Interest Representation and Post-Communist Parliaments over Two Decades

Abstract

Variations in relationships between interest groups and seven post-communist parliaments (Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Moldova, Russia and Ukraine) are found to be determined by the constitutional system, the strength of civil society and institutionalisation of the social partnership, as well as by international organisations. Membership in the European Union has strengthened the national executive in relation to both interest groups and the parliament.

Keywords:

• national parliaments
• interest groups
• lobbying
• social partnership
• constitutional choice
• executive
• European Union
• external factors

Notes

Neo-corporatism is distinguished from the traditional corporatism of pre-industrial Europe as well as from authoritarian corporatism of the fascist type. It developed in Europe as a way of managing the business cycle and economic growth especially after the Second World War. It is a special type of institutionalised voluntary participation of big social groups recognised by the government as partners in policy-making and policy implementation in the fields of economic and social policies. Austria is noted in the literature as a relatively extreme case of a social partnership – a very institutionalised mode of neocorporatism involving interest groups organised in Chambers, institutionalised cooperation between interest groups involving agreements among business and labour interest groups, a three-party institution involving the interest group as well as governmental representatives as a political space for negotiations between the involved parties before government bills are submitted to the parliament. For more, see e.g. the classical text of Gerhard Lembruch (1974). For a more detailed analysis of neo-corporatist sub-types, see e.g. van Waarden (1992). For a more dynamic view of the phenomena, see e.g. Christiansen et al. (2010).

Social partnership is closely linked with neo-corporatism so please see note 1 for an explanation.

In writing this version of the text I am grateful for the data and expert judgements provided by Petra Guasti Rakuscanova, Zdenka Mansfeldová, Miroslav Stanojević, Alenka Krašovec, Gabriella Ilonszki and David M. Olson.

For instance, Shugart's (1993) typology includes five types composed of various elements of a presidential and parliamentary system, where a pure presidential system and a pure parliamentary system are just the extreme types.

This observation is based on the following sources: published research findings (e.g. Ilonszki 1998), an expert interview with Zdenka Mansfeldová in April 2009, media coverage of a debate on a bill on the incompatibility of mayors' and MPs' roles in Slovenia, where 53 out of 90 MPs at the same time hold the office of mayor and on 19 November 2009 as many as nine mayors/MPs from the ruling coalition parties voted against banning people simultaneously holding national legislative and local government executive positions (Usoda nezdružljivosti poslanske in županske funkcije še nejasna, STA, at http://www.sta.si/vest.php?s=s&id=1450179 (accessed 27 December 2009); Koalicija sama pokopala nezdružljivost funkcij, MMC RTV Slovenia, at http://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/koalicija-sama-pokopala-nezdruzljivost-funkcij/217540 (accessed 27 December 2009).

Candidate states had also been evaluated, among others, according to their fulfilment of the political criteria (Copenhagen criteria).

The European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) introduced by the EU during the 2004 enlargement has been targeting neighbouring countries which cannot be seen as EU candidate states in the foreseeable future. These include Moldova, but not Russia, which insists on a special separate track of cooperation with the EU.

COSAC biannual reports include comparative information on the role of national parliaments in managing EU matters in all EU member states since 2004. COSAC reports are available at: http://www.cosac.eu/en/documents/biannual/

The concept of ‘a policy-taking stage’ refers to the pre-accession stage of joining the European Union, when accession countries must integrate the acquis as it stands into their national law, without having the opportunity to alter it. (In other words, they simply have to ‘take’ it.) As full members, they can participate in European Union policy-making.

In the context of the most recent economic crisis, the Slovenian government has been negotiating with the social partners on reform policies to help manage the crisis for a relatively long period of time and, at the same time, it has been criticised for not reacting swiftly enough. Due to pressures from Eurozone authorities and in the circumstances of Slovenia's very recent full membership in the OECD, the government decided to send reform bills directly to the National Assembly. The government's disregard of social partnership practices caused a revolt by trade unions. After the ruling coalition adopted the first few reform bills in the National Assembly in November 2010 (with the exception of the Democratic Party of Pensioners – DESUS) despite pressure from the trade unions and student organisations on both the government and the parliament, the trade unions together with the student organisation decided to employ a direct democracy institutional mechanism to block the implementation of reforms – a referendum. The final outcome of this remains to be seen.