DOCSLIB.ORG

1567029476.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1567029476.Pdf This is an electronic reprint of the original article. This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail. Finland: European Elections in the aftermath of national elections Christensen, Henrik Serup; Svensson La Rosa, Marco Published in: The European Parliament Elections of 2019 Publicerad: 01/01/2019 Link to publication Please cite the original version: Christensen, H. S., & Svensson La Rosa, M. (2019). Finland: European Elections in the aftermath of national elections. In L. De Sio, M. N. Franklin, & L. Russo (Eds.), The European Parliament Elections of 2019 Luiss University Press. https://www.luissuniversitypress.it/sites/luissuniversitypress.it/files/allegati/2019/07/ep_online.pdf General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. This document is downloaded from the Research Information Portal of ÅAU: 28. Sep. 2021 The European Parliament Elections of 2019 Edited by Lorenzo De Sio Mark N. Franklin Luana Russo luiss university press The European Parliament Elections of 2019 Edited by Lorenzo De Sio Mark N. Franklin Luana Russo © 2019 Luiss University Press – Pola Srl All rights reserved ISBN (print) 978-88-6105-411-0 ISBN (ebook) 978-88-6105-424-0 Luiss University Press – Pola s.r.l. viale Romania, 32 00197 Roma tel. 06 85225481/431 www.luissuniversitypress.it e-mail [email protected] Graphic design: HaunagDesign Srl Layout: Livia Pierini First published in July 2019 Table of contents Introduction Understanding the European Parliament elections of 2019 luana russo, mark n. franklin, lorenzo de sio .....................................p. 9 part i − comparative overview Chapter One Much ado about nothing? The EP elections in comparative perspective davide angelucci, luca carrieri, mark n. franklin ...............................p. 15 Chapter Two Party system change in EU countries: long-term instability and cleavage restructuring vincenzo emanuele, bruno marino ........................................................p. 29 Chapter Three Spitzenkandidaten 2.0: From experiment to routine in European elections? thomas christiansen, michael shackleton ...........................................p. 43 Chapter Four Explaining the outcome. Second-order factors still matter, but with an exceptional turnout increase lorenzo de sio, luana russo, mark n. franklin ....................................p. 57 Chapter Five Impact of issues on party performance nicola maggini, lorenzo de sio, diego garzia, alexander h. trechsel.p. 71 part ii − results across the 28 eu countries Austria: An election overshadowed by Ibiza-gate sylvia kritzinger, carolina plescia .......................................................p. 85 Belgium: Least salient, but very European louise hoon.............................................................................................p. 91 Bulgaria: neither a protest, nor a European vote nikoleta yordanova................................................................................p. 97 6 Croatia: Towards further fragmentation of the party system andrija henjak .......................................................................................p. 103 Cyprus: An election of ‘soft’ phenomena: apathy, incumbent punishment and far right consolidation giorgos charalambous...........................................................................p. 109 Czech Republic: No country for old parties vlastimil havlík......................................................................................p. 115 Denmark: The surprising success of pro-European mainstream parties julie hassing nielsen .............................................................................p. 121 Estonia: A scene set by the preceding national election piret ehin, liisa talving..........................................................................p. 127 Finland: European Elections in the aftermath of national elections henrik serup christensen, marco svensson la rosa..............................p. 133 France: Setting the stage for 2022 romain lachat ........................................................................................p. 141 Germany: Second order but still groundbreaking? heiko giebler ..........................................................................................p. 147 Greece: A story of government punishment and party-system stabilisation eftichia teperoglou ...............................................................................p. 155 Hungary: A paradoxical episode under electoral authoritarianism gabor toka..............................................................................................p. 161 Ireland: Something for almost everyone michael marsh ........................................................................................p. 167 Italy: Complete overturn among government partners – League doubled, M5S halved irene landini, aldo paparo......................................................................p. 173 Latvia: EUropean expertise matters jaˉnis ikstens ...........................................................................................p. 181 Lithuania: Defeat of Eurosceptic parties in the shadow of a presidential campaign mazvydas jastramskis ............................................................................p. 187 Luxembourg: The permanent downfall of Luxembourg’s dominant party? patrick dumont, raphaël kies, dan schmit ............................................p. 193 Malta: Unstoppable