Party Positioning

For the party positioning analysis, I compiled the relevant Chapel Hill Expert Survey data into Table 1 to clarify what I am referencing in my interpretations of the data. This survey data was useful in understanding how each majority party views EU issues such as enlargement and how these positions can help shape national government policies. In

Appendix 1, I have also included more detailed information about the Table 1 responses from the CHES data codebook which contains the entire question asked in the survey and the full point scale for each question.

Table 1. Party Positioning on EU Integration

Country Ireland United Kingdom Sweden

Party Name Fianna Fáil Labour Worker’s Party-Social

Democrats Election vote

percentage before 2003

41.5 40.7 39.9

Party Family Conservative Socialist Socialist

Position toward EU

integration 5.63 5.22 5.50

Position on EU Pro-European

Integration Pro-European Integration

Pro-European Integration Importance of issue

37 Party leadership on enlargement wave 5.38 6.06 6.83 Internal party division on integration 4.75 4.39 6.08

Source: Hooghe et al, 2010 5.4.1 Ireland

The final decision regarding Ireland’s labor market policy at the time of enlargement was decided by its national government. Employment guidelines were decided at the state level as they label what works best for the Irish labor market. As European national governments tend to be a joint effort of political parties through collective majority coalitions, Ireland was no exception. Leading up to the date of accession, Ireland had a coalition in government between both the Fianna Fáil and Progressive Democrat parties. As an additional perspective on Ireland’s reasoning for leaving its labor market unrestricted, I chose to explore the party position of Fianna Fáil according to the CHES dataset. Fianna Fáil was the party with the largest portion of votes in the most recent election before the date of enlargement. For my research, I am using this majority of votes as a benchmark for the Irish government’s perspective on integration and this specific wave of enlargement. This

approach helps to understand the behavior and values of the Irish government and its interests toward this open labor policy.

According to the Table 1, Fianna Fáil held the largest percentage of election votes of the three parties I am analyzing. This party makes up a significant portion of Ireland’s government and its values are very likely to make a significant influence on Ireland’s government decisions. The party is defined as Conservative by experts unlike the other parties in the table. This dataset defines party positions on a variety of European topics and the most relevant issues to my research question are included. The question regarding the party’s position toward EU integration lies at 5.63 and according to the data set codebook,

38

this places the party between somewhat in favor and in favor of EU integration. Fianna Fáil is consistently labeled as pro-European despite its Republican origins. The data also supports this claim as the party is defined as Pro-European Integration. The party has been

encouraging toward EU efforts of integration, especially during the discussions leading up to this wave in 2004. The issue of enlargement is shown to be only somewhat important to the overall party stance for Fianna Fáil. The party sees enlargement as an important topic, but it is not a defining feature of the party’s interests. Another question from this survey asks the position of party leadership in 2002 regarding this wave of enlargement and Fianna Fáil places at 5.38 which is defined as somewhat in favor of accession of the large wave. The following question defines the party leadership’s division or unity regarding European integration in 2002 where Fianna Fáil is at 4.75. This score expresses how this party is only slightly united on the issue of integration in 2002. The Fianna Fáil leaders are technically united but almost placed as neutral toward further integration. However, the leadership is also somewhat supportive of this large wave of accession as it is shown to be in favor of it.

The party positioning of Ireland’s Fianna Fáil political party speaks to its interest in encouraging EU integration and support for the 2004 accession wave. Generally, the party seems to be in favor of this enlargement wave which helps explain the nation’s open labor market decision. As the majority party, Fianna Fáil would have some portion of influence on the policies established during this period, including the decision about the free movement of workers into Ireland. This data helps display how positive integration opinions by Fianna Fáil could play a role in motivating a country like Ireland to leave its labor market open even when many other EU countries choose not to.

5.4.2 United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, the national government worked to determine its final decision regarding its labor market policy at the time of accession. The English government

39

helps define employment standards and rules in alignment of what the country and its

workers need. As most European governments, the UK functions through a coalition system. Leading up to the 2004 date of accession, the region had a coalition government where the Labour party held the majority. The CHES data shows that the Labour party had the highest portion of the election vote before 2003. This data helps shape a perspective of the UK’s government based on the majority political party positions on different European issues. I use this party’s positioning as a representation of the UK government to help understand the interests of the organization and its motivations for the unrestricted labor policy.

