Other means of regulated direct democracy are the parliamentary citizens’ initiative20 and the parliamentary petition.21 A parliament-
tary citizens’ initiative has to be supported (also online) by 500 Austrian citizens (16 years and older) and can formulate a citizens’ concern that is within the jurisdiction of the legislative or executive
17 See www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/LgblNO/LRNI_1986001/ LRNI_1986001.pdf.
18 See www.wien.gv.at/vbefergeb/internet/.
19 Kommunalwissenschaftliche Gesellschaft (2014), „Direkte Demokratie und Partizipation in den österreichischen Gemeinden“ [Direct Democracy and Participation in the Austrian communities], p. 35 (www.gemeindebund.at/website2016/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ RFG_4-2015-Direkte-Demokratie-und-Partizipation-in-den-
oesterreichischen-Gemeinden.pdf).
20 See www.parlament.gv.at/PERK/BET/BII/INFOBLATT/. 21 See www.parlament.gv.at/PERK/BET/PET/.
DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 123
branches at federal level. With a parliamentary petition a member of the National Council or the Federal Council (Bundesrat)22
introduces a concrete citizens’ concern to the plenary. Citizens can register their support for a parliamentary petition at the Austrian Parliament’s website, which is however only of an informative nature. In both cases the parliamentary committee on petitions and citizens’ initiatives can simply take note of it, request the opinion of ministries and/or institutions or forward it to the Austrian Ombudsman Board or another parliamentary committee. The committee’s reports are published on the Austrian parliament’s website.23 There have also been calls to give citizens the possibility
to propose a parliamentary citizens’ initiative online or allow initiators the right to speak in the committee if their concern is supported by 5,000 signatures of support, for example, in order to increase the efficiency of these instruments.24
Levels of participation as drivers of voter mobilisation have varied depending on the subjects of the plebiscites, which themselves were manifold and covered
both national and EU-related affairs. While the referendum on Austria’s accession to the EU reached the highest turnout (82.3%) only 0.9% supported the popular initiative on ‘church privileges’ and 1.1% a popular initiative on more direct democracy (!).25
22 The chamber representing the interests of the nine federal provinces. 23 See www.parlament.gv.at/PAKT/VHG/XXVI/I/I_00022/index.shtml. 24 See www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20180227_OTS0104/neos- bekraeftigen-reformwillen-zum-start-des-petitionsausschusses.
25 Furthermore, there are citizens’ initiatives on a regional or local level and private online petition websites that are able to assemble a relevant number of supporters.
Levels of participation as drivers of voter mobilisation have varied depending on the subjects of the plebiscites, which
themselves were manifold and covered both national and EU-related affairs.
124DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN AUSTRIA: JUST A TOOL FOR THE OPPOSITION?
7.2
The EU dimension
7.2.1
Referendums
The most important direct democratic decision on EU matters was the Austrian national referendum on joining the European Union on 12 June 1994. It was also the only nationwide EU-related referendum so far and was compulsory as it entailed a total revision of the Austrian Federal Constitution. The remarkably high support for EU membership was partly the result of a nationwide information campaign supported by the federal government, the Austrian social partners, other major societal players, and the commitment of Austria’s biggest daily newspaper, Kronen Zeitung. The most notable groups opposing Austria’s membership were the Freedom Party and the Green Party, which criticised the pro-EU accession campaigns as a propaganda tool raising unrealistic expectations.
Table 7.1 Referendum on Austria’s accession to the EU26
Date In favour Against Turnout
12 June 1994 66.6%
(3,145,981 votes)
33.4%
(1,578,850 votes)
82.3%
Although the instrument has only been used twice so far, it has nevertheless been demanded often by political parties as a means of reacting to European developments. This holds true especially for opposition parties, first and foremost, the Freedom Party. Since the year 2000, the demand for a nationwide referendum has been expressed by FPÖ representatives in connection with the eastern enlargement of the European Union; the Treaty of Nice; Turkey’s possible EU membership; the ratification of an EU constitution; the Treaty of Lisbon; the European Stability Mechanism (ESM); the EU as a social union; Austria’s membership of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and the reintroduction of the Schilling as the national currency; Austria’s banking secrecy; leaving the Schengen zone; financial aid for Greece; ratification of TTIP and CETA; and closing the borders against ‘mass migration’, among
DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 125
others. On several occasions FPÖ representatives have also examined the possibility of an ‘ÖXIT’-referendum – which in 2012 party leader Heinz-Christian Strache called “a last resort”.27 FPÖ
presidential candidate Norbert Hofer in 2016 would have considered this “if Turkey joined the European Union”.28 Following
the popular initiative on Austria’s EU exit (2015) the Freedom Party filed a motion to consult the people on this matter.29 The day after
the British decision to leave the EU, the FPÖ stated that direct democracy should become more important in Europe and even stand above EU law. In its statement the FPÖ also called for a referendum on EU membership if the EU was unwilling to implement reforms or if Turkey became an EU member.3031 Due to
27 Freiheitlicher Parlamentsklub (2012), “FPÖ: Strache sieht Schilling und EU-Austritt als letzte Möglichkeit” [FPÖ: Strache sees Schilling and EU exit as a last resort], 29 January (www.ots.at/presseaussendung/ OTS_20120129_OTS0043/fpoe-strache-sieht-schilling-und-eu-austritt-als- letzte-moeglichkeit).
