to the Grand Coalition” helped to parameters immigration.”abuses,”two “Stop and right-to-asylum The foreigners,”towards to policy “Opposed categories “Stricter combined rily because of the issue of immigration, as shown by the results from the and 53% of voters who switched to the FPO) did so, as in 2006, prima - Source : F Table 9:Reasons for Voting for the FPO–Simplified Table (2008) Source : BZ H O Dissatisfied/rejects other parties S S Political revival; “fresh start” S O H Party programme; best party Dissatisfied/ S Defends the interests of “ordinary folk” O tricter policy towards foreigners top immigration tricter policy towards foreigners P ound policy in Carinthia pposed to right-to-asylum abuses pposed to the pposed to the aider’s personality . C. O O votes (in %) votes (in %) The choice made by over 60% of voters in favour of the BZO was BZO the of favour in voters of 60% over by made choice The voters FPO of (60% 2008 in FPO the for vote to chose who Those S trache’s personality GfK Austria, 2008 election exit poll G R fK Austria, 2008 election exit poll ejects other parties G G

rand Coalition rand Coalition

F BZ P O O Voters Voters 49 35 11 11 10 15 14 13 13 13 9 5 5 8

s s witched to the witched to the BZ 34 20 52 11 19 14 13 13 12 12 8 8 8 5 F P O O 1015 mirns – h Hpbr mnrh’ hrdtr enemy. hereditary monarchy’s Hapsburg the – immigrants) (110,105 Turksthe with case the not is Such roots. Hungarian or Czech their of reminiscent names) family often (and ancestors have Austrians many since migrant, of type this to reactions hostile not but mixed had have Austrians Slovakia.The and Republic Hungary,Czech and the people) former first, the (297,606 origins: Yugoslavia three of were immigrants The latter began in the 1960s and sharply increased as of the 1980s. The to immigration, anoptionwhichthemajority of Austrians reject. unless there is a radical – change in familial strategies – only achieved by massive recourse be can population the of ageing the down Slowing system. tax the reform to plan a – now for least at – dropped has and allowances family increased modestly only has Coalition crisis, Grand the economic as the by obliterated but all been have positions based country’s political parties claim to be pro-family. Most of these principle- etme 20 eeto timh n oe Asra n te October 2010 electionin Vienna. the and Austria Lower in triumph election 2009 September FPO’s the example, for explains, and today timely still is issues these of immigration.Each to and OVP-SPOCoalition an Grand to opposed ten- economic construction,European and of and system political the sions,of critical by disoriented future, the about worried voters ment BZO isa “groupie” party. party, the xenophobic whereas a foremost and first similar.is FPO than The different more were views voters’ BZO and FPO ultimate, that, issues (rejection of immigration, opposition to the Grand Coalition), but 23. total population. Austria’sof one-third over represent may group By age over-60 the population.2050, ageing the is problem serious one countries, trialised to resolve. OVP,striving Coalition,is Grand the of framework the within working Austria today is confronted with social and economic hurdles which the show 24.2% of the 60-or-older age group by 2015, vs. 22.6%by 2008, 32.4% by 2035 and 34.1% by 2050. eorpi poetos (source: projections Demographic In 2009, however, Austria was a land that welcomed immigration. welcomed that land a was however,Austria 2009, In The FPO and the BZO managed to unite numerous anti-establish- numerous unite to managed BZO the and FPO The The first challenge is demographic. As in nearly all of the EU’s indus- 23 In confronting this demographic challenge, all of the S TAT IS Con T I AU K c S lusion TR A, IA, S aitk e Bevölkerungsstandes, 28.10.2008) des tatistik 33 The state of the right: Austria 34 fondapol | political innovation xenophobia, moreover,ineffective),collective largely strong is a by compounded and nonetheless made family reunification very difficult for non-Europeans. are unable to find work. The OVP and SPO reject suchtheyhomelands when theirmeasures, to backthem send but towishes haveRight Far The concernswhichmigrantsthatdisagreethealreadyis residing in Austria. inworkAustria. andlivefreedom parties towhichthe issueon key The the removing before timeframes longer for calling is Coalition Grand Community,theinnamemigratory of risk. forAsnewmembers,EU the European the Turkey’s into integration to opposed is Coalition Grand FPO). The and (BZO them stop to or SPO) (OVP and flows migratory veryattached totheir multicultural profile, are striving to either limit the “crime- as prone elements.” media the by denounced – persistently and – consistently the are scale Africans,acceptance been the have on who lowest Ranked 26. 