Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2017-6
Issue expansion and selective scrutiny – how opposition parties used parliamentary questions about the European Union in the national arena from 1973 to 2013
The scrutiny exerted by opposition parties in European Union (EU) affairs crucially contributes to the functioning of democratic accountability in the EU. While our knowledge about the extent of control activities has increased, we know little about their content. This article investigates the policy issues that opposition parties address in parliamentary questions about the EU. I argue that Eurosceptic opposition parties follow vote-maximizing strategies and selectively scrutinize very general aspects of the EU. My expectation is tested using a unique data collection of written questions in the Danish Folketing (1973–2013). I find evidence that the content of questions has been broadened over time and that Eurosceptic parties strongly emphasize general EU matters. The results point to the importance of political parties in making democratic accountability in the EU work.
AuelKBenzA (2007) Expanding national parliamentary control: Does it further European democracy? In: Kohler-KochBRittbergerB (eds) Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 57–74.
2.
AuelKHöingO (2014) Parliaments in the euro crisis: Can the losers of integration still fight back?Journal of Common Market Studies52(6): 1184–1193.
3.
AuelKRaunioT (2014) Debating the state of the union? Comparing parliamentary debates on EU issues in Finland, France, Germany and the United Kingdom. Journal of Legislative Studies20(1): 13–28.
4.
BartoliniS (2005) Restructuring Europe: Centre Formation, System Building and Political Structuring Between the Nation-State and the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
BergmanT (1997) National parliaments and EU affairs committees: Notes on empirical variation and competing explanations. Journal of European Public Policy4(3): 373–387.
7.
BergmanT (2000) The European Union as the next step of delegation and accountability. European Journal of Political Research37(3): 415–429.
8.
BiesenbenderJ (2011) The dynamics of treaty change – measuring the distribution of power in the European union. European Integration Online Papers15(5): 1–24.
9.
Bischof D (2015) Towards a renewal of the niche party concept: Parties, market shares and condensed offers. Party Politics. 23(3): 220–235.
10.
Blom-HansenJOlsenI (2015) National parliamentary control of EU policy: The challenge of supranational institutional development. Journal of Legislative Studies21(2): 125–143.
11.
BörzelTA (2005) Mind the gap! European integration between level and scope. Journal of European Public Policy12(2): 217–236.
12.
BrouardSCostaOKönigT (2012) The Europeanization of Domestic Legislators, New York: Springer.
13.
BudgeIFarlieDJ (1983) Explaining and Predicting Elections - Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies, London: George Allen & Unwin.
14.
ChristensenMB (2015) The danish folketing and EU affairs: Is the Danish model of parliamentary scrutiny still best practice? In: HefftlerCNeuholdCRozenbergO (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 275–289.
15.
De VriesCE (2007) Sleeping giant: Fact or fairytale?: How European integration affects national elections. European Union Politics8(3): 363–385.
16.
ElklitJPedersenMN (2003) Decembervalget 1973: 30 år efter. Politica35(4): 365–376.
17.
FinkeDDannwolfT (2013) Domestic scrutiny of European Union politics: Between whistle blowing and opposition control. European Journal of Political Research52(6): 715–746.
18.
FinkeDHerbelA (2015) Beyond rules and resources: Parliamentary scrutiny of EU policy proposals. European Union Politics16(4): 490–513.
19.
Folketinget (2011) Håndbog i Folketingsarbejdet, Copenhagen: Folketinget.
20.
GattermannKHefftlerC (2015) Beyond institutional capacity: Political motivation and parliamentary behaviour in the early warning system. West European Politics38(2): 305–334.
21.
GreenJHoboltSB (2008) Owning the issue agenda: Party strategies and vote choices in British elections. Electoral Studies27(3): 460–476.
22.
Green-PedersenC (2014) Party-system development in Denmark: Agenda-setting dynamics and political Change. In: Green-PedersenCWaalgraveS (eds) Agenda Setting, Policies, and Political Systems, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 69–85.
23.
Green-PedersenCMortensenPB (2010) Who sets the agenda and who responds to it in the Danish parliament? A new model of issue competition and agenda-setting. European Journal of Political Research49(2): 257–281.
24.
Green-PedersenCThomsenLH (2005) Bloc politics vs. broad cooperation? The functioning of Danish minority parliamentarism. Journal of Legislative Studies11(2): 153–169.
25.
Greene Z (2015) Competing on the issues: How experience in government and economic conditions influence the scope of parties' policy messages. Party Politics. 22(6): 809–822.
26.
HarrelFEJ (2015) Regression Modeling Strategies – With Applications to Linear Models, Logistic and Ordinal Regression, and Survival Analysis, New York: Springer.
27.
HelblingMHoeglingerDWüestB (2010) How political parties frame European integration. European Journal of Political Research49(4): 495–521.
28.
HertnerI (2015) Is it always up to the leadership? European policy-making in the Labour Party, Parti Socialiste (PS) and Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD). Party Politics21(3): 470–480.
29.
HixSHøylandB (2013) Empowerment of the European parliament. Annual Review of Political Science16(1): 171–189.
30.
HoeglingerD (2016) Politicizing European Integration – Struggling with the Awakening Giant, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
31.
HolzhackerR (2002) National parliamentary scrutiny over EU issues: Comparing the goals and methods of governing and opposition parties. European Union Politics3(4): 459–479.
32.
