Capítulo 9: Evaluar con mapas conceptuales
9.2. Propuesta de valoración cuantitativa de mapas conceptuales
General context
The economic and financial crisis affected Luxembourg as financial place and country giving priority to social rights. The unemployment rate grew from around 4% in 2008 to 7% in 2013-2014173. The gap between the civil society, especially trade unions, and the political elite
grew bigger over the period running from 2010 to 2014 as a direct consequence of the crisis. While 66% of the population thought that the European Union had a positive image in autumn 2009, the proportion dropped to 53% in 2010 and 37% in 2013174. The 2009 legislative elections gave significant power back to the CSV, while the DP lost votes and the ADR slipped down electoral support. The political landscape changed in the course of the legislative period 2009- 2013. Political crises within the coalition parties LSAP and CSV, especially the decreasing popularity of the Prime Minister, due to revealed political scandals, led to early elections in October 2013. These elections represented a political earthquake in Luxembourg, as the CSV found itself shifting from the majority to the opposition for the second time in history. A three- party coalition was formed between the LSAP, DP and Déi Gréng.
ESM
After the agreement on the creation of the ESM during the European Council of 16-17th December 2010 and the signature of the treaty during the Eurogroup meeting on 11-12th July 2011, the first out of three laws implementing the ESM in Luxembourg was introduced in Parliament. On 27th September 2011, the Government transferred a draft bill to the Chamber
approving the decision of the European Council of 25th March 2011 to modify Article 136 of
the TFUE175. The draft bill was sent to the Finance and Budget Committee on 06th October 2011 as it was designated by the Chamber’s Conference of Presidents as the competent body to examine the treaty176. The Prime Minister seized the Council of State on 21st September 2011 and the latter approved the draft bill on 07th March 2012. In the meantime, the other two draft bills on the ESM ratification and the participation of the State in the ESM were introduced in Parliament on 5th March 2012177. On 20th March 2012, the Finance and Budget Committee met to discuss the draft bill on the modification of Article 136 TFUE and the draft bill ratifying the 173http://www.statistiques.public.lu/stat/TableViewer/tableView.aspx (last accessed 15.03.2018).
174 See Eurobarometer 72 , Autumn 2009,
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Survey/getSurveyDetail/instruments/STANDARD /surveyKy/831 (last accessed 15.03.2018); Eurobarometer 76 , Autumn 2010,
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Survey/getSurveyDetail/instruments/STANDARD /surveyKy/1020 (last accessed 15.03.2018) and Eurobarometer 80, Autumn 2013,
http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Survey/getSurveyDetail/instruments/STANDARD /surveyKy/1123 (last accessed 15.03.2018).
175 « Projet de loi portant approbation de la décision du Conseil européen du 25 mars 2011 modifiant l'article 136 du traité sur le fonctionnement de l'Union européenne en ce qui concerne un mécanisme de stabilité pour les Etats membres dont la monnaie est l'euro ».
176 Both ESM and TSCG were debated in the Finance and Budget Committee. The EAC dealt more thoroughly with the TSCG, probably because the ESM was focused primarily on the financial sector, while the TSCG brought institutional reforms with it that fell partially into the competences of the EAC (Interview 23, 2018, additional information obtained via email on 19.03.2018).
177 « Projet de loi portant approbation du traité instituant le mécanisme européen de stabilité, signé le 2 février 2012 à Bruxelles », « Projet de loi relative à la participation de l'Etat au mécanisme européen de stabilité ».
154
ESM. A rapporteur from the CSV group was designated to produce a report on all three draft bills. The Government amended the third draft bill on 14th May 2012. On 22nd May 2012, the Council of State delivered its opinion without observations on the draft bill ratifying the ESM and the one regulating the State’s participation in the mechanism. The latter required a second opinion on 12th June 2012 following the Government’s amendments, which did not contain any specific observations on the bill. The rapporteur on the draft bills presented its reports in the Finance and Budget Committee on 22nd June 2012, which was then adopted in plenary on 26th June 2012 by 49 votes against 5178. The ADR and Déi Lénk rejected the treaty.
TSCG
The draft bill ratifying the TSCG179 was approved in the Luxembourg Council of
Government on 16th May 2012 and introduced in the Chamber of Deputies on 10th July 2012.
