Contestation and co-optation: why secrecy in EU external relations varies

Abstract

The question posed in this article is how to explain that the governance of secrecy in EU external relations varies. While the Common Foreign and Security Policy appears to retain its secretive character, the EU’s external trade policy has recently seen a shift towards more transparency. This article argues that to understand this variation, one has to take into account the institutional power of the European Parliament as well as the extent to which the rules and practices of secrecy are perceived as legitimate. The empowerment of the Parliament in trade means that it has had recent success in pushing back secrecy in this area. However, a general finding is that the majority of parliamentarians seem only rarely to question the executive’s governance of secrecy in external relations. The analysis shows that perceptions of legitimacy are crucial to account for different secrecy regimes – a finding that is likely to be relevant for the understanding of secrecy in foreign policy beyond the EU.     

WASPI's Is (Mostly) a Campaign for Inequality

Women Against State Pension Inequality (WASPI) has mounted a vociferous campaign for full compensation to be given to ‘1950s women’ who, it argues, have suffered severe financial hardship as a result of the rise in their state pension age from age 60. That campaign has gained significant political traction, with much sympathy expressed for the plight of those affected and acceptance (most notably by the Scottish National Party and the Labour Party) that some form of compensation is urgently needed. But WASPI fails to acknowledge the rise in the state pension age's roots in the fight for women's equality, disregards the fact that the problems experienced by this cohort as they near retirement are faced by both women and men and glosses over the fact that the increase in pension age above 65 applies to both genders equally. Its campaign obscures deeper and more important issues in old‐age income replacement.     

Towards parliamentarisation of foreign and security policy?

Abstract

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.     

State–defence industry relations in the European context: French and UK interactions with the European Defence Agency

While many have noted that EU member states have different preferences over the prospect of an integrated EU defence, analyses that specifically explore state–industry relations in the definition of EU defence-industrial issues, and in the evolution of the Common Security and Defence Policy in general, are lacking. This is surprising, given that different configurations of government–industry relations have represented a persistent impediment to European defence-industrial cross-border collaboration. This article investigates how state–defence industry relations impact on member states’ preferences towards the EU defence-industrial framework. Based on the case studies of the interaction of France and the UK with the European Defence Agency, this analysis focuses on the difference between public and private defence firms’ governance settings as the crucial explanatory variable accounting for diverging member states’ preferences in this domain.     

国会议员与新加坡政治生态——新加坡前国会议员白振华访谈录

本文作者通过邮件和面谈的方式对新加坡知名的政治家、社会活动家和企业家白振华进行了访谈，白振华先生表达了他对新加坡政治生态的观点，为人们了解新加坡政治生态提供了鲜活的第一手资料。     

文本·结构·功能——软法之于欧盟宪政的地位描述与作用分析

在欧盟宪政发展进程中，在硬法发挥作用的同时，欧盟软法所占据的地位与所发挥的作用也同样值得重视与研究。在文本意义上，欧盟软法在欧盟宪法性条约中占有很大的比重，在结构意义上，欧盟软法成为了欧盟治理结构发展、变化的一个重要机制，在功能意义上，欧盟软法成为了欧盟法律秩序形成的先导性力量。     

香港区议会的功能发展

回归后的香港区议会延续了港英政府时期的功能,但也有一定的发展:特区政府取消市政局、区域市政局,提升了区议会的职能;提高民选议员与委任议员的比例,强化了区议会的代表性;理顺区议会与区管会的关系,扩大了区议会在区域行政计划和地区管理方面的职权。为了推进高度自治新局面,本文主张区议会在发挥咨询和区域事务管理功能的同时,还应该加强反映民意、参与特区管治的功能,为特区政制发展提供合适的后备人才。     

Les femmes au Parlement européen: Effets du mode de scrutin,des stratégies et des ressources politiques. L'exemple de la délégation française

Cet article vise à apporter des éléments d'explication quant à la féminisation des élus français au Parlement européen. S'il semble nécessaire de prendre en compte le mode de scrutin, ses effets ne peuvent véritablement se comprendre qu'en relation, d'une part avec la position du Parlement européen dans le champ politique français et d'autre part avec la configuration propre des luttes sociales et politiques qui traversent l'espace public français au cours des années 1990. C'est dans ce cadre que le genre constitue une ressource politique plus rentable au Parlement européen qu'au parlement français, avec pour conséquence la promotion de femmes moins familiarisées avec l'exercice du métier politique; des femmes qui de ce fait s'orientent davantage vers des formes de « bonne volonté » parlementaire et des stratégies de surinvestissement des rôles politiques européens. La spécificité relative des postures qu'elles adoptent au sein de l'institution renvoie donc moins à une hypothétique « nature féminine », qu'à un ensemble de processus sociopolitiques.     

Q&A in legislative oversight: A framework for analysis

Parliamentary questions are an essential tool of legislative oversight. However, the extent to which they are effective in controlling the executive remains underspecified both theoretically and methodologically. This article advances a systematic framework for evaluating the effectiveness of parliamentary questions drawing on principal–agent theory, the public administration literature on accountability and communication research. The framework is called the ‘Q&A approach to legislative oversight’ based on the premise that the study of parliamentary questions (Q) needs to be linked to their respective answers (A) and examined together (Q&A) at the micro-level as an exchange of claims between legislative and executive actors. Methodologically, the Q&A approach to legislative oversight offers a step-by-step guide for qualitative content analysis of Q&A that can be applied to different legislative oversight contexts at different levels of governance. It is argued that the effectiveness of Q&A depends on the strength of the questions asked and the responsiveness of answers provided, which are correspondingly operationalised. To illustrate the merits of the approach, the article includes a systematic case study on the relationship between the European Parliament and the European Central Bank in banking supervision (2013–2018), showing the connection between specific institutional settings and the effectiveness of parliamentary questions.     

Questions of Sovereignty: Redefining Politics in Scotland?

The issue of sovereignty has never been resolved in Scotland. The 1998 Scotland Act, creating the Scottish Parliament affirmed that the Westminster Parliament is sovereign, but this is disputed. In practice, the issue was left largely in abeyance as sovereignty was seen as an outdated concept. The Scottish independence referendum of 2014 and the UK Brexit referendum of 2016 both brought back the question of sovereignty in stark terms. Analysis of data from the British Election Study of 2019 with regard to (a) the right of Scottish self‐determination, and (b) the right of a UK‐wide majority to take Scotland out of the EU, allows us to identify ‘sovereigntists’ and ‘unionists’. Sovereigntists, on both dimensions, now constitute a majority. A smaller group of unionists reject both positions. There remains a group of ‘semi‐sovereigntists’ who accept Scottish self‐determination, but also that the UK as a whole should decide on Brexit. Controlling for the social and political factors, Scots are increasingly polarised around issues of sovereignty, which have become central to contemporary Scottish politics.