This article analyses the cleavages that structured the debates within the Convention on the Future of Europe. Taking the positions on the institutional rules governing EU social policy as an empirical example, it addresses the question of whether these positions were determined by party politics or by national interests. The article also examines how the delegates’ different institutional backgrounds affected their positions. A statistical analysis of a new data set on the positions of conventionists towards EU social policy expansion shows that, overall, delegates’ positions were determined by a mixture of party politics and national interests. At the same time, there are institutional effects separating representatives of government parties, who tended to stress national interests, from actors representing opposition parties, who acted more according to a party political logic.
Aspinwall, Mark ( 2002) ‘Preferring Europe: Ideology and National Preferences on European Integration’, European Union Politics3(1): 81-111.
2.
Aspinwall, Mark ( 2007) ‘Government Preferences on European Integration: An Empirical Test of Five Theories’, British Journal of Political Science37(1): 89-114.
3.
Benoit, Kenneth and Michael Laver ( 2006) Party Policy in Modern Democracies. London: Routledge.
4.
Benoit, Kenneth, Michael Laver, Christine Arnold, Paul Pennings and Madeleine O. Hosli ( 2005) ‘Measuring National Delegate Positions at the Convention on the Future of Europe Using Computerized Word-Scoring’ , European Union Politics6(3): 291-313.
5.
Callaghan, Helen and Martin Höpner ( 2005) ‘European Integration and the Clash of Capitalisms: Political Cleavages over Takeover Liberalization’, Comparative European Politics3(3): 307-32.
6.
Carrubba, Clifford J., Matthew Gabel, Lacey Murrah, Ryan Clough, Elizabeth Montgomery and Rebecca Schambach ( 2006) ‘Off the Record: Unrecorded Legislative Votes, Selection Bias and Roll-Call Vote Analysis’, British Journal of Political Science36(4): 691-704.
7.
CEC (2006) Allocation of 2005 EU Expenditure by Member States. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities.
8.
Dimitrakopoulos, Dionyssis G. and Hussein Kassim (eds) (2004) Preference Formation and EU Treaty Reform, Special Issue of Comparative European Politics2(3). London: Macmillan.
9.
Falkner, Gerda, Oliver Treib, Miriam Hartlapp and Simone Leiber ( 2005) Complying with Europe: EU Harmonisation and Soft Law in the Member States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Ferner, Anthony and Richard Hyman (eds) (1999) Changing Industrial Relations in Europe, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
11.
Hayes-Renshaw, Fiona, Wim Van Aken and Helen Wallace ( 2006) ‘When and Why the EU Council of Ministers Votes Explicitly’, Journal of Common Market Studies44(1): 161-94.
12.
Héritier, Adrienne ( 1996) ‘The Accommodation of Diversity in European Policy-making and Its Outcomes: Regulatory Policy as a Patchwork’, Journal of European Public Policy3(2): 149-67.
13.
Héritier, Adrienne, Christoph Knill and Susanne Mingers ( 1996) Ringing the Changes in Europe: Regulatory Competition and Redefinition of the State. Berlin: de Gruyter.
14.
Hix, Simon, Abdul Noury and Gérard Roland ( 2005) ‘Power to the Parties: Cohesion and Competition in the European Parliament, 1979-2001’, British Journal of Political Science35(2): 209-34.
15.
Hix, Simon, Abdul Noury and Gérard Roland ( 2006) ‘Dimensions of Politics in theEuropean Parliament’, American Journal of Political Science50(2): 494-511.
16.
Hix, Simon, Abdul Noury and Gérard Roland ( 2007) Democratic Politics in the European Parliament . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Hooghe, Liesbet ( 2001) The European Commission and the Integration of Europe: Images of Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Hooghe, Liesbet, Gary Marks, Erica Edwards, Moira Nelson, David Scott, Marco Steenbergen and Milada Vachudova ( 2002a) ‘Chapel Hill Party Dataset 2002’, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill . URL (accessed 21 October 2009): http://www.unc.edu/~hooghe/data_pp.php .
19.
Hooghe, Liesbet, Gary Marks and Carole J. Wilson ( 2002b) ‘Does Left/Right Structure Party Positions on European Integration?’, Comparative Political Studies35(8): 965-89.
20.
Kam, Cindy D. and Robert J. Franzese ( 2007) Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
21.
