scholarly journals The influence of Eurosceptic parties on the EU policies of member states

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Tibor Hargitai
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Government ◽  
Parliamentary Oversight ◽  
Coalition Bargaining ◽  
The Eu

The aim of this research was to understand whether and how Eurosceptic parties might influence the EU policies of member states. It took the Netherlands and Hungary as case studies, focusing on the influence of Eurosceptic parties on the migration of those member states. For the Netherlands, the hard Eurosceptic PVV and soft Eurosceptic SGP were analyses in the period when the PVV was a parliamentary supporter of the VVD-CDA government (2010-2012). For Hungary, Jobbik’s influence on the EU policies of the Fidesz-KDNP government was analysis over the period 2015-2020. For the analysis, causal mechanisms were developed (using process tracing) from three literatures, namely: the contagion effect, coalition bargaining and parliamentary oversight. The results are summarised in the table below. The main points are that the PVV in the Netherlands, as parliamentary supporter, had a disproportionate influence on the government, since it threatened with withdrawing its support, thereby letting the government fall. The PVV did not have ministerial responsibilities (accountability), but was part of the weekly ministerial meetings. In the case of Hungary, the government, with its overwhelming majority, was able to take ownership of the issues that Jobbik proposed. Nevertheless, Jobbik’s more restrictive proposals are likely to have shifted the Fidesz government towards a more restrictive migration policy. Firstly, this research focuses on an urgent, and so far unanswered, question of what the influence is of Eurosceptic parties on the EU policies of member states. Secondly, in order to research this question, three literatures were used, namely: the coalition effect, coalition bargaining and parliamentary oversight. (Theoretical integration of these literatures to focus the research question.) Thirdly, this dissertation analyses Euroscepticism in Hungary and the Netherlands in detail and compares the policy implications on these two systems with each other. As a result, the conditions of Eurosceptic parties in policy are put into perspective, and the generalisability of the findings is touched upon.

With what implications? An assessment of EU migration governance between Union regulation and national diversity

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Carmel
Keyword(s):  
Informal Economy ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Local Variation ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Coherence ◽  
Member States ◽  
Local Labour ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Eu

The analysis of EU migration policy has been focused primarily on evaluating its relationship to EU law, or its application to individual member states. This article argues that neither focus can address the full implications and effects of EU migration governance. The Union’s migration and free movement policies set out to organise populations both within and beyond its formal borders. They are part of the broader governance of the European Union as an integrated market, and as an international policymaker. As such, the characteristics and effects of migration governance across the EU as a whole need to be assessed. At the EU level, EU policy and law on migration creates the illusion of policy coherence, applied to all member states, incomers and residents. Yet these apparently coherent EU policies always co-exist with three confounding factors: 1) national and local variation in migration, integration and social policies; 2) national and local labour market variation, particularly in the role of informal economy, and 3) profound member state hierarchies in the EU’s political economy, reinforced by the ongoing crisis. However, this does not mean that the EU’s migration policymaking is irrelevant to member states. Rather, migration governance in the EU is co-produced by the cross-cutting and sometimes contradictory policies of other actors. With its illusion of policy coherence, this co-produced governance both disguises and entrenches significant hierarchy among member states. It contributes to an EU polity which manages diversity through inequalities.

Bariery w przepływie pracowników na rynku wewnętrznym – stary problem w nowych odsłonach

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4 (1)) ◽  
pp. 39-54
Author(s):  
Robert Grzeszczak
Keyword(s):  
Equal Treatment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Criticism ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Will ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

The issue of re-nationalization (disintegration and fragmentation) of integration process is manifested by the will of some of the Member States to verify their relations with the European Union. In the age of an economic crisis of the EU and in relation to the large migration of the population, there has emerged strong social and political criticism, on the European level, of the integration process, with some Member States even consideringtheir withdrawal from the EU. In those States, demands forextending the Member States’ competences in the field of some EU policies are becoming more and more popular. The legal effects of the above-mentioned processes are visible in the free movements of the internal market, mainly within the free movement of persons. Therefore, there are problems, such as increased social dumping process, the need to retain the output of the European labour law, the issue of the so-called social tourism, erosion of the meaning of the EU citizenship and the principle of equal treatment.

