DOCSLIB.ORG

Damjan Lajh and Meta Novak Slovenian Bubble in the Brussels: from Best Student in Class to Passive Observer? Debateu Jean Monnet

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Damjan Lajh and Meta Novak Slovenian Bubble in the Brussels: from Best Student in Class to Passive Observer? Debateu Jean Monnet DebatEU Jean Monnet paper No 2020/01 Damjan Lajh and Meta Novak Slovenian Bubble in the Brussels: From Best Student in Class to Passive Observer? DebatEU Jean Monnet Paper No 2020/01 May 2020 URL: jmce-ljubljana.eu To cite this article: Lajh, D., & Novak, M. (2020). Slovenian Bubble in the Brussels: From Best Student in Class to Passive Observer? DebatEU Jean Monnet Paper, 2020/01. JEAN MONNET PAPERS publishes pre-print manuscript on the policymaking process and policy studies in Europe. The series is interdisciplinary in character and accept papers in the field of political science, international relations, European studies, sociology, law and similar. It publishes work of theoretical, conceptual as well as of empirical character and it also encourages submissions of policy-relevant analyses, including specific policy recommendations. Papers are available in electronic format only and can be downloaded in pdf-format at jmce- ljubljana.eu. Issued by University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Social Sciences Kardeljeva ploščad 5 1000 Ljubljana Email: [email protected] Tel: +386 1 5805 227 Fax: +386 1 5805 103 www.fdv.uni-lj.si This publication has been co-funded with support from Erusmus+ Programme of the European Union. This publication [communication] reflects the views only of the authors, and the European Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. 1 DebatEU Jean Monnet paper No 2020/01 Slovenian Bubble in the Brussels: From Best Student in Class to Passive Observer? Damjan Lajh and Meta Novak Abstract: With dissolution of socialist Yugoslavia Slovenia turned towards the European Union (EU) membership. Since independence the European idea has been widely acknowledged by political elite as well as general public. Due to absence of any real and successful Eurosceptic parties, main goals related to European integration became national projects, including EU membership, adoption of Euro as the national currency, entering Schengen area, and holding the Presidency of Council of the EU. During accession and full membership periods Slovenian citizens nevertheless have met various negative experiences with the EU: pressures to open the real estate market to foreigners and closing down duty free shops, imposition of austerity measures during the financial crisis, lack of effective EU policy during the migration crisis, and absence of understanding and support from the EU partners concerning the border dispute and other open issues with neighbouring Croatia. Although these events to some extent increased the level of Euroscepticism it remained limited until today. On the other hand, Slovenian political elite with meeting all initially set goals in European integration lost concrete strategy and role Slovenia should play in the EU. After fifteen years of membership this has led to the image of Slovenia as being one of the most submissive players in the EU policymaking. Key words: European Union, Slovenia, membership Damjan Lajh is associate professor at Faculty of Social Sciences University of Ljubljana, Jean Monnet professor, Head of Centre for political science research, recipient of Altiero Spinelli prize for outreach 2018 and coordinator of University of Ljubljana Jean Monnet centre of excellence. Meta Novak is assistant professor and research at the Faculty of Social Sciences University of Ljubljana. 2 DebatEU Jean Monnet paper No 2020/01 Introduction: Slovenian Accession and the Copenhagen Learning Process Slovenian relationship with the European Union (EU) is as long as the history of Slovenian independence. Process of Slovenian transition from socialist political system in Yugoslavia to independence in the late 1980s and early 1990s was already characterised with the ambition to join the EU with the aim to become economically successful and internationally recognised democratic country (Lajh, 2012). In this regard the EU membership was defined as a national project even before Slovenia’s formal independence. The reformed former Slovenian League of Communists even adopted the document “Europe now – for the European quality of living” for its congress in autumn 1989 and used slogan “Europe