Opposition Parties in European Legislatures
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
t -i''1Þ Parties in Roufledge sturlies on Political Parties and Party systems Opposition Series Editors: European Legislatures Ingrid van Biezen the rlands Leicl en Llnivers i ty, the Ne Conflict or Consensus? and Fernando Casal Bértoa (JK Uni ver s i ty rf' Nottinglta m, Edited by Elisabetta De Giorgi This new series focuses on majol issttes alfecting political pal'ties in a broad approaches sense. lt welcotnes a wide-r'ange oltheoretical ancl rnethodological and Gabriella Ilonszki nnder-t'eseat'ched countries. The Regulation of Post-Communist Party Politics E¿titect by Fernando Clasal Bértoa utcl Ingrid van Biezen Party Systems in Young Democracies Varièties of institution alizalion in SLlb-Saharan Africa E da I in a Ro clr i gue s S anc he s Opposition Parties in European Legislatures -1 Conflict or Consensus? E(lited by Elisabettu De Giot"gi ancl Gabriallu llonszki Fo| rnor.e information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.corn/ RoLrtledge-Studies-on-Political-Parties-and-PaLty-systenrs/boolç-series/PPPS E) Routledge ll\ Taylor & Francis GrouP LONDON AND NEW YORK 12 Switzerland When opposition is in government Jan Rosset, Andrea Pilotti and Yannis Papadopoulos Introduction Switzerland has been considered the prototypical example of the consensus model of democracy (Lijphan 1984:23-32). Among the 21 Western democ- racies analysed by Lijphart, Switzerland is the only one whose government has been composed unintenuptedly since 1945 by a large coalition (Liber- als, Christian Democrats, Agrarians and Socialists). It has been argued that parliamentary opposition - at least in the way it is understood in Westminster democracies - does not exist in Switzerland (Church and Vatter 2009).Indeed, with all major parties being part of the governmental coalition, an upfront or systematic confrontation between these parties and govemment is simply not a viable option. This does not mean, howeveg that voices that are not in line with government are absolutely silent, and the level of confrontation in Swiss poli- tics has been on the rise. A recent special issue of the Swìss Politícal Science Review (21,no.4: December 2015) is significantly entitled "Consensus Lost? Disenchanted Democracy in Switzerland", and Yatter (2016) showed that the Swiss "consociational" model is subject to centrifugal trends: while Switzer- land continues to display elements of power sharing in the polity, a polarising and competitive trend can be observed now in politics and policymaking. Multiple institutional channels in Switzerland, within or outside the parlia- ment (i,e. through direct democracy), allow political actors to express their divergent views and hold the govemment accountable on specific issues (Papa- dopoulos 1994:114-115). The aim ofthis chapter is to assess the evolution of the use of some of these channels through an analysis of parliamentary bills, voting behaviour of parliamentarians and direct democratic votes dur- ing the 1999-2011period. The need for such an assessment is linked to the changes that were initiated in the 1990s and have progressively altered oppo- sition activity in Switzerland. These changes mainly concern two (partially interconnected) trends: on the one hand, an evolution in the functioning of parliament and its relationship with the government and, on the other hand, shifts in electoral politics, in terms of both the relative strength of political parties and the way political campaigns are conducted. \ì (D . ;, ^+@=- a ---l +gE iË r *å;rÉ=åËåå+i ?í Àr'+kÕ-rD,+ 3'E- d råläãaä1gäle 3(DêoxL1.o L ã'a È, F.s v=-<-J.r^ s {^:JUóe'¡ 3s ã' Þ g -. ,í Ø a E iä *å Ës ËË ð äåa +llËB Iå å iËËå$ äËËËåä *E 6 3._dF A S^':9-c)-õ -ã'ú P q .TÆgiååì (D:JÀ)q^^É='Þ <r ã 6 3a'Lq -oo I] s ;iÌJ (D .{Sêã+isã Éo á ä *Ëå' ä reå ïil vu^rsr^ a¿ 3o' g"å Ul!+^r* <8 t S9¿-e *2- å ä åg -lrD'XÞ!¿LJ gääËååg ËåEååågå d +Ë í, ä íÊ ä äåå LA d ã SI Ñ ô:SØ ååä*åFË*;g F: l.J- - ä' vpÒ SDË= =.9 Þ ;^ê\tØ HgäF {t--o gËiååååååË !tX-g-^ :-(D€ =.o-¡eR;a o 5'o- räåååggËä$ åEä$åå+äË$ Ë(D-i ã,ß : niõ-a ã+o Y.3 o + ='{ <o= X +äE' :0ti iì = -Ø(D saåyå1ËË$É ååFåsääFåå -= TE 5(D ã' å;iäåít iåg oI ñÈ E I ã'oR 9r.ô-^+v ÕÀ)- ã ìn :Ði5.(Þ o= -fo d scd gÈ.P< ;å ä iã äåså å å iËg äË I ãÄå $ iå äË g-E: ØOt+ iFer os + oE "' =< 9-='Þ #3älårËãilf äi*a++ãiîF råEgëfåågi x:ØõÂ. o.() 5 = 9Éò E(9-Ui .9 .oìo 5 Þ ã5 Ëoá(D È(D + (D - 5Þ \oØ ääË ääË å$*Ë (D .