The Government seized the Council of State for an opinion on the draft bill on 27th July 2012. The Finance and Budget Committee received the draft bill on 04th October 2012. Both the Chamber of Employees and the Council of State submitted opinions on the draft bill, the first on its own initiative on 22nd October and the latter on 21st December 2012. The Chamber of Employees expressed a negative opinion on the TSCG, arguing that it would threaten the European social model, deepen the economic crisis and restrict parliamentary competences in public budget decisions. In its opinion, the Council of State reflected about the incidence of the new measures contained in the TSCG on the Luxembourg Constitution and about the need for constitutional revisions. The Council of State stated that the draft bill had to be adopted in Parliament with a two-thirds majority according to Article 114 of the Luxembourg Constitution regulating constitutional revisions, because the control of budgetary discipline fixed by the TSCG implied a transfer of competences to new national institutions, to the European Commission and to the European Court of Justice.
On 08th January 2013, the Finance and Budget Committee nominated the same CSV rapporteur that followed the draft bills on the ESM. The report was presented in the committee on 19th February 2013 and adopted in plenary on 27th February 2013 by 46 votes against 10180. Déi Gréng, ADR and Déi Lénk rejected the treaty. The bill entered into force on 04th April 2013. The “golden rule” fixed in the TSCG, which sets the threshold of public administrations’ annual structural deficit to 0,5% of the nominal GDP, was implemented in Luxembourg through
178 26.06.2012, 34th plenary session, TOP 5 « 6334 - Projet de loi portant approbation de la décision du Conseil européen du 25 mars 2011 modifiant l’article 136 du traité sur le fonctionnement de l’Union européenne en ce qui concerne un mécanisme de stabilité pour les États membres dont la monnaie est l’euro ; 6405 - Projet de loi portant approbation du traité instituant le mécanisme européen de stabilité, signé le 2 février 2012 à Bruxelles ; 6406 - Projet de loi relative (1) à la participation de l’État au mécanisme européen de stabilité; (2) à certaines immunités du mécanisme européen de stabilité et de la banque européenne d’investissement et (3) modifiant la loi modifiée du 9 juillet 2010 relative à l’octroi de la garantie de l’État dans le cadre de l’instrument européen de stabilisation de la zone euro »
179 « 6449 - Projet de loi portant approbation du traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance au sein de l'Union économique et monétaire, signé à Bruxelles, le 2 mars 2012 »
180 27.02.2013, 23rd plenary session, TOP 2 « 6449 - Projet de loi portant approbation du traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance au sein de l’Union économique et monétaire, signé à Bruxelles, le 2 mars 2012 ».
155
a bill introduced in Parliament by the Finance minister on 22nd July 2013181. The Finance and
Budget Committee received the draft bill on 01st October 2013 and nominated a rapporteur from the coalition party DP on 20th May 2014. The draft bill was amended once by the Government on 20th March 2014 and by the Luxembourg Central Bank on 24th April 2014. It was subject to numerous opinions submitted by the Chamber of Civil Servants and Public Employees on 10th October 2013, the Chamber of Trades on 05th November 2013, the Business Chamber on 11th
November 2013 and 22nd April 2014, the Chamber of Employees on 12th November 2013, the Council of State on 10th December 2013, 20th May and 03rd June 2014 and the Union of Luxembourg Cities and Communes (SYVICOL) on 28th May 2014. According to the Chamber of Civil Servants and Public Employees, the democratic legitimacy of the treaty would not be guaranteed and social partners should be involved in budgetary negotiations. All chambers pointed out that parliaments’ budgetary powers should be strengthened. After several meetings of the Finance and Budget Committee on 27th May, 03rd June and 19th June 2014, the bill was adopted in plenary on 09th July 2014 by 55 votes against 5182.
The economic crisis seemed to have triggered increasing tensions between and within political parties, but also within civil society. Positions started to crystallise in 2010-2011 during discussions on the future of Luxembourg’s financial place and negotiations on the ESM, reaching a peak of discontent especially from the side of the opposition in 2012 during negotiations on the Fiscal Compact. Despite growing dissent between MPs on the way that the economic crisis needed to be handled, all agreed that solidarity and democracy in the EU were two essential elements that needed to be preserved. In 2010, most MPs agreed on the need to safeguard the financial place, to establish strict control mechanisms in financial and economic policies on the European level and to enhance cooperation between Member States by avoiding centralisation of decision-making183. While the ADR and Déi Lénk criticised sharply the European Union and the financial measures taken from 2011 onwards, the other parties’ more had mitigated positions. Positions of ADR MPs could be explained by the fact that the party changed its president in 2012, who adopted an increasingly sovereignist and conservative stance. Following the nomination of the new president, several members left the party and forced the president to resign. The group lost some MPs within the Chamber of Deputies, who switched to “independent” MPs. ADR MPs pointed out regularly the risk of financial and political sovereignty loss for the Parliament and Luxembourg, as well as the democratic deficit of the EU, as a consequence of the financial measures taken on the European level184.