HoogheLMarksG (2001) Multi-Level Governance and European Integration, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
33.
HoogheLMarksG (2009) A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining dissensus. British Journal of Political Science39(1): 1–23.
34.
HutterSGrandeE (2014) Politicizing Europe in the national electoral arena: A comparative analysis of five west European countries, 1970–2010. Journal of Common Market Studies52(5): 1002–1018.
35.
JensenCBProkschSOSlapinJB (2013) Parliamentary questions, oversight and national oppositions status in the European parliament. Legislative Studies Quaterly37(2): 259–282.
36.
JensenH (2003) Europaudvalget - Et Udvalg i Folketinget, Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.
37.
JohnPJenningsW (2010) Punctuations and turning points in British politics: The policy agenda of the Queen's speech, 1940–2005. British Journal of Political Science40(3): 561–586.
38.
KarlasJ (2011) Parliamentary control of EU affairs in central and eastern Europe: Explaining the variation. Journal of European Public Policy18(2): 258–273.
39.
KatzRSWesselsB (1999) The European Parliament, the National Parliaments, and European Integration, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40.
KnudsenACL (2008) Euroscepticism in Denmark. In: TaggartPSzczerbiakA (eds) Opposing Europe? The Comparative Party Politics of Euroscepticism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 152–167.
41.
KönigTDannwolfTLuetgertB (2012) EU legislative activities and domestic politics. In: BrouardSCostaOKönigT (eds) The Europeanization of Domestic Legislators, New York: Springer, pp. 21–38.
42.
KriesiH (2007) The role of European integration in national election campaigns. European Union Politics8(1): 83–108.
43.
LaursenF (2005) The role of national parliamentary committees in European scrutiny: Reflections based on the Danish case. Journal of Legislative Studies11(3-4): 412–427.
44.
LindbergSAScheingoldLN (1970) Europe's Would-Be Polity: Patterns of Change in the European Community, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
45.
MaurerAWesselsW (2001) National Parliaments After Amsterdam: Losers or Latecomers?, Baden-Baden: Nomos.
46.
McLarenLM (2006) Identity, Interests and Attitudes to European Integration, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
47.
NavarroJBrouardS (2014) Who cares about the EU? French MPs and the Europeanisation of parliamentary questions. Journal of Legislative Studies20(1): 93–108.
48.
NortonP (1996) National Parliaments and the European Union, London: Frank Cass.
49.
O'BrennanJRaunioT (2007) National Parliaments within the enlarged European Union. From Victims of Integration to Competitive Actors?, Milton Park: Routledge.
50.
PapkeLEWooldridgeJM (1996) Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(k) plan participation rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics11: 619–632.
51.
PollackMA (1994) Creeping competence: The expanding agenda of the European community. Journal of Public Policy14(2): 95–145.
52.
ProkschSOSlapinJB (2011) Parliamentary questions and oversight in the European Union. European Journal of Political Research50(1): 53–79.
53.
RauhC (2015) Communicating supranational governance? the Salience of EU Affairs in the German Bundestag, 1991–2013. European Union Politics16(1): 116–138.
54.
RaunioT (2005) Holding governments accountable in European affairs: Explaining cross-national variation. Journal of Legislative Studies11(3-4): 319–342.
55.
RaunioT (2009) National parliaments and European integration: What we know and agenda for future research. Journal of Legislative Studies15(4): 317–334.
56.
SaalfeldT (2005) Deliberate delegation or abdication? Government backbenchers, ministers and European union legislation. Journal of Legislative Studies11(3-4): 343–371.
57.
SenningerRWagnerM (2015) Political parties and the EU in national election campaigns: Who talks about Europe, and how?Journal of Common Market Studies53(6): 1336–1351.
58.
SousaMM (2008) Learning in Denmark? The case of Danish parliamentary control over European union policy. Scandinavian Political Studies31(4): 428–447.
59.
SteenbergenMRScottDJ (2004) Contesting Europe? the salience of European integration as a party issue. In: MarksGSteenbergenMR (eds) European Integration and Political Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
60.
TopaloffLK (2012) Political Parties and Euroscepticism, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
61.
TzelgovE (2014) Cross-cutting issues, intraparty dissent and party strategy: The issue of European integration in the House of Commons. European Union Politics15(1): 3–23.
62.
Van de WardtMDe VriesCEHoboltSB (2014) Exploiting the cracks: Wedge issues in multiparty competition. The Journal of Politics76(4): 986–999.
63.
Van der BrugWDe VreeseCH (2016) (Un)intended Consequences of European Parliamentary Elections, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64.
Van der EijkCFranklinMN (2007) The sleeping giant: Potential for political mobilization of dissatisfaction in Europe. In: Van der BrugWVan der EijkC (eds) European Elections and Domestic Politics: Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future, Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 189–208.
65.
WilliamsCSpoonJJ (2015) Differentiated party response: The effect of Euroskeptic public opinion on party positions. European Union Politics16(2): 176–193.
66.
WinzenT (2012) National parliamentary control of European Union affairs: A cross-national and longitudinal comparison. West European Politics35(3): 657–672.
67.
WinzenT (2013) European integration and national parliamentary oversight institutions. European Union Politics14(2): 297–323.
68.
WüstAM (2009) Parties in European parliament elections: Issues, framing, the EU, and the question of supply and demand. German Politics18(3): 426–440.
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.