<Êr.5 Ë \OØ Fäãråägiä* $Ës$ËäËårå =' :4H< Table I2.l Political parties in the Swiss parliament (l9ggl}ll) Name National language name English name Partyfamily First Party abbreviation stability Experience in entry into (electoralsupport government parliament range) svP Schweizerische Swiss People's Party Agrarian l97l 22,6-28,9 Volkspartei In and out of government sPs Sozialdemokratisch Social Democratic Pa¡ty of Social Democrat 1890 19,5-23,3 Always in Pa¡tei der Schweiz Switzerland govemment FDP FDP. Die Liberalen Free Democratic Pafty of Liberal Party 1848 15,8-19,9 Always in Switzerland government cvP Christlichdemok¡ati sche Christian Democratic Christian Party I 848 14,4-15,8 Always in Volkspartei People's Party of Switzerland goverffnent GPS Die Grünen Grüne Green Pa¡tJ¡ of Switzerland - Green 1979 5,0-9,8 Never Partei der Schweiz in government LPS Liberale Partei der Liberal Pa¡ty of Switzerland Liberal Pa¡ry 1913 1,81,3 (merged Schweiz Never in with FDP in 2009) government BDP Bürgerlich- Conservative Democratic Conservative 2008 Did not run in ln a¡rd out of Demokratische Pa¡tei Pa¡ty of Switzerland the period under govemment consideration GLP Grünliberale Partei Green Liberal Party of Green 2007 0-1,4 Never in Switzerland government EVP Evangelische Evangelical People's Party of Christian Party t9t9 1,8-2,4 Never in Volkspartei der Schweiz Switzerla¡rd government EDU Eidgenössisch- Federal Democratic Union of Nationalist l99l t,2-1,3 Never in Demokratische Union Switzerland government Lega Lega dei Ticinesi Ticino League Ethno- l99l 0,3-{,9 Never in nationalist government PdA Patei derArbeit der Swiss Party of Labour Communist 1947 0,7-1,0 Schweiz Never in Government Note: Only pafies with at least two simulta¡leous representatives during the 1999-2003, 2003-2007 and 2007--2011 legislafive periods are included. party classified gl the Comparative Manifesto e.-¡"rt families are 9*:9 1*t.n available)i The main political "ancestor" of the SVP was the Pa¡ty ofFarmers, which has had MPs since 1919. Traders and independents, 214 Jan Rosset et al. Switzerland 215 almost uninterruptedly increased its share of votes in Lower House elections, sponsored by the government, amending these bills, or sponsoring new bills expanding its electorate from 11.9 to29.4 per cent. (i.e. parliamentary bills or motions). opposition can also materialise in direct This electoral shift came hand in hand with two other trends in Swiss poli- democracy, with petitions (often backed by political parties) that call for new tics. First, the rise ofthe SVP is associated with an increased polarisation in the legislation (popular initiatives) or for referendums against bills approved by Swiss party system (Ladner 2007).In the 1970s, the party was characterised the bicameral federal parliament. by a "governmental profile"; only in very few cases did its positions diverge In addition, Switzerland is characterised by a ,,collegial,, government in from those of the government. Since the mid-1990s, the SVP has a more criti- which all major parties (cvR FDR sPS and svp) have been represented cal attitude towards legislative acts supported by the Federal Council (Sciarini almost continuously since 1943. The distribution of the seven seats between 2007 485486).'zThis trend has also been observed more generally in the the four parties has remained unchanged for a long time since r 959.3 The period Swiss decision-making process with the increased level of conflict between under consideration, however, has been marked by a short-term disruption of the various actors involved (Sciarini et al. 2015). Second, beyond the policy this exceptional continuity. Indeed, in200i,the Federal Assembly chose not to positions of political actors, the style of doing politics has evolved over time as renew the mandate of the Federal councillor christoph Blocher, the leader of it has become more and more mediatised, and this has contributed to polarisa- the svP. Reflecting the consensual spirit of swiss politics, it elected another, tion too (Landerer 2014). more moderate, SVP politician, Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf. She as well as This specific context of a country with no opposition tradition but with a samuel Schmid, the second SVP representative in government who also used series of changes encouraging less consensual policymaking (see Bochsler to take moderate stands, were expelled from the party to later join the ranks et aL 2015 for an overview) makes the analysis of variations in the magnitude of a new part¡ the conservative Democratic Party of Switzerland (BDp), At of opposition in the new millennium particularly relevant. Specifically, we the time, the svP declared it would rather stay outside government and be in can expect an increase in parliamentary activity both in terms of legislation opposition (see church and vatter 2009). This strategy has not been sustained, proposals and scrutiny. The level ofconsensus arnong governmental parties however, as svP was back in government the following year with the election is also expected to have diminished over time, particularly with a decrease of of ueli Maurer to the Federal council (see Table 12.2).