Labour? marcello carammia, roderick pace........................................................p. 199 table of contents 7 Netherlands: A Timmermans (Spitzenkandidaten) effect? arjan schakel ........................................................................................p. 205 Poland: A skirmish before the decisive battle michał kotnarowski, mikolaj czesnik ...................................................p. 219 Portugal: Defeat for the right, challenges for the left marco lisi ...............................................................................................p. 225 Romania: Between national politics and European hopes sorina soare, claudiu tufi¸s ...................................................................p. 231 Slovakia: Continuation of electoral earthquakes peter spácˇ................................................................................................p. 239 Slovenia: Split national political identities in EU electoral democracy simona kustec .........................................................................................p. 245 Spain: The endless election sequence enrique hernandez, marta fraile .........................................................p. 253 Sweden: We are all the winners maria oskarson.......................................................................................p. 261 United Kingdom: European Elections in the run-up to Brexit kaat smets...............................................................................................p. 267 Authors’ Biographies ................................................................................p. 273 Introduction Understanding the European Parliament elections of 2019 luana russo, mark n. franklin and lorenzo de sio Understanding an election to the European Parliament (EP) – any election to the EP – is not straightforward. The elections are treated as being akin to a parliamentary election, but whereas parliamentary elections in EU member states lead to the for- mation of a government pledged to carry out policies on which its member parties campaigned in the run-up to the election, an EP election leads to no government being formed, much less one pledged to certain policies supported by voters. Indeed it is not clear to most of those voters what is the purpose of these elections or what is the point of voting in them. The most common appeal by national parties is that their supporters should vote out of loyalty to those parties. Consequently those without established party loyalties (particulary younger citizens) are especially unlikely to vote and turnout seldom reaches even 50 percent. Some people also vote to register dissatisfaction with government policies or to support policies that they feel are being neglected. As a result, government parties (often larger parties) regularly lose vo- tes at these elections whereas parties espousing ideas with limited appeal (mostly small parties) do well. For reasons explained later in the book these phenomena ac- cord with what is known as Second Order Election (SOE) theory. In the first three decades of EP elections (1979 to 2009) these elections, despi- te their ostensive purpose to elect a European parliament, had very little focus on Eu- ropean matters. Instead they presented a distorted mirror of national political con- cerns. In 2014 for the first time, these elections were clearly "about Europe" but it has been argued that they were still just displaying a distorted reflection of national po- litical concerns which, in the aftermath of the Great Recession and the economic strin- gency that ensued in many EU countries, had also become "about
Load more

Recommended publications
  • KAS MP SOE Redebeitrag AM En
    REPORT Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung MEDIA MONITORING LABORATORY February 2015 Media under their own momentum: www.fmd.bg The deficient will to change www.kas.de Foundation Media Democracy (FMD) and KAS. In summary, the main findings, by the Media Program South East Europe of areas of monitoring, include: the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS) present the joint annual report on the MEDIA DISCOURSE state of the Bulgarian media environment in 2014. The study summarises the trends Among the most striking images in the coverage of socio-political constructed by Bulgarian media in 2014 was developments in the country. During the the presentation of patriotism as the monitored period dynamic processes sanctuary of identity. Among the most unfolded – European Parliament elections watched television events during the year and early elections to the National turned to be the Klitschko-Pulev boxing Assembly took place, three governments match. The event inflamed social networks, changed in the country’s governance. morning shows, commentary journalism. It was presented not simply as boxing, but as The unstable political situation has also an occasion for national euphoria. Such affected the media environment, in which a discourse fitted into the more general trend number of important problems have failed of nourishing patriotic passions which to find a solution. During the year, self- through the stadium language, but also regulation was virtually blocked. A vast through the media language, are easily majority of the media continued operating mobilised into street and political forms of at a loss. For many of them the problem symbolic and physical violence against with the ownership clarification remained others (Roma, refugees, the sexually and unresolved.