181 « 6597 - Projet de loi relatif à la coordination et à la gouvernance des finances publiques et modifiant: a) la loi modifiée du 8 juin 1999 sur le budget, la comptabilité et la trésorerie de l'Etat b) la loi modifiée du 10 mars 1969 portant institution d'une inspection générale des finances »
182 09.07.2014, TOP 2 « 6597 - Projet de loi relatif à la coordination et à la gouvernance des finances publiques et modifiant: a) la loi modifiée du 8 juin 1999 sur le budget, la comptabilité et la trésorerie de l’État, b) la loi modifiée du 10 mars 1969 portant institution d’une inspection générale des finances ».
183 See 01.06.2010, 31st plenary session, TOP 7 « Interpellation de M. Claude Meisch au sujet de l’avenir de notre place financière ; Heure d’actualité demandée par le groupe LSAP sur la régulation des marchés financiers et l’introduction d’une taxe sur les transactions financières ; Heure d’actualité demandée par le groupe CSV sur le contrôle des politiques budgétaires nationales par la soumission des projets de budgets des pays européens à un contrôle ou une concertation ex ante au niveau européen ».
184 08.03.2011, 25th plenary session, TOP 13 Débat d’orientation sur la gouvernance économique au sein de I’UE et sur le pacte de convergence et de compétitivité projeté » ; 14.12.2011, 12th plenary session, TOP1 « Déclaration de M. Jean-Claude Juncker, Premier Ministre, Ministre d’Etat, relative aux conclusions du Conseil européen des
156
In the same line as the ADR, Déi Lénk MPs insisted several times on the need to preserve the social rights in Luxembourg and criticised the lack of democracy on the European level185. During a press conference organised on the Fiscal Compact on 06th February 2012, a Déi Lénk MP qualified the treaty as a “legal monster” that would permit a predominance of industrial and financial sectors over public expenditure and pointed out that it was no surprise that trade unions would reject the treaty. MPs from both parties voted systematically against the ESM and the Fiscal Compact. MPs from the majority supported both treaties, but were not entirely satisfied with their content. CSV and LSAP MPs argued that the Fiscal Compact needed clarification and additional measures in the near future186. The President of the LSAP group criticised the TSCG for its lack of democratic legitimacy and its numerous deficiencies187. While the CSV party pleaded for budgetary consolidation and fiscal measures through structural reforms to strengthen the economy, the LSAP dampened the CSV’s austerity plans by insisting on social cohesion and solidarity. However, not all MPs from the majority welcomed the measures implemented by the coalition. In 2012, an LSAP MP resigned from Parliament, contesting the party’s support to the coalition’s decision to reform the pension system and limit the wage indexation. The MP also protested against the budget voted in Parliament for the year 2013 and rejected the party’s decision to adopt both treaties (Dumont/Kies/Poirier, 2013). The gap widened between the LSAP’s position on the treaties, its electorate and the socialist trade union OGBL, putting the party in a situation never experienced since the referendum on the Constitutional treaty in 2005.
The coalition’s economic policy also became a major subject of criticism for DP and Déi Gréng MPs. Through a motion that was rejected in Parliament in 2011, a Déi Gréng MP argued that budgetary consolidation would be essential, but only if social justice, growth and the durability of measures would be secured188. During a topical hour requested by the group in March 2012 on the Greek sovereign debt crisis, Déi Gréng MPs criticised the lack of cooperation and information from the Government’s side in the same line of argument as the ADR. They also reproached the Government to misrepresent Luxembourg’s positions on the treaties and the economic crisis during negotiations in the Eurogroup189. A Déi Gréng MP raised doubts about the Government’s credibility towards the Chamber and the country during negotiations on the EU level, criticising the lack of coordinated positions between the Finance
8 et 9 décembre 2011, suivie d’un débat » ; « 27.02.2013, 23rd plenary session, TOP2 6449- Projet de loi portant approbation du traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance au sein de l’Union économique et monétaire, signé à Bruxelles, le 2 mars 2012 ».
185 14.07.2011, 46th plenary session, TOP 1 « Interpellation de M Claude Meisch sur la crise de la dette européenne (DP) » ;http://www.europaforum.public.lu/fr/actualites/2011/11/chd-debat-declaration-politique-
etrangere/index.html (last accessed 16.03.2018).
186 26.01.2012, 14th plenary session, TOP9 « Déclaration sur la position du Gouvernement luxembourgeois à l’égard du Traité international sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance dans l’Union économique et monétaire ».
187 27.02.2013, 23rd plenary session, TOP2 « 6449- Projet de loi portant approbation du traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance au sein de l’Union économique et monétaire, signé à Bruxelles, le 2 mars 2012 ». 188 14.12.2011, 12th plenary session, TOP1 « Déclaration de M. Jean-Claude Juncker, Premier Ministre, Ministre d’Etat, relative aux conclusions du Conseil européen des 8 et 9 décembre 2011, suivie d’un débat ».