Now!” for the first multi-party and democratic elections in 1990 (Balažic, 2002). Other political parties as well included integration with the EU in their electoral programmes for the first multiparty elections (Krašovec & Lajh, 2009). Fink-Hafner even claims that Europeanisation had ‘become a kind of substitute for the old ideology’ (Fink-Hafner, 1999). In 1991, the ambition to become the EU member was formally declared in the Basis of Slovenian Foreign Policy (Fink-Hafner & Lajh, 2005). Among the Slovenian elite existed general consensus of Slovenian membership in the EU as a national goal. Except for the Slovenian National Party that openly expressed soft Eurosceptic stances, all other parties supported Slovenian membership in the EU and even signed a unique agreement on cooperation during the process of Slovenian accession to the EU (Lajh, 2012). Slovenian parliamentary parties along with support to EU membership also started to connect outwards and began collaboration with their European counterparts already before the Slovenian membership in the EU. This collaboration did not bring major changes in organisational structure of the parties during the accession period but only in the period of EU membership when party rules and structures changed in a direction to include parties MEPs in relevant party bodies (Krašovec & Lajh, 2009). However, the Social Democratic Party of Slovenia changed its name to Slovenian Democratic Party as a result of its cooperation with the European Peoples Party (Krašovec & Lajh, 2009). Despite the general support to the European integration, the process of joining demanded some unwanted adaptations that Slovenians were not too happy to took over. Three most salient issues were (1) the so-called Spanish Compromise, which enabled the right of foreigners to buy Slovenian real estate and triggered fear of especially Slovenians living close to the borders that former “occupier” will again occupy the land, (2) the issue of closing down duty free shops at Italian and Austrian borders, where foreigners used to buy luxury goods such as cigarettes, 3 DebatEU Jean Monnet paper No 2020/01 alcohol and cosmetics, as well as (3) transition period for the free labour movement (Krašovec & Kustec Lipicer, 2008). Open issues connected with membership in the EU triggered decrease in public support and slowly emerged some Euroscepticism among Slovenian public. Additionally, in 2002 news appeared that Slovenia due to its stable economy will join the EU as net contributor and pay more into EU funds than it would receive (Nations in Transit, 2003). Even with minor problems during the Slovenian accession to the EU the public in high percentage supported Slovenian membership in the EU even after the rumours that Slovenia might be a net contributor (Lajh, 2012). During the process of Slovenian accession to the EU the national political system needed to adapt to new circumstances. Fink-Hafner and Lajh (2005) demonstrated that national institutions, processes, traditions and politico-cultural context remained flexible and pragmatic in its adaptation. No radical change was made instead political structures only rearranged its setup to meet the demands of the accession process. In October 1995 special units for handling EU affairs were established within most ministries and other governmental bodies. EU tasks were in this way dispersed rather than concentrated in a special unit with EU- knowledgeable elite (Fink-Hafner, 2007). At the end of 1997 the coordination of European affairs was set up. It started with the establishment of the Government Office for European Affairs (GOEA), led by a minister without portfolio that took on management and coordination of the Slovenian accession process, the formation of the Negotiating Team of the Republic of Slovenia for Accession to the EU, and inter-sectoral working groups that comprised representatives of ministries and relevant institutions to prepare negotiating positions. However, Ministry of Foreign Affairs remained chief negotiator while the Prime Minister led the coordination of managing EU affairs (Fink-Hafner, 2007, pp. 818-819). At the end of negotiations, in February 2003, the Minister for EU Affairs was prolonged into the first year of membership and GOEA was reformed and institutionalized as the central coordinating unit (Fink-Hafner, 2007). In October 2002 a Commission on Non- Governmental Organizations was established by the government to help involve NGOs in the EU accession