    [Show full text]
  • INVITATION Award Ceremony for Maneka Gandhi: Award Ceremony for Richard Ryder: in Part 2 Only Starting at 9:00 A.M
    Peter-Singer-Preis 2021 The award ceremony is carried out as a closed event and is open to altogether 120 guests only Förderverein des Association for the Peter-Singer-Preises Promotion of the Peter für Strategien zur Singer Prize for AWARD CEREMONY MEMBERSHIP Tierleidminderung e.V. Strategies to Reduce the Suffering of Animals Award Ceremony for Maneka Gandhi as the Winner of the 6th and Richard Ryder as the I would like to become a member of the Association for the Promo- tion of the Peter Singer Prize for Strategies to Reduce the Suffe- th ring of Animals. Winner of the 7 Peter Singer Prize for Strategies to Reduce the Suffering of Animals. Registered non-profit association www.peter-singer-preis.de • E-Mail: [email protected] th My membership fee is Euro every year DATE: Saturday, May 29 , 2021 (minimal fee is 50 Euro every year for one person) VENUE: Hollywood Media Hotel (Cinema Hall) • Kurfürstendamm 202 • 10719 Berlin PARTICIPATION I would like to participate in the whole evemt. PROGRAMME: FIRST PART PROGRAMME: SECOND PART in part 1 only INVITATION Award Ceremony for Maneka Gandhi: Award Ceremony for Richard Ryder: in part 2 only Starting at 9:00 A.M. Starting at 4:00 P.M. Name: • Welcome: Dr. Walter Neussel • Moderation: Prof. Edna Hillmann Street, house number: • Moderation: Prof. Dr. Peter Singer (Professor for Animal Husbandry, Humboldt University, Berlin) • Prof. Dr. Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker Postcode, city: (Honorary President of the Club of Rome): • Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Dieter Birnbacher Telephone, fax: Avoiding Collapse of the “Full World” (Institute of Philosophy, Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf): • Renate Künast Email adress: (Former German Minister of Consumer Protection, „Speciesism“– a Re-Evaluation Place, date, signature: Food and Agriculture from 2001 to 2005): • Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Meat and Morality: Alternatives to Factory Farming
    J Agric Environ Ethics (2010) 23:455–468 DOI 10.1007/s10806-009-9226-x Meat and Morality: Alternatives to Factory Farming Evelyn B. Pluhar Accepted: 30 November 2009 / Published online: 18 December 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract Scientists have shown that the practice of factory farming is an increasingly urgent danger to human health, the environment, and nonhuman animal welfare. For all these reasons, moral agents must consider alternatives. Vegetarian food production, humane food animal farming, and in-vitro meat production are all explored from a variety of ethical perspectives, especially utilitarian and rights- based viewpoints, all in the light of current U.S. and European initiatives in the public and private sectors. It is concluded that vegetarianism and potentially in-vitro meat production are the best-justified options. Keywords Factory farming Á Humane farming Á In-vitro meat production Á Rights theory Á Utilitarianism Á Vegetarianism factory farming (FAK-tuh-ree FAHR-ming) noun: an industrialized system of producing meat, eggs, and milk in large-scale facilities where the animal is treated as a machine (Wordsmith 2008) After several years of receiving ‘‘A Word for the Day’’ from a dictionary service, the author was interested to see the above definition pop up in the email inbox. The timing was perhaps not coincidental. In spring 2008, the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production completed a two-year investigation of factory- farming practices in the United States. At the end of its 1,100-page report, the Commission recommended a ten-year timeline for the termination of the most intensive production techniques, including battery cages, gestation crates, and force- feeding birds to harvest their fatty livers for foie gras (Hunger Notes 2008).
    [Show full text]
  • THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity Authors: Naomi A
    s l a m m a y t T i M S N v I i A e G t A n i p E S r a A C a C E H n T M i THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity The Humane Society of the United State s/ World Society for the Protection of Animals 2009 1 1 1 2 0 A M , n o t s o g B r o . 1 a 0 s 2 u - e a t i p s u S w , t e e r t S h t u o S 9 8 THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity Authors: Naomi A. Rose, E.C.M. Parsons, and Richard Farinato, 4th edition Editors: Naomi A. Rose and Debra Firmani, 4th edition ©2009 The Humane Society of the United States and the World Society for the Protection of Animals. All rights reserved. ©2008 The HSUS. All rights reserved. Printed on recycled paper, acid free and elemental chlorine free, with soy-based ink. Cover: ©iStockphoto.com/Ying Ying Wong Overview n the debate over marine mammals in captivity, the of the natural environment. The truth is that marine mammals have evolved physically and behaviorally to survive these rigors. public display industry maintains that marine mammal For example, nearly every kind of marine mammal, from sea lion Iexhibits serve a valuable conservation function, people to dolphin, travels large distances daily in a search for food. In learn important information from seeing live animals, and captivity, natural feeding and foraging patterns are completely lost.