189 06.03.2012, 18th plenary session, TOP14 « Heure d’actualité du groupe déi gréng sur les décisions du Sommet de l’Union Européenne du 20 février par rapport à la crise de la dette souveraine grecque »
157
Minister and the Prime Minister190. DP MPs were aligned with the other groups on topics such
as the transparency of decision-making, solidarity in the EU and the consolidation of budgetary policies. However, a DP MP regretted that the Government did not insist more on the EU level to defend the inclusion of the growth component in the TSCG’s crisis measures191. In light of
the growing unemployment rates and the deindustrialisation of the country, the DP party was more in favour of a middle ground between fiscal consolidation and economic growth. However, the group was dissatisfied with the insufficient reforms undertaken by the Government.
Parliamentary votes on each treaty did not entirely reflect the critical positions of both groups. Even though DP MPs were increasingly sceptical about the ESM and the Fiscal Compact, they voted in favour of both, but without enthusiasm. A DP MP justified the votes by the need to show solidarity with the rest of the Member States192. The votes of the DP group on both treaties provided the Government with the required support of the two-thirds constitutional majority within Parliament. Déi Gréng MPs approved the ESM treaty despite their scepticism and discontent about the low level of transparency and democratic participation. However, the group rejected the TSCG by voting against it, pointing out in Parliament and in a press conference on 25th February 2013 that the treaty represented a brake for national investments, would destroy the welfare state by encouraging social regression and would reduce democratic legitimacy of the decision-making in budgetary policy by leaving national parliaments aside193. According to them, the Fiscal Compact would not clarify the role of the European Court of Justice, weakening the European Parliament and national parliaments. On 24th March 2012,
during their national congress, the party criticised the austerity measures that threatened the European social model. Déi Gréng reproached the Government to be divided on European issues. According to them, part of the Government would push towards more cooperation and a deepening of the EU, while the rest would prefer bilateral agreements. The absence of coordination would weaken Luxembourg’s position during negotiations on the European level.
190 09.05.2012, Discours sur l’état de la nation 2012 : Les groupes politiques à la Chambre cherchent leurs marques dans un cadre décisionnel européen, http://www.europaforum.public.lu/fr/actualites/2012/05/chd-etat-nation- debat/index.html (last accessed 16.03.2018).
191 26.01.2012, 14th plenary session, TOP9 « Déclaration sur la position du Gouvernement luxembourgeois à l’égard du Traité international sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance dans l’Union économique et monétaire » ; 09.05.2012, Discours sur l’état de la nation 2012 : Les groupes politiques à la Chambre cherchent leurs marques dans un cadre décisionnel européen, http://www.europaforum.public.lu/fr/actualites/2012/05/chd- etat-nation-debat/index.html (last accessed 16.03.2018).
192 26.06.2012, 34th plenary session, TOP 5 « 6334 - Projet de loi portant approbation de la décision du Conseil européen du 25 mars 2011 modifiant l’article 136 du traité sur le fonctionnement de l’Union européenne en ce qui concerne un mécanisme de stabilité pour les États membres dont la monnaie est l’euro ; 6405 - Projet de loi portant approbation du traité instituant le mécanisme européen de stabilité, signé le 2 février 2012 à Bruxelles ; 6406 - Projet de loi relative (1) à la participation de l’État au mécanisme européen de stabilité; (2) à certaines immunités du mécanisme européen de stabilité et de la banque européenne d’investissement et (3) modifiant la loi modifiée du 9 juillet 2010 relative à l’octroi de la garantie de l’État dans le cadre de l’instrument européen de stabilisation de la zone euro » ; 27.02.2013, 23rd plenary session, TOP2 « 6449- Projet de loi portant approbation du traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance au sein de l’Union économique et monétaire, signé à Bruxelles, le 2 mars 2012 ».
193 27.02.2013, 23rd plenary session, TOP2 « 6449- Projet de loi portant approbation du traité sur la stabilité, la coordination et la gouvernance au sein de l’Union économique et monétaire, signé à Bruxelles, le 2 mars 2012 ».
158
While the ESM did not trigger much reaction from the civil society, the Fiscal Compact was criticised because of its direct impact on the financial policy of the country. The professional chambers and trade unions produced opinions denouncing the consequences of austerity measures on Luxembourg’s social and democratic system194. The fragmentation of
positions was clearly visible between the LSAP and its affiliated trade union OGBL. The latter tended to welcome the political decisions of Déi Lénk and Déi Gréng to reject the TSCG,