28 Freiheitlicher Parlamentsklub (2016), „FPÖ-Präsidentschaftskandidat Hofer: Schutz der Österreicher steht im Zentrum” [FPÖ presidential candidate Hofer: Safety of Austrians is key], 14 March (www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20160314_OTS0092/fpoe-
praesidentschaftskandidat-hofer-schutz-der-oesterreicher-steht-im- zentrum).
29 Pressedienst der Parlamentsdirektion Parlamentskorrespondenz (2016), „Europäische Union besteht Feuerprobe im Parlament” [European Union passes the acid test in Parliament], 27 January (www.ots.at/ presseaussendung/OTS_20160127_OTS0237/europaeischen-union- besteht-feuerprobe-im-parlament).
30 Freiheitlicher Parlamentsklub (2016), „Strache, Vilimsky: Brexit ist Weichenstellung für Demokratie sowie gegen Zentralismus und Migrationswahn” [Strache, Vilimsky: Brexit sets the course for democracy and against centralism and ‘migration mania‘], 24 June (www.ots.at/ presseaussendung/OTS_20160624_OTS0011/strache-vilimsky-brexit-ist- weichenstellung-fuer-demokratie-sowie-gegen-zentralismus-und- migrationswahnimpl).
31 Freiheitlicher Parlamentsklub (2016), „Krise der Europäischen Union: FPÖ-Bundespräsidentschaftskandidat Hofer mahnt Vorsicht ein und wünscht sich Großbritannien im EWR“ [Crisis of the European Union: FPÖ presidential candidate Hofer calls for watchfulness and wants the UK to be
126DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN AUSTRIA: JUST A TOOL FOR THE OPPOSITION?
changes in public opinion – Austrians’ support for EU membership has been growing since Brexit32 – these opinions were duly toned
down.
Direct democratic votes in neighbouring Switzerland were taken by the FPÖ several times as an occasion to praise the Swiss model and portray it as an example worthy of imitation. This was the case following the successful Swiss federal popular initiative "against the construction of minarets" in 2009 as well as an initiative for the “deportation of criminal foreigners” in 2010 and the initiative “against mass migration” in 2014.
Claims to hold nationwide referendums were also expressed, though to a lesser extent, by other opposition parties, e.g. recently on CETA by the Greens,33 the Social Democrats and the Liste Pilz in
Parliament.34
The claim to hold referendums on EU matters has also partly been supported by Austria’s tabloid press, especially by the most widely read daily newspaper Kronen Zeitung, which campaigned loudly against the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, TTIP and CETA, for example. To illustrate just how influential politicians perceive the Kronen Zeitung to be, one should look back at the summer of 2008
part of the EEA], 4 July (www.ots.at/presseaussendung/ OTS_20160704_OTS0068/krise-der-europaeischen-union-fpoe-
bundespraesidentschaftskandidat-hofer-mahnt-vorsicht-ein-und- wuenscht-sich-grossbritannien-im-ewr).
32 Österreichische Gesellschaft für Europapolitik (2017), „ÖGfE-Survey: High support for EU-membership in Austria“, 21 December (www.oegfe.at/2017/12/oegfe-survey-clear-majority-of-austrians-in- favour-of-eu-membership-2/).
33 Die Grünen (2018), „CETA: Türöffner für weitere Handelsverträge” [CETA: Door opener for other ‘trade agreements’], 15 June (https://www.gruene.at/themen/europa/ceta-wo-bleibt-die-
volksabstimmung).
34 Parlamentskorrespondenz (2018), „Handelsabkommen CETA nimmt erste parlamentarische Hürde“ [Free Trade Agreement CETA clears the first hurdle], 5 June (https://www.parlament.gv.at/PAKT/PR/ JAHR_2018/PK0643/index.shtml).
Austrians’ support for EU membership has been growing since Brexit.
DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 127
when both the incumbent and the designated federal chancellors Alfred Gusenbauer and Werner Faymann (both SPÖ) wrote a joint open letter to the ‘Krone’ editor declaring that due to growing public discomfort with the EU and its politics prior to the ratification of
the Treaty of Lisbon “future changes in EU treaties affecting the Austrian interest” should be put to a nationwide referendum.35 This
letter received harsh criticism from both the coalition partner ÖVP and the opposition Green Party, who saw it as a sign of submission to the Kronen Zeitung media power. The FPÖ in turn noted that the letter just included empty phrases and was without tangible consequences.