process (Nations in Transit, 2003). The Government decided that Slovenia enters the EU as a single region to receive funds for regional development from the EU. Office for Structural Policy and Regional Development was established to coordinate various national actors for balanced regional development and for the implementation of the EU’s structural and cohesion policies (Nations in Transit, 2004). In 2005 the government agreed to divide Slovenia into two 4 DebatEU Jean Monnet paper No 2020/01 cohesion regions: Western Slovenia and Eastern Slovenia. The division between Western and Eastern Slovenia does not originate in geographical or historical division and was made artificially for the purpose of drawing European cohesion funds. The debate on the division of Slovenia on several regions was initiated again in 2019. New proposal suggest implementation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Slovenia Before the Elections
    PERSPECTIVE Realignment of the party system – Slovenia before the elections ALEŠ MAVER AND UROŠ URBAS November 2011 The coalition government under Social Democrat Prime make people redundant. Nevertheless, the unemploy- Minister Borut Pahor lost the support it needed in Parlia- ment rate increased by 75 per cent to 107,000 over three ment and early elections had to be called for 4 Decem- years. This policy was financed by loans of 8 billion eu- ber, one year before completing its term of office. What ros, which doubled the public deficit. are the reasons for this development? Which parties are now seeking votes in the »political marketplace«? What However, Prime Minister Pahor overestimated his popu- coalitions are possible after 4 December? And what chal- larity in a situation in which everybody hoped that the lenges will the new government face? economic crisis would soon be over. The governing par- ties had completely different priorities: they were seek- ing economic rents; they could not resist the pressure of Why did the government of lobbies and made concessions; and they were too preoc- Prime Minister Borut Pahor fail? cupied with scandals and other affairs emerging from the ranks of the governing coalition. Although the governing coalition was homogeneously left-wing, it could not work together and registered no significant achievements. The next government will thus Electoral history and development be compelled to achieve something. Due to the deterio- of the party system rating economic situation – for 2012 1 per cent GDP growth, 1.3 per cent inflation, 8.4 per cent unemploy- Since the re-introduction of the multi-party system Slo- ment and a 5.3 per cent budget deficit are predicted – venia has held general elections in 1990, 1992, 1996, the goals will be economic.
    [Show full text]
  • General Election in Slovenia
    GENERAL ELECTIONS IN SLOVENIA 4th December 2011 European Elections monitor The Rightwing Opposition Forces forecast to win in the Slovenian General Elections on from Corinne Deloy translated by Helen Levy 4th December next. ANALYSIS On 4th December next Slovenia will be holding the first early general elections in its history. 1 month before This election follows parliament’s rejection on 20th September last of the confidence motion the poll presented by Borut Pahor’s government (Social Democratic Party, SD). 51 MPs of the Demo- cratic Party (SDS), the People’s Party (SLS), the Slovenian National Party (SNS), Zares (Z) and of the Democratic Pensioners’ Party (DeSUS) voted against the text, 36 members of the Social Democratic Party and of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDS) as well as three independent MPs voted in support. The Slovenian Parliament was dissolved on 21st October. Borut Pahor is the third Slovenian head of government to fall after Alojz Peterle (Slovenian Christian-Democrats) in 1992 and Janez Drnovsek (LDS) in 2000. After the announcement of the government’s collapse, President of the Republic, Danilo Türk left New York where he was attending the UN’s General Assembly to return to Ljubljana. “The vote of defiance has worsened the political crisis,” he declared, calling on all political parties to show courage rapidly in order to find solutions to the crisis in the interest of the Slovenian people. “The vote of defiance is good news because it will lead to a new government that will have wider public support, which is vital if the necessary decisions are to be taken,” declared Janez Sustarsic, professor at the Faculty of Management in Koper.