In the most recent election before 2004, the Labour party received 40.7 percent of the total votes. Labour is also placed by the survey experts within the Socialist party family. The party received a 5.22 on positioning toward EU integration which defines it as in favor of EU integration and a major proponent of European enlargement. In the past few decades, the party’s values have been quite aligned toward more EU involvement and their policies display these efforts. Discussion surrounding the 2004 wave of enlargement brought into focus national interests in enlargement and how the current members could benefit from the accession of these new countries. According to the CHES codebook, the Labour party views this wave of enlargement as of some importance to the party stance. Party leaders are

encouraging toward the concept of integration, but the issue is only one of many others of their concern. Regarding this upcoming wave, the leadership of the Labour party is given a 6.06 which expresses they are supportive of this accession. Labour has shown to also be supportive of further EU enlargement and its party members are generally in agreement about integration since it was given a 4.39.

The party positioning of the United Kingdom’s Labour party expresses its support for the incoming wave and toward EU integration in general. Overall, the party is seen to be in favor of the 2004 enlargement wave which can help underline why the country chose to leave

40

its labor market unrestricted to the new EU citizens. Since being elected in 1997, it was noticeable that the Labour party was consistently in support of EU enlargement in the years prior to 2004 (Clark & Hardy, 2011). This support of enlargement was another step forward in the party’s plans to align Britain further with the EU. The decision to allow migrants from the new countries to freely work in the UK was one of the more significant displays of the Labour party’s change to a liberal policy framework. When this decision was made, the party held the most portion of election votes in the country pronouncing its influence on the

government procedures during this time. Party positioning data helps us understand the Labour party’s European interests as a perspective on why the decision was made to keep its labor market open.

5.4.3 Sweden

Sweden’s national government finalized the country’s decision to leave its labor market completely unrestricted to the 2004 accession countries. In Sweden, the government works to figure out what their economy needs and the best way to maintain the nation. The Swedish government utilizes its power through a coalition which allows the involved parties the ability to influence policy decisions. In the most recent election before 2004, Sweden’s Social Democratic party received the largest portion of votes. The CHES data displays that the Social Democrats were the majority party, and this helps to give a certain perspective on the Swedish government during this period. The use of the majority party as a representation of the Swedish government opinion’s displays the country’s interests in enlargement and EU relations. The data helps create a specific viewpoint toward the country’s interest in an open labor market based on the political party its government consists of. I have looked at this information closer to understand how the Social Democrats’ position on European topics may have influenced the country’s choice for open labor migration at the time of accession.

41

During this election period, the Social Democratic party in Sweden gained 39.9 percent of the votes. Based on the survey responses, the party falls into the Socialist party family which helps describe the general values and interests of the party. The party’s received 5.5 for position on integration which is defined as being somewhat in favor of EU integration. The Social Democrats are seen to be pro-European integration as they are mostly

encouraging toward expanding the EU. Enlargement is a major EU topic which is why the party’s position on it is so important. For the Social Democrats, the issue of enlargement is described as of some importance. As an EU issue, the party is involved in enlargement debates, but these discussions are not the entirety of their platform. Regarding only the 2004 wave of enlargement, the party has shown to be very supportive of the large wave. The leaders of this party were very supportive of enlargement as they are placed as being strongly in favor of accession. The party was encouraging toward EU expansion in the past and this wave was also strongly supported. However, the party itself was not in total agreement about integration during this time. Sweden ultimately chose to leave its labor markets open, but the party was very divided on the issue. The Social Democrats were given 6.08 regarding party division on integration in 2002 which shows that the party was more divided than united on this issue. The political party has shown to be in favor of enlargement, but the opinions of those within the party are less cohesive. Public opinion seemed to follow a similar pattern of division. Public opinion was supportive of EU enlargement around this time, but the concerns about wages being decreased or workers migrating for welfare benefits were rampant.

The party positioning of Sweden’s Social Democratic party displays its opinion on EU enlargement and its interest in the 2004 wave of countries. Overall, the party is in support of further EU integration and encouraging toward the new member states. The choice to allow citizens of the new countries to take advantage of the free movement of workers within the EU expresses Sweden’s lean toward liberal policies of immigration and employment. At

42

the date of accession, this party held the most election votes within the Swedish government. As the majority, the Social Democrats had an influence on Sweden’s policy decisions during this period. Party positioning helps develop the Social Democrats’ interests in enlargement and the state’s motivation for keeping its labor market unrestricted.

43

6. DISCUSSION

After looking at a variety of sources, we can see how the motivations of each of the three countries for leaving their labor markets open to new member state citizens developed from similar issues. In this section, I briefly compare how these factors apply in each of the three member states studied and discuss how my findings relate to the theories I chose to frame my study. National economic interests, trade union relationships, business and employer associations representation, and party positioning all show to have at least some impact on the policy decisions in Ireland, the UK, and Sweden. As these three countries have diverse backgrounds and experiences, it is important to compare them to determine how these factors may have affected each individual country.

