The (Northern) League, the National Front and programmatic proposals about EU affairs

This post illustrates how the electoral strategies that embrace negative references to EU affairs by the National Front and the (Northern) League did not enhance the proposals about EU affairs between pro-European parties during the Great Recession and at the time of the Brexit referendum.

To do so, we produced data from the party manifestos authored by the National Front (FN 2012, 2017), Republic Onwards! (EM! 2017), Socialist Party (PS 2012, 2017), The Republicans (LR 2017), Union for a Popular Movement (UMP 2012); Democratic Party (PD 2013, 2018), Five Star Movement (M5S 2013, 2018), Go Italy (FI 2018), (Northern) League (LN 2013, L 2018), and People of Freedom (PdL 2013).ⁱ

To organize party preferences on the most prominent EU public policies at that time, we followed Juncker’s scenarios for the future of Europe. We used the following headings: “nothing but the single market”, “doing less more efficiently”, “carry on”, “those who want more do more”, and “doing much more together” (European Commission, 2017).

In doing do, we focused on programmatic proposals about the following: single market; trade; Economic and Monetary Union; Schengen; migration; security; foreign policy and defence; and EU budget. All the ideas analyzed are given in table 3 below this post.

Our data shows how the Northern League and the National Front defended disintegration, while mainstream parties supported the most pro-EU scenarios for the EU 27 by 2025, i.e., “doing much more together” and “those who want more do more”. See table 1 below.

The key difference between the National Front and the mainstream parties was that, to attain that common objective of protection, the National Front supported the idea of devolving authority from the supranational level in core policy areas, from the single market to home affairs, and this also included monetary policy. However, at the same time, other parties relied on the empowerment of EU bodies in these policy domains to protect French interests and citizens. Proposals in favor of deepening European integration were shared both by the center-right and the center-left (Socialist Party 2012 and 2017; Union for a Popular Movement 2012; The Republicans 2017; Republic Onwards! 2017).

Table 3 mentioned earlier sheds light on how scarce innovation was with regard to EU competences, apart from when it came to introducing changes in EU law and trade agreements to protect national industries, workers, and consumers. The same is true of measures to reinforce EU capacity for border control – the exception being the Socialist Party (2017) proposal for a European investment plan which was devoted to ecological transition and research.

Thus, in 2013, the Northern League, in alignment with the People of Freedom, positioned itself in favor of deepening European integration. What’s more, over time, it endorsed no negative reference to the EU through its general election manifestos until the platform that was issued in 2018. Thus, the arrival of Matteo Salvini as the secretary of the Northern League in December 2013, which was accompanied by the impact on Italy of the 2015 refugee crisis, marked a turning point in the activation of EU issues by the party.

In addition, Go Italy (2018) issued some programmatic proposals that could be classified under the category ‘less Europe’, e.g., the control of Italian interest by Italy itself, especially regarding its agricultural products, and more generally the Made in Italy classification, as well as the reduction of Italy’s contribution to the EU budget. In doing so, Go Italy was the only mainstream party that endorsed disintegration stances in the four elections examined for this post (France 2012 and 2017; and Italy 2013 and 2018).

Furthermore, it could be of interest to pay attention to the Five Star Movement’s use of EU affairs, whose agenda was labelled as Euro-alternative due to its pro-systemic opposition. It is worth noting that in 2013, at the height of the Great Recession, no proposal on EU themes could be found in its platform. Like the Northern League, the Five Star Movement politicized EU affairs later, for the 2018 general election. In 2018, as in the 2014 European election, it made a pledge for EU disintegration: an Italian referendum about remaining part of the eurozone or returning to the lira. However, the Five Star Movement activated EU issues in a way that is much closer to the idea of contributing to EU outputs, which aims at changing the EU from within. It did not confront EU competences in other policy areas, and it proposed ideas as regards diverse EU policies. For instance, in terms of trade, it defended an EU policy that would be more respectful of workers’ rights and environmental protection, while rejecting commercial agreements with the United States (TTIP) and Canada (CETA). In addition, it advocated for an EU without austerity, the abolishment of the fiscal pact, the exclusion of investments in innovation and new economic activities from the annual budgetary deficit targets, as well as the intensification of EU action against tax evasion. Moreover, the Five Star Movement endorsed some proposals that deepened European integration, such as the adoption of Eurobonds, the creation of a compulsory mechanism to redistribute refugees as well as sanctions for the Member States that didn´t honor their commitments.