König, Thomas (ed.) (2005) Methods and Measuring Positions on European Constitution-building, Special Issue of European Union Politics6(3). London: Sage.
22.
König, Thomas and Simon Hug (eds) (2006) Policy-making Processes and the European Constitution: A Comparative Study of Member States and Accession Countries. London: Routledge.
23.
Kreppel, Amie ( 2002) The European Parliament and Supranational Party System . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Kritzinger, Sylvia ( 2003) ‘The Influence of the Nation-State on Individual Support for theEuropean Union’, European Union Politics4(2): 219-41.
25.
Kritzinger, Sylvia ( 2005) ‘European Identity Building from the Perspective of Efficiency’, Comparative European Politics3(1): 50-75.
26.
Lindgren, Karl-Oskar and Thomas Persson ( 2008) ‘The Structure of Conflict over EU Chemical Policy’ , European Union Politics9(1): 31-58.
27.
Long, J. Scott and Jeremy Freese ( 2006) Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata, 2nd edn. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
28.
Lowi, Theodore J. ( 1972) ‘Four Systems of Policy, Politics and Choice’ , Public Administration Review32(4): 298-310.
29.
Manow, Philip ( 2005) ‘National Vote Intention and European Voting Behaviour, 1979-2004: Second-order Election Effects, Election Timing, Government Approval and the "Europeanization" of EP-elections’, MPIfG Discussion Paper 05/11, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne.
30.
Manow, Philip, Armin Schäfer and Hendrik Zorn ( 2004) ‘European Social Policy and Europe’s Party-Political Center of Gravity,1957-2003’, MPIfG Discussion Paper 04/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne .
31.
Marks, Gary ( 2004) ‘Conclusion: European Integration and Political Conflict’, in Gary Marks and Marco Steenbergen (eds) European Integration and Political Conflict, pp. 235-59. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Marks, Gary and Marco R. Steenbergen (eds) (2004) European Integration and Political Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Marsh, Michael ( 1998) ‘Testing the Second-Order Election Model after FourEuropean Elections’, British Journal of Political Science28(4): 591-607.
34.
Mattila, Mikko ( 2004) ‘Contested Decisions: Empirical Analysis of Voting in the Council of Ministers’, European Journal of Political Research43(1): 29-50.
35.
Mattila, Mikko and Jan-Erik Lane ( 2001) ‘Why Unanimity in the Council? A Roll Call Analysis of Council Voting’, European Union Politics2(1): 31-52.
36.
Moravcsik, Andrew ( 1993) ‘Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach’, Journal of Common Market Studies31(4): 473-524.
37.
Moravcsik, Andrew ( 1998) The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
38.
Paoli, Pascal and Agnès Parent-Thirion ( 2003) Working Conditions in the Acceding and Candidate Countries . Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
39.
Praesidium (2002) ‘Working Group on Social Europe’, Doc. CONV 421/02, Secretariat of the European Convention, Brussels. URL (accessed 21 October 2009): http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/02/cv00/cv00421.en02.pdf .
40.
Raunio, Tapio ( 1997) The European Perspective: The Transnational Party Groups in the 1989-1994 European Parliament. Aldershot : Ashgate.
41.
Reif, Karl-Heinz and Hermann Schmitt ( 1980) ‘Nine Second-Order National Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results’ , European Journal of Political Research8(1): 3-44.
42.
Thomson, Robert, Jovanka Boerefijn and Frans Stokman ( 2004) ‘Actor Alignments in European Union Decision Making’ , European Journal of Political Research43(2): 237-61.
43.
Thomson, Robert, Frans N. Stokman, Christopher H. Achen and Thomas König (eds) (2006) The European Union Decides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44.
Tsebelis, George ( 2005) ‘Assessing the Contributions of the DOSEI Project’ , European Union Politics6(3): 377-90.
45.
Vaughan-Whitehead, Daniel C. ( 2003) EU Enlargement versus Social Europe? The Uncertain Future of the European Social Model. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
46.
Wonka, Arndt ( 2007) ‘Technocratic and Independent? The Appointment of European Commissioners and Its Policy Implications’, Journal of European Public Policy14(2): 169-89.
47.
Zimmer, Christina, Gerald Schneider and Michael Dobbins ( 2005) ‘The Contested Council: Conflict Dimensions of an Intergovernmental EU Institution’, Political Studies53(2): 403-22.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