6.1 Case Comparison

Table 2. Motivations for Open Labor Market Policy by Country

Country Ireland United Kingdom Sweden

National Interests Yes Yes Yes

Trade Unions Yes Yes Yes

Business & Employer Associations

Yes Yes Yes

Treaty of Nice Yes No No

When it comes to unions as a factor in the open labor market decision, Sweden has shown to be the country where unions have the largest influence on the government system.

44

Trade unions in Sweden have been closely affiliated with certain political parties for a large portion of the country’s history. In more recent decades, this relationship has decreased but the historical ties are difficult to overlook. Comparatively, the UK and Ireland also have historical roots with union organizations. In these countries, however, trade unions did not have the same amount of voice in political matters as the trade unions in Sweden. Trade unions were making their perspectives known on EU enlargement and relative issues during the debates leading up to the date of accession. However, the Swedish trade unions were more involved in the national enlargement debates because of their relationship with the political parties in ways unlike the trade unions of the UK and Ireland.

Another perspective of the national motivations for unrestricted labor market access comes from the country’s political history. Each member state has different interests in EU enlargement and those opinions can impact how the country makes policy decisions. In the years leading up to 2004, each of these countries dealt with changes in EU structure, but for Ireland, the Treaty of Nice played a more significant role in its perspective of European affairs. Unlike in Sweden and the UK, Ireland was required to ratify the treaty through a referendum which changed the country’s ideas of how the EU and its member states interact. The need for public agreement on the changes invoked by the treaty necessitated an extra level of agreement on these policy changes. The initial rejection of the treaty introduced a shift in Ireland’s perspective of the EU and its relationship with it as a current member. Ireland ultimately continued with its decision to leave its labor market open, but the Treaty of Nice referendums placed some cracks in the country’s strong support for enlargement that were not there before.

Additionally, Ireland’s economy had been doing very well prior to this decision and it is likely economic potential was influencing its actions at the time. Ireland’s history as a member state with low economic growth and high emigration had transitioned into this

45

booming country looking to take further advantage of the gains for enlargement. The UK and Sweden were not living in the major economic boom of Ireland but were still in a good economic standing. Economic interests were still an influencing factor for each of these countries, but the fall from superior growth in Ireland was not being experienced in the other two countries.

The interest of all three countries in encouraging enlargement seemed to work in their favor. The comparable influence of business and employer associations helped display how a factor may influence each of the countries in the same manner. These organizations worked in a similar manner to encourage the liberal policy outcome each state eventually decided on. Enlargement also gave these member states a simplified approach to solve its needs for labor while opening them up to additional economic opportunities within the European Union. Each country had its own national objectives to consider when making this decision about their labor market. Enlargement may seem more significant at the EU-level but the needs of each member state are just as essential.

6.2 Theoretical Application

As a nation, Ireland, Sweden, and the UK’s political interests and relationships with the EU stem from a need for co-dependent agreements. A collective like the EU is not easily explained through realism and liberal intergovernmentalism theory as this level of

coordination between countries is not how a state would likely behave. The foundations of these theories emphasize the positioning of the state at the fore-front of policy making within the overarching international political sphere.

In making policy decisions, EU member states must consider the potential outcomes of change at both the domestic and supranational level. The theoretical framework of this study describes how states generally behave in situations like this level of enlargement. The states are the main actor within the international political sphere and their policy preferences

46

are constantly being influenced and altered depending on the setting. When evaluating motivations for enlargement, we can also see how the policy decision of each of these states were simultaneously affected by various political factors. These theories help to assess the role of these factors on the member states’ eventual decision to leave their labor markets unrestricted to citizens of the 2004 accession countries.

Realism and liberal intergovernmentalism theory assess actions by the cost or benefit to the state as the primary actor. When it comes to discussions of the 2004 wave of

enlargement from the perspective of state unions, it has shown that these organizations were supportive of keeping Ireland’s labor market open. Unions are encouraging toward open migration policy with the necessary aspect of proper rights for both native and foreign workers. These organizations are more interested in ensuring all workers were treated well regardless of country of origin. For unions, further enlargement of the EU would support the need for labor and further the move toward more liberal labor policies.

From a self-interested perspective, enlargement had the potential to bring about significant changes for the economies of these countries. Realism and liberal

intergovernmentalism theory also describe how states interact with each other as primary actors. States are likely to behave in response to their personal interests. These national preferences are dependent on the context the decisions are made in which helps uncover