    [Show full text]
  • Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Slovenia On
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND LEGAL AFFAIRS DIRECTORATE OF MONITORING Strasbourg, 7 December 2007 Public Greco Eval III Rep (2007) 1E Theme II Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Slovenia on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II) Adopted by GRECO at its 35 th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 3-7 December 2007) Secrétariat du GRECO GRECO Secretariat www.coe.int/greco Conseil de l’Europe Council of Europe F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex +33 3 88 41 20 00 Fax +33 3 88 41 39 55 I. INTRODUCTION 1. Slovenia joined GRECO in 1999. GRECO adopted the First Round Evaluation Report (Greco Eval I Rep (2000) 3E) in respect of Slovenia at its 4 th Plenary Meeting (12-15 December 2000) and the Second Round Evaluation Report (Greco Eval II Rep (2003) 1E) at its 16 th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 8-12 December 2003). The aforementioned Evaluation Reports, as well as their corresponding Compliance Reports, are available on GRECO’s homepage (http://www.coe.int/greco ). 2. GRECO’s current Third Evaluation Round (launched on 1 January 2007) deals with the following themes: - Theme I – Incriminations: Articles 1a and 1b, 2-12, 15-17, 19 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173) 1, Articles 1-6 of its Additional Protocol 2 (ETS 191) and Guiding Principle 2 (criminalisation of corruption). - Theme II – Transparency of party funding: Articles 11, 12, 13b, 14 and 16 of Recommendation Rec(2003)4 on Common Rules against Corruption in the Funding of Political Parties and Electoral Campaigns, and - more generally - Guiding Principle 15 (financing of political parties and election campaigns) .
    [Show full text]
  • Writing the Political History of the Republic of Slovenia
    22 Jure Gašparič: Writing the Political History of the Republic of Slovenia 1.01 UDC: 930 930:323(497.4)"1991/2016" Jure Gašparič* Writing the Political History of the Republic of Slovenia IZVLEČEK PISATI POLITIČNO ZGODOVINO REPUBLIKE SLOVENIJE Avtor v prispevku obravnava problematiko raziskovanja in pisanja politične zgodovine Re- publike Slovenije po letu 1991. Po uvodni ugotovitvi, da ljudje od vsega začetka niso zaupali politikom in strankam, zastavi vprašanje, kako so ti ves čas ravnali, kako so se razvijale politične institucije, kako so se prilagajale svetu in času, ki se je v dvajsetih letih spremenil. Najprej predstavi številne dileme in metodološke posebnosti problematike (problem historične distance, smiselnost početja, neobvladljivost in specifičnost virov), nato pa oriše mogoče pristope in načine spopadanja z izzivom. V drugem delu prispevka povzame ugotovitve lastnega raziskovanja tega obdobja (o polarizaciji, personalizaciji, medializaciji in informalizaciji politike), jih vpenja v širši evropski okvir in poleg tega zariše še izziv za prihodnje raziskovanje. Ključne besede: politična zgodovina, 1991–2016, Slovenija, politične stranke ABSTRACT The author focuses on the issue of researching and writing the political history of the Republic of Slovenia after its independence in 1991. After his introductory assessment that ever since the be- ginning people have not trusted politicians and political parties, he focuses on the question of how people have acted throughout this time, how the political institutions have been developing, and how they have been adapting to the world and the times which have changed radically in the last twenty five years. First the author presents numerous dilemmas and methodological peculiarities of the issue at hand (the problem of historical distance, the sensibility of the activity, the uncontrol- lable and specific sources), and then he proceeds to describe the possible approaches and methods of meeting this challenge.