scholarly journals Italy and the Comprehensive Agreement on Investments: disappointment over the process

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Ghiretti
Keyword(s):  
Critical Points ◽  
Business Community ◽  
Member States ◽  
Positive Assessment ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe formal conclusion of the Comprehensive Agreement on Investments (CAI) has drawn much criticism. Criticisms for member states did not always recognise the same critical points. The case of Italy presents an instance in which the issue rather than laying in the content of the agreement was identified in the process. Not only had Italy been marginalised in the process of negotiation that led to the conclusion of the CAI, but also exponents from the government claim that leading negotiators, amongst which France and Germany, ignored Italy’s doubts about the deal when these were raised. Beyond politics, the paper shows that the Italian business community displays a response to the agreement in line with that of the rest of the EU in its positive assessment of the outcome.

scholarly journals European Union Social Policy as an Instrument for Sustainable Development

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 117-138
Author(s):  
Janina Witkowska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Corporate Social Responsibility ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Member States ◽  
Social And Economic Development ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
Corporate Social ◽  
The Eu

This paper undertakes an analysis and assessment of European Union (EU) social policy in the context of the sustainability of the group's social and economic development. The process of Europeanizing EU social policy is not advanced. Thus, the weight of solving social problems primarily rests with member countries. EU social policy is "looser" in character than other EU policies and its scope is limited to those areas where member states were willing to transfer certain prerogatives to European Union level. The EU only supports social policy in the context of the sustainability of the group's social and economic development. The process of Europeanizing EU social policy is not and supplements the actions of member states in the social sphere. At the same time, the EU supports the concept of corporate social responsibility. Corporate social responsibility is defined as the voluntary taking into account by companies of social and environmental matters in their operations and in relations with interested parties.

Immigration Policy and European Union Politics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natascha Zaun ◽  
Christof Roos
Keyword(s):  
Labor Migration ◽  
Immigration Policies ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Family Migration ◽  
Irregular Migration ◽  
Policy Area ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

EU immigration policies have incrementally evolved from a purely intergovernmental to a deeply integrated EU policy area. In practice, EU immigration policies and EU secondary legislation still leave significant discretion to the Member States, as witnessed by key developments in the various subfields of immigration policies—including policies on border protection, return and irregular migration, as well as labor migration and family migration policies. The key academic debates on EU immigration policies have mainly focused on explaining the decision-making processes behind the adoption of EU policies as well as their impact on national policies. While scholars find that these EU policies have led to liberalizations in the areas of family migration or labor migration, the irregular migration and border policies of the EU have gradually produced more restrictive outcomes. Policy liberalizations are usually based on the impact of EU institutions, which tend to have more liberal positions than Member States. Lowest common denominator output at the EU level, such as on the Blue Card Directive, is usually due to a resistance of individual Member States. With deeper integration of the policy area over time and qualified majority voting, however, resistant minorities have been increasingly outvoted. The stronger politicization of some areas of immigration, such as family migration, has also led the European Commission to curb its legislative proposals, as it would be much harder to adopt a piece of legislation today (2019) that provides adequate protection standards.

