IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v15y2014i1p3-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-cutting issues, intraparty dissent and party strategy: The issue of European integration in the House of Commons

Author

Listed:
  • Eitan Tzelgov

Abstract

When do legislative opposition parties use wedge issues to attack the government? In this article, I focus on the issue of European integration and its impact on party strategy in the 1992–1997 British House of Commons. Utilizing both voting and rhetorical data, the analysis reveals that both government and opposition were split on the issue, and thus the opposition was not able to use it. This, I argue, stems from the complexity of the issue, i.e. the fact that it combines redistributive cleavages with pre- and post-material ones, which cannot be suppressed by party leaders. The results demonstrate the importance of taking into consideration both the government’s and the opposition’s cohesion in modeling party strategies. Further, the combination of voting and rhetorical data adds to our understanding of the dimensionality and structure of partisan ideologies in Europe. We have won more elections than any party in Britain because we are the most united and the most determined party in Britain. Over the same period Labour has been the most divided and the most undisciplined party. That is why they have lost, and lost, and lost, and lost again.   Sir Norman Fowler, Conservative Party Chairman, 1992 Party Conference.

Suggested Citation

  • Eitan Tzelgov, 2014. "Cross-cutting issues, intraparty dissent and party strategy: The issue of European integration in the House of Commons," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 3-23, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:15:y:2014:i:1:p:3-23
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116513509307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116513509307
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116513509307?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimmer, Justin, 2010. "A Bayesian Hierarchical Topic Model for Political Texts: Measuring Expressed Agendas in Senate Press Releases," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-35, January.
    2. Simon Hix & Abdul Noury & Gérard Roland, 2006. "Dimensions of Politics in the European Parliament," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(2), pages 494-520, April.
    3. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 2009. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-23, January.
    4. McKelvey, Richard D & Schofield, Norman, 1987. "Generalized Symmetry Conditions at a Core Point," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 923-933, July.
    5. Gyung‐Ho Jeong & Gary J. Miller & Camilla Schofield & Itai Sened, 2011. "Cracks in the Opposition: Immigration as a Wedge Issue for the Reagan Coalition," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 511-525, July.
    6. Simon Hix & Abdul Noury & Gérard Roland, 2006. "Dimensions of Politics in the European Parliament," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(2), pages 494-520, April.
    7. Howard Rosenthal & Erik Voeten, 2004. "Analyzing Roll Calls with Perfect Spatial Voting: France 1946–1958," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(3), pages 620-632, July.
    8. Spirling, Arthur & McLean, Iain, 2007. "UK OC OK? Interpreting Optimal Classification Scores for the U.K. House of Commons," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 85-96, January.
    9. McKelvey, Richard D., 1976. "Intransitivities in multidimensional voting models and some implications for agenda control," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 472-482, June.
    10. Kevin M. Quinn & Burt L. Monroe & Michael Colaresi & Michael H. Crespin & Dragomir R. Radev, 2010. "How to Analyze Political Attention with Minimal Assumptions and Costs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 209-228, January.
    11. Clinton, Joshua & Jackman, Simon & Rivers, Douglas, 2004. "The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 355-370, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rauh, Christian, 2015. "Communicating supranational governance? The salience of EU affairs in the German Bundestag, 1991–2013," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 116-138.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jeong-Hun Han, 2007. "Analysing Roll Calls of the European Parliament," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(4), pages 479-507, December.
    2. Christopher Hare & Keith T. Poole, 2015. "Measuring ideology in Congress," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 18, pages 327-346, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Arianna Degan & Antonio Merlo, 2006. "Do Voters Vote Sincerely?," PIER Working Paper Archive 06-008, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    4. repec:gig:joupla:v:1:y:2009:i:1:p:67-96 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Jon Eguia, 2013. "On the spatial representation of preference profiles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 103-128, January.
    6. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:48:y:2010:i::p:811-833 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Hartlapp, Miriam & Lorenz, Yann, 2012. "Persönliche Merkmale von Führungspersonal als Politikdeterminante: Die Europäische Kommission im Wandel der Zeit," Discussion Papers, Schumpeter Junior Research Group Position Formation in the EU Commission SP IV 2012-501, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. James Lo, 2018. "Dynamic ideal point estimation for the European Parliament, 1980–2009," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 229-246, July.
    9. Bjørn Høyland, 2010. "Procedural and party effects in European Parliament roll-call votes," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(4), pages 597-613, December.
    10. Christophe Crombez & Pieterjan Vangerven, 2014. "Procedural models of European Union politics: Contributions and suggestions for improvement," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(2), pages 289-308, June.
    11. Arianna Degan & Antonio Merlo, 2006. "Do Voters Vote Sincerely? Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 07-006, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 03 Jan 2007.
    12. Ryan Bakker & Seth Jolly & Jonathan Polk, 2012. "Complexity in the European party space: Exploring dimensionality with experts," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(2), pages 219-245, June.
    13. Bon Sang Koo, 2023. "When legislators responded to news media surveys: unstable responses, missing not at random responses, and self-censorship," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 1821-1843, April.
    14. Degan, Arianna & Merlo, Antonio, 2009. "Do voters vote ideologically?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(5), pages 1868-1894, September.
    15. Richard F. Potthoff, 2018. "Estimating Ideal Points from Roll-Call Data: Explore Principal Components Analysis, Especially for More Than One Dimension?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, January.
    16. Christopher Hare & Tzu-Ping Liu & Robert N. Lupton, 2018. "What Ordered Optimal Classification reveals about ideological structure, cleavages, and polarization in the American mass public," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 57-78, July.
    17. Sara Hagemann & Bjørn Høyland, 2010. "Bicameral Politics in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 811-833, September.
    18. Arianna Degan & Antonio Merlo, 2007. "Do Voters Vote Ideologically?, Third Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 08-034, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 01 Aug 2008.
    19. Kenneth Benoit & Michael Laver & Slava Mikhaylov, 2009. "Treating Words as Data with Error: Uncertainty in Text Statements of Policy Positions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 495-513, April.
    20. Michal Ovádek, 2021. "Supranationalism, constrained? Locating the Court of Justice on the EU integration dimension," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(1), pages 46-69, March.
    21. Shor, Boris & McCarty, Nolan, 2010. "The Ideological Mapping of American Legislatures," Papers 8-11-2010, Princeton University, Research Program in Political Economy.
    22. McCannon, Bryan & Zhou, Yang & Hall, Joshua, 2021. "Measuring a Contract’s Breadth: A Text Analysis," Working Papers 11013, George Mason University, Mercatus Center.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:15:y:2014:i:1:p:3-23. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.