Pathways to party unity: Sanctions, loyalty, homogeneity and division of labour in the Dutch parliament

Andeweg, Rudy B.; Thomassen, Jacques J.A.

doi:10.1177/1354068810377188

Cited by 114 publications

(137 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MPs are not so much independent agents seeking to advance their own agenda, but rather they are their party's representative on a specific policy portfolio (Louwerse and Otjes 2015). They are essentially party delegates (Andeweg and Thomassen 2011;Mickler 2017: 188;Van Vonno 2012). Within these parties MPs are embedded within internal organisations.…”

Section: Case Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parliamentary questions as strategic party tools

Otjes¹,

Louwerse

2017

West European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Case Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parliamentary questions as strategic party tools

Otjes¹,

Louwerse

2017

West European Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The government, for example, in most countries is constitutionally required to speak with one voice. This is not the case with political parties, but where cohesion, loyalty, or discipline make parties behave as unitary actors (Andeweg and Thomassen 2011), a single measure for all MPs belonging to a party may suffice. It is an empirical question whether parties or other collectivities are unified or not; it is not a question to be resolved by assumption.…”

Section: Measuring Policy Congruencementioning

confidence: 99%

How Democracy Works : Political Representation and Policy Congruence in Modern Societies

Rosema¹,

Denters²,

Aarts³

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

DemocracyCover design and layout: Maedium, Utrecht All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the written permission of both the copyright owners and the authors of the book. PrefaceThere are many good reasons to present a book on the functioning of representative democracy at this precise moment. But the true reason for its creation is a special event of a personal nature: the formal retirement of Jacques Thomassen at the University of Twente. In his long and impressive academic career Jacques Thomassen has greatly contributed to the study of democracy. He has authored and edited several influential academic works, which already started with one of his first articles in 1976, entitled "Party identification as a cross-national concept," which is still considered to be a classic in the literature on voting behavior. His publications since include many books in both Dutch and English, often published by the leading academic publishers in political science. His reputation as an editor of books is almost unrivalled in political science. But there is much more. Jacques Thomassen has played a vital role in the development of major national and international data collection projects about political institutions, such as the Dutch Parliamentary Election Studies, Dutch Parliament Studies, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and the European Election Studies. The data that are still generated on the basis of these collaborative projects provide a most valuable source of information for the study of democracy -without it researchers would arguably not be able to adequately study the functioning of democracy -and thus form one of the most important developments in the last decades in political science. This Liber Amicorum serves to honour Jacques Thomassen for his extremely valuable contribution to the study of democracy. In his career he has collaborated with dozens of academics from many countries. They have learned to know Jacques Thomassen as a most competent and erudite scholar and a good colleague; and many enjoy the privilege of being amongst the many friends that he has made over these years. This volume is a collection of essays by some of these colleagues and friends. In planning this volume, we had to be very restrictive, and as a result many colleagues who would have liked to contribute to this book could not be taken on board. The final set of essays demonstrate the appreciation of the authors for Jacques Thomassen by bringing together in this volume some of their very best and fresh work on the theme that has been at the heart of his research agenda: the functioning of representative democracy. Together, these contributions provide the most up-to-date assessment of how democracy works in the world of today. The contributions in this volume have been created in the spi...

show abstract

“…One caveat is that even if divisions exist, leaders have many institutional, political, and normative sources for influencing party discipline (see Kam 2009;Andeweg and Thomassen 2010). Also, as Hazan (2000) points out, intraparty factionalism does not occur in a vacuum and is connected to public opinion in complicated ways -party factions may be driven by and responsive to cleavages in public opinion and may hinder party leaders' abilities to 'sell' a policy to the public.…”

Section: Intraparty Factionalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

No, prime minister: explaining the House of Commons’ vote on intervention in Syria

Kaarbo

Kenealy

2015

European Security

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On 29 August 2013 the UK House of Commons inflicted the first defeat on a PrimeMinister over a matter of war and peace since 1782. Recalled to debate and vote on UK intervention in Syria, the Commons humbled the government and crucially impacted the development of UK foreign policy. This article places that vote, and the developments leading to it, in the context of the role of parliaments in security policy and explores the relationships between parliamentary influence, leadership, intra-party and intra-coalition politics, and public opinion. From an in-depth analysis of leaders' statements and parliamentary debate, we find a combination of intra-party politics and party leadership were most significant. An additional factor -the role of historical precedent -was also important. Our analysis explores the fluidity and interconnectedness of the various factors for parliamentary influence in foreign policy and offers directions for future theoretical development and empirical research.Keywords: foreign policy analysis; decision-making; UK foreign policy; parliaments. 2'A leader humbled, a nation cut down to size ' (Rachman 2013 This was an unusual case of a parliament defying a PM's preference on a decision to deploy military force. This vote was unprecedented in UK politics and challenges conventional wisdom that Westminster has little influence in security policy. Yet this case also resembles instances of parliamentary influence elsewhere and the factors that explain this vote are consistent with other cases. After a brief description of the backdrop to the vote, we establish the theoretical context of parliaments' role in security policy, setting out the general expectation that parliaments are not particularly influential. At the heart of the article we consider -through a consolidation of previous research -factors that facilitate parliamentary influence in security policy and examine the impact they each had in the Syria vote. In concluding, we use this case to suggest directions for future research. Our aim is to explain this particular vote and to advance research and understanding about the role of parliaments in security policy. We ground our analysis of parliamentary influence in a conceptualisation of political dynamics focusing on group and individual actors from a decision-making perspective. From this wide-ranging research, we consolidate and specify several facilitating factors for parliamentary influence in security policy. They include:• Institutional powers of parliament; 8• Public opinion;• Cabinet type;• Intraparty factions; and• Prime Ministerial (PM) leadership style.These factors can, and often do, act together, but here we present the logic of each separately. Furthermore, none are deterministic; there are caveats to the logic of each of them. Following a comparative, general analysis of factors for parliamentary influence in foreign and security policy, we apply these to the Syria vote.

show abstract

Pathways to party unity: Sanctions, loyalty, homogeneity and division of labour in the Dutch parliament

Cited by 114 publications

References 27 publications

Parliamentary questions as strategic party tools

Parliamentary questions as strategic party tools

How Democracy Works : Political Representation and Policy Congruence in Modern Societies

No, prime minister: explaining the House of Commons’ vote on intervention in Syria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About