Who Governs in the Council? Determinants of Ministerial Participation in Council Meetings

2020 ◽  
pp. 088832541990052
Author(s):  
Jan Kovář ◽  
Kamil Kovář
Keyword(s):  
Original Data ◽  
Legislative Elections ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Member States ◽  
Popular Support ◽  
Low Level ◽  
The Government ◽  
Visegrád Countries ◽  
Country Specific ◽  
The Eu

The Council of the EU is the primary institution through which ministers of member states can express their positions on Commission proposals and vote upon legislation. This article first examines the extent to which ministers actually attend Council meetings before moving toward investigating the determinants of ministerial participation in over a period covering almost thirteen years between May 2004 and December 2016. It aims to identify determinants of why ministers from the Visegrad countries participate at some meetings and are absent from others. Using an original data set containing information about 940 Council meetings as well as several country-specific characteristics, we show that, on average, at about four out of every six meetings, ministers are absent. The results of our regressions indicate a pattern in which holding the office of the EU’s rotating presidency, the number of b-points on the agenda, and the size of the government increase the likelihood of ministerial participation in meetings. In contrast, high levels of popular support for Eurosceptic parties and holding of national legislative elections decrease the probability of ministerial attendance. Moreover, meetings of Council formations related to policy areas with a low level of EU competence are significantly less likely to be attended by ministers.

Political Agents as Relational Selves

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 493-519 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Dewandre ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Human Condition ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
Political Agents ◽  
The Eu

In this article, I argue that Hannah Arendt’s well-known but controversial distinction between labour, work, and action provides, perhaps unexpectedly, a conceptual grounding for transforming politics and policy-making at the EU level. Beyond the analysis and critique of modernity, Arendt brings the conceptual resources needed for the EU to move beyond the modern trap it fell into thirty years ago. At that time, the European Commission shifted its purpose away from enhancing interdependence among Member States with a common market towards achieving an internal market in the name of boosting growth and creating jobs. Arendt provides the conceptual tools to transform the conceptualisation of relations and of agents that fuels the growing dissatisfaction among many Europeans with EU policy-making. This argument is made through stretching and re-articulating Arendt’s labour-work-action distinction and taking seriously both the biological and plural dimensions of the human condition, besides its rational one. By applying this shift in an EU context, EU policies could change their priorities and better address the needs and expectations of plural political agents and of European citizens.

EU Migration Policy: Evolving Ideas of Responsibility and Protection

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Haddad
Keyword(s):  
Forced Migration ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
The Eu

AbstractWhile humanitarian intervention in cases of state instability remains a disputed concept in international law, there is consensus in the international community over the need to provide protection to refugees, one of the corollaries of such instability. Using the European Union (EU) as a case study, this article takes a policy perspective to examine competing conceptions of both 'responsibility' and 'protection' among EU Member States. Responsibility can be seen either as the duty to move refugees around the EU such that each Member State takes its fair share, or the duty to assist those Member States who receive the highest numbers of migrants due to geography by way of practical and financial help. Similarly, protection can imply that which the EU offers within its boundaries, encompassed within the Common European Asylum System, or something broader that looks at where people are coming from and seeks to work with countries of origin and transit to provide protection outside the Union and tackle the causes of forced migration. Whether one or both of these concepts comes to dominate policy discourse over the long-term, the challenge will be to ensure an uncompromised understanding of protection among policy-makers.

scholarly journals The Netherlands

2020 ◽  
pp. 73-87
Author(s):  
Nina Amelung ◽  
Rafaela Granja ◽  
Helena Machado
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Member States ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Track Record ◽  
Dna Database ◽  
Genetic Technologies ◽  
Technical Framework ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The Netherlands’ DNA database was legally established in 1994 and became operational in 1997. It represents one of the mid-sized databases in the EU. The Netherlands has a track record of ‘innovation’ regarding the regulation and practical application of genetic technologies for forensic purposes. The Netherlands was involved with the Prüm regime from its beginnings in 2005. In terms of bordering practices, the country serves as an exemplary case of an expansive and diffusive mode of debordering. This positioning derives from the fact that the Netherlands has been a front-runner in building and implementing the technical framework for Prüm in its most expansive form; it is currently one of the most active countries in the Prüm regime. In addition, the Netherlands has also proactively trained other Member States, guiding them towards effective implementation and thus diffusing the expansive mode of debordering.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document