    [Show full text]
  • An Unsupervised Language Independent Method of Name Discrimination Using Second Order Co-Occurrence Features
    An Unsupervised Language Independent Method of Name Discrimination Using Second Order Co-Occurrence Features Ted Pedersen1, Anagha Kulkarni1, Roxana Angheluta2, Zornitsa Kozareva3, and Thamar Solorio4 1 University of Minnesota, Duluth, USA 2 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium 3 University of Alicante, Spain 4 University of Texas at El Paso, USA Abstract. Previous work by Pedersen, Purandare and Kulkarni (2005) has resulted in an unsupervised method of name discrimination that represents the context in which an ambiguous name occurs using second order co–occurrence features. These contexts are then clustered in order to identify which are associated with different underlying named entities. It also extracts descriptive and discriminating bigrams from each of the discovered clusters in order to serve as identifying labels. These methods have been shown to perform well with English text, although we believe them to be language independent since they rely on lexical features and use no syntactic features or external knowledge sources. In this paper we apply this methodology in exactly the same way to Bulgarian, English, Romanian, and Spanish corpora. We find that it attains discrimination accuracy that is consistently well above that of a majority classifier, thus providing support for the hypothesis that the method is language independent. 1 Introduction Purandare and Pedersen (e.g., [9], [10]) previously developed an unsupervised method of word sense discrimination that has also been applied to name discrim- ination by Pedersen, Purandare, and Kulkarni [8]. This method is characterized by a reliance on lexical features, and avoids the use of syntactic or other language dependent information. This is by design, since the method is intended to port easily and effectively to a range of languages.
    [Show full text]
  • MAC1 Abstracts – Oral Presentations
    Oral Presentation Abstracts OP001 Rights, Interests and Moral Standing: a critical examination of dialogue between Regan and Frey. Rebekah Humphreys Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom This paper aims to assess R. G. Frey’s analysis of Leonard Nelson’s argument (that links interests to rights). Frey argues that claims that animals have rights or interests have not been established. Frey’s contentions that animals have not been shown to have rights nor interests will be discussed in turn, but the main focus will be on Frey’s claim that animals have not been shown to have interests. One way Frey analyses this latter claim is by considering H. J. McCloskey’s denial of the claim and Tom Regan’s criticism of this denial. While Frey’s position on animal interests does not depend on McCloskey’s views, he believes that a consideration of McCloskey’s views will reveal that Nelson’s argument (linking interests to rights) has not been established as sound. My discussion (of Frey’s scrutiny of Nelson’s argument) will centre only on the dialogue between Regan and Frey in respect of McCloskey’s argument. OP002 Can Special Relations Ground the Privileged Moral Status of Humans Over Animals? Robert Jones California State University, Chico, United States Much contemporary philosophical work regarding the moral considerability of nonhuman animals involves the search for some set of characteristics or properties that nonhuman animals possess sufficient for their robust membership in the sphere of things morally considerable. The most common strategy has been to identify some set of properties intrinsic to the animals themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast
    Briefing May 2019 European Parliament Elections 2019 - Forecast Austria – 18 MEPs Staff lead: Nick Dornheim PARTIES (EP group) Freedom Party of Austria The Greens – The Green Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) (EPP) Social Democratic Party of Austria NEOS – The New (FPÖ) (Salvini’s Alliance) – Alternative (Greens/EFA) – 6 seats (SPÖ) (S&D) - 5 seats Austria (ALDE) 1 seat 5 seats 1 seat 1. Othmar Karas* Andreas Schieder Harald Vilimsky* Werner Kogler Claudia Gamon 2. Karoline Edtstadler Evelyn Regner* Georg Mayer* Sarah Wiener Karin Feldinger 3. Angelika Winzig Günther Sidl Petra Steger Monika Vana* Stefan Windberger 4. Simone Schmiedtbauer Bettina Vollath Roman Haider Thomas Waitz* Stefan Zotti 5. Lukas Mandl* Hannes Heide Vesna Schuster Olga Voglauer Nini Tsiklauri 6. Wolfram Pirchner Julia Elisabeth Herr Elisabeth Dieringer-Granza Thomas Schobesberger Johannes Margreiter 7. Christian Sagartz Christian Alexander Dax Josef Graf Teresa Reiter 8. Barbara Thaler Stefanie Mösl Maximilian Kurz Isak Schneider 9. Christian Zoll Luca Peter Marco Kaiser Andrea Kerbleder Peter Berry 10. Claudia Wolf-Schöffmann Theresa Muigg Karin Berger Julia Reichenhauser NB 1: Only the parties reaching the 4% electoral threshold are mentioned in the table. Likely to be elected Unlikely to be elected or *: Incumbent Member of the NB 2: 18 seats are allocated to Austria, same as in the previous election. and/or take seat to take seat, if elected European Parliament ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• www.eurocommerce.eu Belgium – 21 MEPs Staff lead: Stefania Moise PARTIES (EP group) DUTCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY FRENCH SPEAKING CONSITUENCY GERMAN SPEAKING CONSTITUENCY 1. Geert Bourgeois 1. Paul Magnette 1. Pascal Arimont* 2. Assita Kanko 2. Maria Arena* 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Regolamento Parlamento Eu Alla Proposta
