Search

This paper explores the different ways in which the EU dimension was contextualised in domestic politics in the 2005 Constitutional Treaty referendums in Spain, France and The Netherlands. It suggests that an ideationally based type of contextualisation dominated the Spanish referendum, in sharp contrast with the materially based mode that was dominant in France and The Netherlands. Variations in the ways in which the EU dimension was structured in domestic politics are largely accounted for by the interplay between the presence of an explicit anti-European agenda and government popularity. The paper shows that in Spain a popular government managed to keep control of the referendum debates, preventing anti-EU campaigners from gaining control of the debate and turning its focus from a symbolic pro-European discourse to materially based anti-European matters. By contrast, increasingly unpopular governments in France and The Netherlands were unable to keep the debate focused away from potential sources of material discontent. By focusing on the modes the EU dimension is framed in domestic politics, the paper aims at making a contribution to the literature on European referendums. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Referendums on issues of European integration have become more and more important in recent years, particularly after the failed referenda on the EU Constitutional Treaty in France and the Netherlands. This paper examines the impact of direct democracy in national contexts on the decision of governments and parliaments to conduct EU referendums. The results of a qualitative–comparative analysis of 30 countries since 1945 show that this form of path dependency exists only in part: While some nation states with plebiscitary traditions also grant their citizens direct participation in major EU decisions, others do not convene EU referendums or call for EU referendums even though they have no experience with direct democracy in national politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The period since the early 1990s has seen a marked shift in the terms of Dutch European discourse, as dramatically highlighted by the country's 'No' vote in its 2005 referendum on the European Constitutional Treaty. The present paper examines the trajectory of this discursive shift, suggesting that a traditional 'federalist' referential has been replaced by an elite discourse focused primarily on defining the 'limits of Europe' in intersecting substantive and geographical terms. A general framework for the understanding of national discourses of European integration is first set out, highlighting the key role played by national elites as mediators between the European and the national political systems. The Dutch case is then examined against this background, chronicling the general terms of the 'critical turn' in national European discourse, the 2005 referendum campaign, post-referendum party positioning and discussions surrounding the 2007 Reform Treaty. Despite the persistence of strong, underlying support for Dutch EU membership, it is finally argued that The Netherlands has not (as yet) found a stable, cohesive national narrative of its 'fit' and 'place' in the contemporary (post-enlargement) project of European integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]