    [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]
  • The Far Right in Slovenia
    MASARYK UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF SOCIAL STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE The Far Right in Slovenia Master‟s thesis Bc. Lucie Chládková Supervisor: doc. JUDr. PhDr. Miroslav Mareš, Ph.D. UČO: 333105 Field of Study: Security and Strategic Studies Matriculation Year: 2012 Brno 2014 Declaration of authorship of the thesis Hereby I confirm that this master‟s thesis “The Far Right in Slovenia” is an outcome of my own elaboration and work and I used only sources here mentioned. Brno, 10 May 2014 ……………………………………… Lucie Chládková 2 Acknowledgments I would like to express my gratitude to doc. JUDr. PhDr. Miroslav Mareš, Ph.D., who supervised this thesis and contributed with a lot of valuable remarks and advice. I would like to also thank to all respondents from interviews for their help and information they shared with me. 3 Annotation This master‟s thesis deals with the far right in Slovenia after 1991 until today. The main aim of this case study is the description and analysis of far-right political parties, informal and formal organisations and subcultures. Special emphasis is put on the organisational structure of the far-right scene and on the ideological affiliation of individual far-right organisations. Keywords far right, Slovenia, political party, organisation, ideology, nationalism, extremism, Blood and Honour, patriotic, neo-Nazi, populism. 4 Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7 2. Methodology .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Review of European and National Election Results Update: September 2019
    REVIEW OF EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTION RESULTS UPDATE: SEPTEMBER 2019 A Public Opinion Monitoring Publication REVIEW OF EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTION RESULTS UPDATE: SEPTEMBER 2019 Directorate-General for Communication Public Opinion Monitoring Unit May 2019 - PE 640.149 IMPRESSUM AUTHORS Philipp SCHULMEISTER, Head of Unit (Editor) Alice CHIESA, Marc FRIEDLI, Dimitra TSOULOU MALAKOUDI, Matthias BÜTTNER Special thanks to EP Liaison Offices and Members’ Administration Unit PRODUCTION Katarzyna ONISZK Manuscript completed in September 2019 Brussels, © European Union, 2019 Cover photo: © Andrey Kuzmin, Shutterstock.com ABOUT THE PUBLISHER This paper has been drawn up by the Public Opinion Monitoring Unit within the Directorate–General for Communication (DG COMM) of the European Parliament. To contact the Public Opinion Monitoring Unit please write to: [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN DISCLAIMER This document is prepared for, and primarily addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official position of the Parliament. TABLE OF CONTENTS EDITORIAL 1 1. COMPOSITION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 5 DISTRIBUTION OF SEATS OVERVIEW 1979 - 2019 6 COMPOSITION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LAST UPDATE (31/07/2019) 7 CONSTITUTIVE SESSION (02/07/2019) AND OUTGOING EP SINCE 1979 8 PROPORTION OF WOMEN AND MEN PROPORTION - LAST UPDATE 02/07/2019 28 PROPORTIONS IN POLITICAL GROUPS - LAST UPDATE 02/07/2019 29 PROPORTION OF WOMEN IN POLITICAL GROUPS - SINCE 1979 30 2. NUMBER OF NATIONAL PARTIES IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT CONSTITUTIVE SESSION 31 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Guide Euroscepticism
    Information Guide Euroscepticism A guide to information sources on Euroscepticism, with hyperlinks to further sources of information within European Sources Online and on external websites Contents Introduction .................................................................................................. 2 Brief Historical Overview................................................................................. 2 Euro Crisis 2008 ............................................................................................ 3 European Elections 2014 ................................................................................ 5 Euroscepticism in Europe ................................................................................ 8 Eurosceptic organisations ......................................................................... 10 Eurosceptic thinktanks ............................................................................. 10 Transnational Eurosceptic parties and political groups .................................. 11 Eurocritical media ................................................................................... 12 EU Reaction ................................................................................................. 13 Information sources in the ESO database ........................................................ 14 Further information sources on the internet ..................................................... 14 Copyright © 2016 Cardiff EDC. All rights reserved. 1 Cardiff EDC is part of the University Library
    [Show full text]
  • Slovenian Democratic Path After European Union Accession
    The Difficult Look Back: Slovenian Democratic Path after European Union Accession MIRO HAČEK Politics in Central Europe (ISSN: 1801-3422) Vol. 15, No. 3 DOI: 10.2478/pce-2019-0023 Abstract: In the third wave of democratic changes in the early 1990s when the Central and Eastern European (CEE) political landscape changed radically and the democrati‑ sation processes started in the eastern part of the continent, Slovenia was one of the most prominent countries with the best prospects for rapid democratic growth. Slove‑ nia somewhat luckily escaped the Yugoslav civil wars and towards the end of the 20th century was already on the path towards a stable and consolidated democracy with the most successful economy in the entire CEE area. After the dissolution of Yugoslavia, Slovenia had a simple and straight ‑forward political goals, i.e. to join the European union as soon as possible, thus consolidating its place among the most developed countries within the region. After some setbacks, this goal was accomplished in (so far) the biggest enlargement to the Union in May 2004. But what happened after Slovenia managed to successfully achieve its pair of major political goals? In this chapter, we search for an answer to this question and find out why Slovenian voters are increas‑ ingly distrustful not only of political institutions, but why so ‑called new political faces and instant political parties are so successful and why Slovenian democracy has lost a leading place among consolidated democracies in CEE. Keywords: Slovenia; European Union; membership; distrust; democracy. Introduction After declaring its independence from former Yugoslavia in 1991, the Republic of Slovenia expressed its willingness and objective, both in its strategic develop‑ ment documents and at the highest political levels, to become a full member of POLITICS IN CENTRAL EUROPE 15 (2019) 3 419 the European Union (EU).1 As the crucial developmental documents2 indicate, the optimum long ‑term development of the Slovenian economy is inextricably tied to Slovenia’s full membership in the EU.