    Parlamento europeo 2019-2024 Documento di seduta A9-0214/2020 10.11.2020 ***I RELAZIONE sulla proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio che istituisce un dispositivo per la ripresa e la resilienza (COM(2020)0408 – C9-0150/2020 – 2020/0104(COD)) Commissione per i bilanci Commissione per i problemi economici e monetari Relatori: Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Siegfried Mureşan, Dragoș Pîslaru (Commissioni congiunte – articolo 58 del regolamento) Relatori per parere (*): Dragoș Pîslaru, commissione per l'occupazione e gli affari sociali Pascal Canfin, commissione per l'ambiente, la sanità pubblica e la sicurezza alimentare François-Xavier Bellamy, commissione per l'industria, la ricerca e l'energia Roberts Zīle, commissione per i trasporti e il turismo (*) Commissioni associate – articolo 57 del regolamento RR\1217780IT.docx PE655.950v03-00 IT Unita nella diversitàIT PR_COD_1consamCom Significato dei simboli utilizzati * Procedura di consultazione *** Procedura di approvazione ***I Procedura legislativa ordinaria (prima lettura) ***II Procedura legislativa ordinaria (seconda lettura) ***III Procedura legislativa ordinaria (terza lettura) (La procedura indicata dipende dalla base giuridica proposta nel progetto di atto.) Emendamenti a un progetto di atto Emendamenti del Parlamento presentati su due colonne Le soppressioni sono evidenziate in corsivo grassetto nella colonna di sinistra. Le sostituzioni sono evidenziate in corsivo grassetto nelle due colonne. Il testo nuovo è evidenziato in corsivo grassetto nella colonna di destra. La prima e la seconda riga del blocco d'informazione di ogni emendamento identificano la parte di testo interessata del progetto di atto in esame. Se un emendamento verte su un atto esistente che il progetto di atto intende modificare, il blocco d'informazione comprende anche una terza e una quarta riga che identificano rispettivamente l'atto esistente e la disposizione interessata di quest'ultimo.
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
    Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Parliament Elections in Bulgaria Are Likely to Reinforce the Country's Political Stalemate Between Left and Right
    The European Parliament elections in Bulgaria are likely to reinforce the country’s political stalemate between left and right blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2014/04/14/the-european-parliament-elections-in-bulgaria-are-likely-to-reinforce- the-countrys-political-stalemate-between-left-and-right/ 14/04/2014 The Bulgarian government currently lacks a majority in the country’s national parliament, with the governing coalition counting on support from 120 out of 240 MPs. Kyril Drezov writes that the upcoming European elections will likely be fought on the basis of this domestic situation, with European issues playing only a minor role, and the majority of seats being distributed between the two largest parties: the Bulgarian Socialist Party and the Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB). European Parliament Elections are still fairly new for Bulgaria – the 2014 elections will be only the third since accession. Like previous EP elections in 2007 and 2009, their function is purely as a test for changes in national politics. The present election campaign is overwhelmingly dominated by domestic concerns and is notable for the absence of EU-related issues. As a leftover from the accession days, the European Union is still considered ‘a good thing’ in Bulgaria and does not generate much passion. There is consensus amongst Bulgarians that key European policies are shaped somewhere else, and that Sofia’s role is to adapt to these policies whatever shape they may take. The big traditional players in Bulgarian politics gravitate towards particular European party families – Socialist, Christian Democratic and Liberal – and in their election manifestoes mostly parrot whatever line these party families take on the big European issues.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Populism in Europe
    2018 State of Populism in Europe The past few years have seen a surge in the public support of populist, Eurosceptical and radical parties throughout almost the entire European Union. In several countries, their popularity matches or even exceeds the level of public support of the centre-left. Even though the centre-left parties, think tanks and researchers are aware of this challenge, there is still more OF POPULISM IN EUROPE – 2018 STATE that could be done in this fi eld. There is occasional research on individual populist parties in some countries, but there is no regular overview – updated every year – how the popularity of populist parties changes in the EU Member States, where new parties appear and old ones disappear. That is the reason why FEPS and Policy Solutions have launched this series of yearbooks, entitled “State of Populism in Europe”. *** FEPS is the fi rst progressive political foundation established at the European level. Created in 2007 and co-fi nanced by the European Parliament, it aims at establishing an intellectual crossroad between social democracy and the European project. Policy Solutions is a progressive political research institute based in Budapest. Among the pre-eminent areas of its research are the investigation of how the quality of democracy evolves, the analysis of factors driving populism, and election research. Contributors : Tamás BOROS, Maria FREITAS, Gergely LAKI, Ernst STETTER STATE OF POPULISM Tamás BOROS IN EUROPE Maria FREITAS • This book is edited by FEPS with the fi nancial support of the European
    [Show full text]