Suchergebnisse

THIS ARTICLE REDRESSES THE BRITISH DEFICIT BY USING A CONTENT ANALYSIS OF WRITTEN QUESTIONS TO ANALYZE THE BEHAVIOR OF MEP'S. SINCE TABLING A QUESTION IS ONE OF THE LAST FORMAL RIGHTS OF THE BACKBENCHER, THE STUDY OF PARLIAMENTARY QUESTIONS MAY BE REGARDED AS A PARTICULARLY USEFUL TOOL FOR INCREASING OUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE WAY THAT MEP'S UNDERSTAND THEIR ROLE AS REPRESENTATIVES. FIRST THE FORMAL RULES AND IMPORTANCE OF PARLIAMENTARY QUESTIONS ARE EXPLAINED. THE FOLLOWING DIMENSIONS OF QUESTIONS ARE ANALYZED: THE QUESTIONING ACTIVITY OF MEP'S, PARTY GROUPS, AND NATIONAL DELEGATIONS; THE ISSUES MEP'S RAISE IN THEIR QUESTIONS, AND THE TERRITORIAL DIMENSION OF THE QUESTIONS.

It is customary to argue that foreign policy is very much dominated by the executive, with parliaments wielding limited influence. However, with the exception of the US Congress, legislative‒executive relations in the realm of foreign and security policy have attracted remarkably little scholarly attention. Drawing on a principal‒agent framework, this collection scrutinises the conventional wisdom of 'executive autonomy' in foreign affairs, indicating that even though parliaments have arguably become more involved in foreign and security policy over time, any notions of parliamentarisation need to be treated with caution. While expectations of consensus in the name of the national interest continue to play an important role in foreign policy decision-making, the papers highlight the role of party-political contestation structuring parliamentary debates and votes in this increasingly politicised issue area. This introductory paper introduces the analytical framework and hypotheses guiding the contributions in this collection, summarises their main findings and suggests avenues for future research.

This article analyzes party responses to European integration in Finland and Sweden. We argue that such responses are shaped by seven explanatory factors: basic ideology, public opinion, factionalism, leadership influence, party competition, transnational links, and the development of integration. Each factor can lead to a positive or a negative evaluation of the European Union. In the empirical analysis, the sample includes all parties represented in the respective national parliaments, and the research material consists of party documents, parliamentary votes, statements by leading party figures, public opinion surveys, direct observation and interviews. Party competition and leadership influence are the strongest factors in the Finnish case, while public opinion and factionalism are the strongest factors in Sweden. Issue avoidance combined with the secondary importance of the EU in party politics explain why parties have been relatively successful in containing internal factionalism and discord, especially in Finland. (European Journal of Political Research / FUB)

THE FINNISH POLITICAL SYSTEM COMBINES PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY WITH A STRONG PRESIDENCY AND IS THEREFORE OFTEN CHARACTERIZED AS SEMI-PRESIDENTIAL. SINCE THE SECOND WORLD WAR FINNISH PARLIAMENTARISM HAS BEEN CONSTRAINED BY TWO MAJOR FACTORS. DURING THE COLD WAR, FOREIGN POLICY--AND TO A LESSER EXTENT DOMESTIC POLICY--WAS HEAVILY INFLUENCED BY THE NEED TO ANTICIPATE REACTIONS FROM MOSCOW. SECONDLY, THE PRESIDENT HAS WIDE-RANGING POWERS OVER BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC POLICY. WHILE RECENT CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS HAVE STRENGTHENED PARLIAMENTARISM, THE PRESIDENT CONTINUES TO ENJOY CONSIDERABLE AUTHORITY, EVEN IN DOMESTIC POLICY MATTERS. NEVERTHELESS, IT IS CORRECT TO SAY THAT FINLAND IS MOVING MORE TOWARD PARLIAMENTARISM AND AWAY FROM SEMI-PRESIDENTIALISM.

THIS ARTICLE GIVES A PRESENTATION OF THE FINNISH PARLIAMENT'S EARLY ADAPTATION TO EUROPEAN UNION (EU) MEMBERSHIP. THE MAIN ARGUMENT IS THAT THE FINNISH EDUSKUNTA IS STRONGER THAN THE OTHER NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS WITH RESPECT TO DEALING WITH EU ISSUES, BECAUSE THE EDUSKUNTA IS PRO-ACTIVE AND BECAUSE THE WHOLE PARLIAMENT IS INVOLVED IN THE PREPARATION OF FINNISH NATIONAL EU POLICIES BEFORE DECISIONS ARE TAKEN IN THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS. THE ARTICLE ALSO POINTS OUT SOME PRACTICAL AND INFORMATIONAL PROBLEMS AND ANALYZES THE MAIN PROCEDURAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL REFORMS INSIDE THE EDUSKUNTA. THE ARTICLE CONCLUDES WITH A DISCUSSION OF THE MAIN PROBLEMS FACING THE FINNISH PARLIAMENTARIANS.