25. 24 annually,per 2.5% a reaches growth Austrian that provided 2012, by Holland (3.9%). long-term unemployed). At the European level, it is in second place, after the for -17.3% group,and age 15-24 the for women,-8.6% for -3.9% and men for (-12.6% 8.7% by 2009,fallen had rate unemployment the September in was it what to Compared 2004. in as level same the was which unemployed, was population the of 5.9% 2010, September In other Europeancountriesnavigatingthesecrises. takes the credit. This record is actually rather good, compared to that of naturally supportedbytheOVP andtheSPO. strategy a – disputes work and strikes prevent to strives which (OGB), Federation TradeUnion Austrian powerful the group, consensus social its broad very a in on part in decline relies success economic temporary This 2009. in a exports despite country, prosperous very a been . See August publications/pol/pw_31.pdf. Österreich von der Monarchie bis heute,” No.12,in OctoberRainer and2008;Bauböck, “NachRasse und 1990-2008,” Bericht zurEuropäischen Wertestudie 2008 –Österreichteil (Vienna, 2009). SeeChristian Fries, Regina Polak andUrsula Unemployment at the European level: EU 27: 9.5%;EU 16: 10%. idn eid hs xrml rgd mirto plc (which, policy immigration rigid extremely this behind Hidden are Greens,whothe Austria’s exception of politicaltheparties, with Austrian economists expect an additional decline in unemployment in decline additional an expect economists Austrian The OVPThe Coalition’sthe stresses record,track economic it which for G ächter, “Migrationspolitik in Österreich seit 1945, Arbeitspapiere Migration und soziale Mobilität,” 25 are economic concerns. Until now, Austria has always has now,Austria Until concerns. economic are 26 Institut für H amachers-Zuba(Eds.), “DieÖsterreicherinnen. Wertewandel H öhere S tudien (IHS), Vienna, at: http://www.ihs.ac.at/ S pracheverschieden Migrationspolitik- in 24 - 2009 elections andthe year-end nationalelectionsof2013. regional of period 2010-2013 the in ambush an preparing of capable is are a risky step for the Grand Coalition, which knows that the Far Right unpopular,be naturally will which measures, savings’ These 2012. by gramme totalling 2.8 billion euros in order to resume meeting the criteria pro- tax and savings a on decided government 2011, the deficit. For its priority sectors(researchandtraining, forexample)willbethreatened. debt.the vice taken,is measure no in If investments public of future the 15.2% of the State budget (11.4 billion euros) would be allocated to ser of that,analysis structural 2010 March its in stressed Auditors 2013,in Court the euros, billion 184 reached debt public when 2009, In deficit. public the reduce as well as system, banking the and euro the stabilise Germany, it still poses a challenge for the State budget, which must help and France than less Austria affected has crisis financial the Although inflation (1.9%inJuly2010). Exportsalsoimproved. boosting by trend the interrupted which costs energy in increase strong the 2009),despite of quarter last the to compared (+0.25%,as 2010 in Table 11 :Austria’s Economy: Austrian Central Bank Projections (15 June 2010) performance. economic current country’s the on based objective conceivable fectly Source :S 2008 Years Table 12 :Austrian S I G Private sector consumption (in %) compared to preceding year 2007 U Public deficit as % of Budget as % of nflation (in %) compared to preceding year nemployment (in %) compared to preceding year DP growth (in %) compared to preceding year In order to comply with the Maastricht criteria,Maastricht the with comply to order reduce In must Austria One of the positive factors is domestic consumption, which rose again