    [Show full text]
  • Strenghtening European Social Democracy
    Brochure_roundtable_sd_EN:Mise en page 1 11/5/10 5:41 PM Page 1 STRENGTHENING EUROPEAN SOCIAL S&D GROUP ROUND TABLE DEBATES DEMOCRACY MAY & JUNE 2010 Brochure_roundtable_sd_EN:Mise en page 1 11/5/10 5:41 PM Page 2 PARTICIPANTS Juan Fernando López Aguilar Head of Delegation Spain Kader Arif Coordinator S&D Group France Henning Meyer Social Europe journal Germany Kriton Arsenis MEP Greece Miguel Ángel Martínez Martínez EP Vice-President Spain Maria Badia I Cutchet S&D Group Vice-President Spain Kyriakos Mavronikolas Head of Delegation Cyprus Thijs Berman Head of Delegation Netherlands Jelena Milinovic S&D Trainee Serbia Janna Besamusca Ecosy Secretary General Netherlands Alexander Mirsky Head of Delegation Latvia Antony Beumer S&D Group Secretariat Netherlands Javier Moreno GPF Secretary General Spain Henrik Bokor Facebook debate Sweden Anne Muxel Academic Speaker France David Capezzuto PES secretariat Italy Katarina Nevedalová MEP Slovakia Anna Colombo S&D Group Secr. General Italy Justas Vincas Paleckis Head of Delegation Lithuania Philip Cordery PES Secretary General France Ivari Padar Head of Delegation Estonia Massimo D’Alema FEPS President/speaker Italy Jan Pronk Professor/Speaker Netherlands Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă Head of Delegation Romania Kévin Pusieux Facebook debate France Jacki Davis Moderator UK Bernhard Rapkay Head of Delegation Germany Véronique De Keyser S&D Group Vice-President Belgium Poul Nyrup Rasmussen PES Pres./Speaker Denmark Proinsias De Rossa Head of Delegation Ireland Maria Joao Rodrigues PES special advisor Portugal Saîd El Khadraoui MEP Belgium Libor Roucek EP Vice-President Czech Rep. Edite Estrela Head of Delegation Portugal David-Maria Sassoli Head of Delegation Italy Monika Flašíková Beňová S&D Group Vice-President Slovakia Martin Schulz S&D Group President Germany Krisztian Gal Facebook debate Hungary Adrian Severin S&D Group Vice-Pres.
