• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • About
  • Contribute
  • Contact

Sceptical Scot

Asking Questions. Seeking Answers.

A day is a long time in EU politics

December 6, 2016 by Mark Lazarowicz Leave a Comment

Not surprisingly, many commentators have simplified Sunday’s votes as meaning Austria: pro-EU and good; Italy: anti-EU and bad. I draw different conclusions from these results. 

First, all the reports suggest that the biggest factors in the Italian referendum were anti-government feeling, coupled with concerns about the nature of the constitutional changes proposed by (former) premier Matteo Renzi. Fears about those changes may well have been well-founded. They were criticised for seeking to place more power in the hands of the premier and the government; an accurate criticism, given their stated intention  was to allow Italian governments to operate more effectively.

The reforms included endorsement of the electoral system giving the largest party a ‘super majority’ of seats to ensure ‘stable government’, so that if the largest party received more than 40% of the votes cast, it would be guaranteed a minimum of 54% of the seats in the lower house, the Chamber of Deputies. Although a system of this nature was first introduced in 2005 (and is under constitutional challenge), its effect is at present limited by the powers of the Senate (upper house). The proposed reform would have substantially reduced the powers of the Senate and the influence of the Regions, and so markedly increased the ability of a party with minority electoral support to get its way. From a UK perspective we can see the downside of an electoral system which gives governments with minority support a majority of seats in parliament (whether Westminster or Holyrood).

It would have been ironical, as well as dangerous, if the changes proposed by Renzi had resulted in a future populist government getting elected in Italy with a strong majority of seats, but with minority support. Given the rise in backing for the populist “Five Star Movement”, it is by no means inconceivable that an election could have brought them to overall power in that way. It is noticeable that opposition to the changes came not just from the populist and racist parties in Italy, but also from many politicians with impeccable democratic and European credentials.

The real significance of Italy’s referendum is not its immediate impact on the country’s membership of the EU or the Euro, but on the consequences that a weakened government would have in making it harder for it to deal with major problems such as the banking and refugee crises, which in turn could (in the case of banking) weaken the single currency and place further tension on European structures. Renzi’s departure is likely to have an impact also because it will remove a powerful voice in European policy making.

So, although the Italian referendum vote should not be seen as primarily an anti-EU vote, it may nevertheless trigger consequences which will be damaging for the future prospects of the EU.

On the other hand, the result of the presidential election in Austria, was undoubtedly good news for those who support the EU and liberal values. The new president campaigned as a political leader who was up-front about support for the EU; for green policies; for refugees and human rights; and against nationalism. It is probable that not all those voted for him supported all his policies – after all, he only won a little over 20% in the first round of the elections. No doubt many did so for the simple and laudable reason that they did not want a far-right candidate to be their president.  The fact that they did so, however, shows that the onward march of right-wing populism is not inevitable nor unstoppable, and politicians who make a stand against it can be elected.

What should also not be overlooked, however, was the reason Van der Bellen became the united standard bearer against the far-right was that the established parties of the left and right did so badly in the first round of the presidential elections. His victory should certainly not be seen as an encouragement of those, in the UK and EU as a whole just as much as Austria, who hope that politics does not need radical change.

Ironically, it might also be much too early to write off Renzi, or at least his reforms. The need for reforms of the Italian state is obvious. If he had not made the vote one of confidence in himself, there might have been a different result. And if the Five Star Movement performs badly in the management of the major cities which it has gained in recent municipal elections, as certainly seems to be the case in Rome, perhaps in due course some version of Renzi’s proposals for reform might be implemented, and voters turn back to his centre-left party (which is still – just – in the lead in the polls).

Filed Under: Blog, Brexit, European Union Tagged With: Europe, eurozone

About Mark Lazarowicz

Mark Lazarowicz is an advocate, with a special interest in citizens’ rights, campaigner and commentator - and a former Labour MP for Edinburgh N & Leith. He was chair of the European Movement in Scotland 2018-2022.

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

About Sceptical Scot

Welcome to Sceptical Scot, Scotland’s premier non-tribal forum for passionate, informed debate. Sceptical Scot is for all who care about Scotland’s future, regardless of how they vote: for party, independence or union, EU or Brexit. We aim to provide an arena that is both broader and deeper than current online/print offers with a rich diet of well-researched, polemical, thought-provoking writing. Read more » about About Sceptical Scot

What’s new on Sceptical Scot

  • ‘Epic Fury’ suffering continues even if Trump invents an end to his illegal war March 8, 2026
  • Global food insecurity: another dividend from Trump’s war of choice March 6, 2026
  • Public pay settlements: a crisis waiting for the next Scottish government March 1, 2026
  • ‘A shambles and a disgrace’ – saving Scotland’s High Streets will take more than the market (Part 2) February 11, 2026
  • ‘A shambles and a disgrace’ – why have Scotland’s high streets declined? (Part 1) February 9, 2026
  • What are we stumbling into? Reasons for hope and fear again. February 6, 2026
  • Business anticipates uneasy start to 2026 February 6, 2026
  • Beyond the Binary: how progressives risk aping the radical right in Scotland January 26, 2026
  • How will next SNP government tackle fiscal mess left by this one? #ScottishBudget January 24, 2026
  • Trump’s tariffs: who pays the cost? January 23, 2026

The Sceptical Newsletter

Categories

  • anti-fascism (12)
  • Articles (730)
  • Blog (681)
  • Books & Poetry (27)
  • Brexit (231)
  • climate crisis (55)
  • climate crisis (9)
  • Covid19 (67)
  • Criminal justice (19)
  • Culture (348)
  • Devo20 (1)
  • Economics (202)
  • Economy (185)
  • Education (84)
  • Elections (242)
  • Energy (12)
  • Environment (105)
  • European Union (294)
  • Featured (44)
  • Federalism (23)
  • federalism (15)
  • Health (71)
  • History (97)
  • Housing (29)
  • Humour (11)
  • identity (32)
  • Independence (322)
  • Inequality (88)
  • International (81)
  • Ireland (15)
  • Ireland (8)
  • Local government (97)
  • Longer reads (81)
  • Media (19)
  • Podcast (4)
  • Poetry (73)
  • Policy (309)
  • Politics (477)
  • Polls and quizzes (2)
  • protest song (1)
  • Reviews (26)
  • Social democracy (93)
  • Tributes to David Gow (2)
  • Trump (27)
  • UK (423)
  • Uncategorized (16)

Sceptical Scot elsewhere

Facebook
Twitter

About Sceptical Scot

Since 2014 Sceptical Scot has offered a non-tribal forum for passionate, informed debate for all who care about Scotland’s future

Copyright © 2026 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in