7.2.2
Popular initiatives
EU-related items have also accounted for 13 popular initiatives since 1991. Since this date, nearly half of all popular initiatives were launched to broach an issue related to EU matters, e.g. the claim for a referendum on EEA-accession, keeping the Schilling as the national currency, exiting the EU and EURATOM, opposing nuclear energy in Austria and Europe, genetic engineering and Austrian neutrality.
35 Der Standard (2008), „Der SPÖ-Brief an Dichand im Wortlaut“ [Wording of the SPÖ letter to Dichand], 1 July (www.derstandard.at/3393035/Der- SPOe-Brief-an-Dichand-im-Wortlaut-).
The claim to hold
referendums on EU matters has also partly been
supported by Austria’s tabloid press.
128DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN AUSTRIA: JUST A TOOL FOR THE OPPOSITION?
Table 7.2 EU-related popular initiatives36
Year Subject Valid
signatures of support Turnout Ranking (corresponding turnout in %) 1991 To hold a referendum on
Austria’s accession to the European Economic Area (EEA) 126,834 2.25% 33 1993 Austria First 416,531 7.35% 14 1996 Neutrality 358,156 6.21% 15 1997 Genetic engineering 1,225,790 21.23% 2 1997 To hold a referendum
before introducing the euro (‘Schilling- Volksbegehren’) 253,949 4.43% 20 1997 Non-nuclear Austria 248,787 4.34% 21 2000 New referendum on EU membership 193,901 3.35% 26 2002 Veto against Temelin* 914,973 15.53% 6 2003 Non-nuclear Europe 131,772 2.23% 30 2006 Austria stay free!** 258,281 4.28% 23 2011 Out of EURATOM 98,678 1.56% 35 2015 EU-exit of Austria 261,056 4.12% 22 2017 Against CETA and TTIP 562,389 8.87% 11
* Nuclear plant in the Czech Republic near the Austrian border. ** Guarantee of neutrality, ratification of EU convention and EU accession of Turkey only after referendum.
Most of these initiatives focused on fundamental and far-reaching aspects of EU integration and can be seen as a protest against developments regarded as not being in Austria’s interest and endangering national identity and sovereignty. They also express the desire to protest against the harmful effects of globalisation. Often supported by – mostly opposition – political parties, these initiatives have often portrayed an image of an all-dominant EU forcing a small country like Austria to obey to its rules – rules
36 See www.bmi.gv.at/411/Alle_Volksbegehren_der_zweiten_ Republik.aspx.
DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION 129
criticised as undemocratic and driven by business interests rather than the will of ’ordinary people’. Consequently, mobilisation was often accompanied by fierce debates and polarisation – a characteristic that we can generally observe in the Austria’s EU discourse.
One can argue that non-binding popular initiatives are a blunt instrument that can be easily pigeonholed by politics. Most popular initiatives on EU matters did not in fact address the initiators’ concerns. These experiences clearly constitute one explanation for the overall low turnout. Nevertheless, popular initiatives can be a useful tool for political campaigning, especially if mass media support them. By abolishing the possibility for members of the National Council to start a popular initiative in 1998, the direct democratic character of this instrument was strengthened. Nevertheless, the limited prospects of success for popular initiatives remain a major downside – an aspect that shifted to the core of debate in recent years.
7.2.3
Consultations
The instrument of non-binding people’s consultations was also regularly promoted – mainly by opposition parties, although since its introduction in 1989 only one Austria-wide consultation has been held. Yet the proposed subjects for potential consultations rarely differed from those proposed for national referendums: Turkey’s accession to the EU, non-participation in a European transfer union, the right to reintroduce controls at the national borders, TTIP and CETA (the latter also promoted by the Green Party), the national government’s migration and asylum policy, and indeed the system of direct democracy itself as a topic that should be submitted to the Austrian public. Propositions that could not reach the necessary support for further implementation though.
As a consequence of the bilateral measures imposed by 14 EU member states against Austria following the participation of the Freedom Party in the government, the Austrian government decided to launch a consultation covering the following issues: the immediate suspension of the ‘sanctions’ imposed by the other member states; further development of the European Union as a
Popular initiatives can be a useful tool for political campaigning, especially if mass media support them.
130DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN AUSTRIA: JUST A TOOL FOR THE OPPOSITION?
community of equal member states “that grants all members equal rights and duties and prevents bigger EU members dominating smaller ones”,37 ensuring that the EU grants a country’s
fundamental right to decide its own government on the basis of free elections and respects the rights of democratically elected political parties and instruments of direct democracy; a clear division of tasks between the European and the national level, as well as a reinforced role of the regions; the commitment of all EU institutions to comply with the basic rule of law and human rights; integration of constitutional procedures, including a judicial review of any alleged violation of human rights in a new EU treaty.38
This controversial intention never became reality, however, as the bilateral measures were suspended in September 2000.