    [Show full text]
  • European Election Study 2014 EES 2014 Voter Study First Post-Electoral Study
    European Election Study 2014 EES 2014 Voter Study First Post-Electoral Study Release Notes Sebastian Adrian Popa Hermann Schmitt Sara B Hobolt Eftichia Teperoglou Original release 1 January 2015 MZES, University of Mannheim Acknowledgement of the data Users of the data are kindly asked to acknowledge use of the data by always citing both the data and the accompanying release document. How to cite this data: Schmitt, Hermann; Popa, Sebastian A.; Hobolt, Sara B.; Teperoglou, Eftichia (2015): European Parliament Election Study 2014, Voter Study. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5160 Data file Version 2.0.0, doi:10.4232/1. 12300 and Schmitt H, Hobolt SB and Popa SA (2015) Does personalization increase turnout? Spitzenkandidaten in the 2014 European Parliament elections. European Union Politics, Online first available for download from: http://eup.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/06/03/1465116515584626.full How to cite this document: Sebastian Adrian Popa, Hermann Schmitt, Sara B. Hobolt, and Eftichia Teperoglou (2015) EES 2014 Voter Study Advance Release Notes. Mannheim: MZES, University of Mannheim. Acknowledgement of assistance The 2014 EES voter study was funded by a consortium of private foundations under the leadership of Volkswagen Foundation (the other partners are: Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, Stiftung Mercator, Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian). It profited enormously from to synergies that emerged from the co-operation with the post-election survey funded by the European Parliament. Last but certainly not least, it benefited from the generous support of TNS Opinion who did the fieldwork in all the 28 member countries . The study would not have been possible the help of many colleagues, both members of the EES team and country experts form the wider academic community, who spent valuable time on the questionnaire and study preparation, often at very short notice.
    [Show full text]
  • Ust Spr I.Vp:Corelventura
    REPUBLIKA SLOVENIJA DR@AVNI ZBOR USTAVNE RAZPRAVE 1996 – 1997 Izbor gradiv Dr`avnega zbora Republike Slovenije I. knjiga Ljubljana, 2004 USTAVNE RAZPRAVE 1996-1997 Izbor gradiv Dr`avnega zbora Republike Slovenije I. knjiga Uredniki: dr. Miro Cerar dr. Ale{ Novak Boris Vri{er Sodelavca urednikov: Primo` Gorki~ Gregor Jagodi~ Pri urejanju gradiva sta sodelovali: Natalija Muhi~ Sabahat Krasni~i Ljubljana, 2004 CIP - Katalo`ni zapis o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knji`nica, Ljubljana 342:342.53(497.4)"1996/1997" SLOVENIJA. Dr`avni zbor Ustavne razprave : izbor gradiv Dr`avnega zbora Republike Slovenije / uredniki Miro Cerar, Ale{ Novak, Boris Vri{er. - Ljubljana : Dr`avni zbor Republike Slovenije, 2004- Knj. 1:1996-1997. - 2004 ISBN 961-6415-10-7 (knj. 1) 1. Gl. stv. nasl. 2. Cerar, Miro, 1963- 3. Vri{er, Boris 216136448 Zbornik "Ustavne razprave: izbor gradiv Dr`avnega zbora Republike Slovenije" sodi v knji`no zbirko Dr`avnega zbora Republike Slovenije, ki jo izdaja Slu`ba za odnose z javnostmi. Urednik zbirke: mag. Du{an Benko Uredniki zbornika: dr. Miro Cerar, dr. Ale{ Novak in Boris Vri{er Naslov zbornika: Ustavne razprave: izbor gradiv Dr`avnega zbora Republike Slovenije Naslov izdajatelja: Dr`avni zbor Republike Slovenije, Ljubljana, [ubi~eva 4 Telefon: +386 1 478 94 00 Produkcija: Slu`ba za odnose z javnostmi Oblikovanje in priprava za tisk: Multigraf, d.o.o. Tisk: Tiskarna Dr`avnega zbora RS Naklada: 600 izvodov Zbornik lahko poi{~ete tudi na elektronskem naslovu: www.dz-rs.si VSEBINA Uvod 5 Uredni{ko pojasnilo 7 PREDLOG ZA ZA^ETEK POSTOPKA ZA SPREMEMBO USTAVE REPUBLIKE SLOVENIJE 9 Predlog ve~ kot 40.000 volivk in volivcev za za~etek postopka za spremembo ustave (Za odpoklic poslanca) 11 STALI[^A IN MNENJA 13 Mnenje vlade k predlogu za za~etek postopka za spremembo prvega odstavka 82.
    [Show full text]