tatistik austria, 29.3.2010 G DP compared to Maastricht criteria G DP

tate Deficit

I n millions of euros 2009 66,5 -3,4 -3,4 0,8 0,4 4,8

184 105 176 544

161 033

2010 69,2 -4,5 5,0 1,6 1,7 1,1

a 2011 71,3 -4,2 0,9 1,8 5,1 1,7 s a % of

66,5 59,5 62,6 G 2012 72,8 -3,9 DP 1,8 1,0 2,1 5,1 - 35 The state of the right: Austria 36 fondapol | political innovation Food Security: aglobal challenge* Bernard Bachelier, November2010 Achieving anew Common Agricultural Policy* Raymond Boudon, November2010 The People’s moral ability Gil Delannoi, December2010 The return of sortition inpolitics Antony Todorov, December 2010 The state of the right: Bulgaria* Thierry Weibel, January2011 Public service 2.0 Fondapol, January2011 2011, World Youths* Jacques Percheand Antoine Pertinax, February2011 Profit-sharing in the service of employment and purchasing power Wolfgang Glomb, July2010 Banking crisis, public debt: aGerman perspective Sofia Ventura, July2010 The State of the Right: Italy* Mathieu Zagrodzki, July 2010 What isthe police up to? Jacob Christensen, July2010 The State of the Right: Sweden and Dennmark* Dominika Tomaszewska-Mortimer, August 2010 The state of the right: Poland* Robin Berjon, September2010 Internet, Politics and citizen Coproduction David Sraer, September2010 The virtues of competition Joan Marcet, October2010 The State of the Right: Spain* Guillaume Lagane, October2010 Overcoming the Defense budget issue Emmanuel Combe, November2010 The unknown virtues of low cost carriers Bernard Bachelier, November2010 RE C EN T P T U B LI C A T IONS Public debt, public concerns Jérôme Fourquet, June 2010 Banking regulation for sustainable growth* Nathalie Janson, June 2010 Four proposals to renew our agricultural model Pascal Perri, May 2010 2010 regional elections: where have all the voters gone? Pascal Perrineau, May 2010 The Netherlands: the populist temptation* Christophe de Voogd, May 2010 Four ideas to boost spending power Pascal Perri, Avril 2010 The State of the Right: Great Britain* David Hanley, April 2010 Reinforce the regions’ economic role Nicolas Bouzou, March 2010 Reforming the Constitution to rein in government debt Jacques Delpla, February 2010 A strategy to reduce France’s public debt Nicolas Bouzou, February 2010 Iran: civil revolution?* Nader Vahabi, November 2009 Catholic Church policy: liberty vs liberalism Émile Perreau-Saussine, October 2009 A panorama of action in favour of green growth Valéry Morron and Déborah Sanchez, October 2009 The German economy on the eve of the general election* Nicolas Bouzou and Jérôme Duval-Hamel, September 2009 2009 European elections* Corinne Deloy, Dominique Reynié and Pascal Perrineau, September 2009 The Nazi-Soviet alliance, 70 years on Stéphane Courtois, July 2009 The administrative state and liberalism: a French story Lucien Jaume, June 2009 European development policy* Jean-Michel Debrat, June 2009

37 38 fondapol | political innovation US elections and trade policy: redefining EU-US relations? Elvire FabryandDamien Tresallet, November2008 Greening economic growth: towards aglobal strategy for Europe Dominique Reynié, January2009 Working on Sundays: Sunday workers’ perspectives January 2009 Reforms and social conflict, a survey Zoe McKenzie, March2009 Higher education reform inFrance: lessons from Australia* Nicolas Bouzou, March2009 Stemming the protectionist tide inEurope* Dominique Reynié, March2009 Civil service vscivil society David BonneauandBrunoBensasson, May2009 Academics: defending their status, illustrating astatus quo Elise Muir, June2009 Fighting age discrimination inthe workplace Read our news and publications at www.fondapol.org *The titles marked with anasterisk areavailable inEnglish Elvire Fabry, October2008 Defence, immigration, energy: Franco-German views Julien Tourreille, October2008 SUPPORT FONDAPOL

To reinforce its independence and carry out its mission, the Fondation pour l’innovation politique, an independent organisation, needs the support of private companies and individuals. Donors are invited to attend the annual general meeting that defines the Fondation’s orientations. The Fondation also invites them regularly to meet its staff and advisors, to talk about its publication before they are released, and to attend events it organises.

As a government-approved organisation, in accordance with the decree published on 14 April 2004, the Fondation pour l’innovation politique can accept donations and legacies from individuals and private companies.

Contact : Anne Flambert +33 (0)1 47 53 67 09 [email protected]

fondapol | www.fondapol.org

A liberal, progressive and European Think tank

The Fondation pour l’innovation politique contributes to pluralist thought and the revival of public debate. It approaches its work from a liberal, progressive and European perspective. As a platform for expertise, thought and debate, the Fondation strives to describe and decipher French and European society as it evolves.

The www.fondapol.org website features all the Fondation’s work, as well an ongoing series devoted to the effects of the digital revolution on political practice (Politique 2.0).

The Fondation pour l’innovation politique is an independent organisation, not subsidised by any political party. Support from private companies and individuals is essential to the expansion of its activities.

fondapol 11, rue de Grenelle 75007 Paris – France Tél. : 33 (0)1 47 53 67 00 [email protected] ISBN : 978-2-917613-91-7 3 €