Apologies for the absence of messages recently. Here's one about
developments in Danish and Swedish politics.
1. Probably by the time you read this, DENMARK WILL HAVE A NEW PRIME
MINISTER.
Finance minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen will meet the queen today to
formalise his appointment, minutes after the incumbent since 2001,
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, has popped in to submit his resignation. The
reason, as you'll doubtless know, is that Fogh Rasmussen is going to
become NATO's secretary-general. His new job had been thrown into doubt
at the last minute my Turkey's opposition to his candidacy (which,
reportedly, had prompted the German chancellor to threaten Turkey's EU
membership prospects if it wasn't dropped). But after months of rumours
and rather tiresomely unconvincing denials, Fogh Rasmussen's belated
admission late last week of his interest in the NATO job made it clear
that his time at the summit of Danish politics was over.
Løkke Rasmussen, who will also ascend to leadership of the Liberals, is
assured of the support of the other coalition party, the Conservatives,
and of the Danish People's Party, whose backing gives the government a
parliamentary majority.
But the opposition has the wind in its sails. Ten days ago the Social
Liberals, in a fairly historic statement, announced that they hoped to
govern not only with the Social Democrats, as they have often done
before, but also with the Socialist People's Party, which has taken some
hefty strides towards the political mainstream in the last couple of
years. Narrowly ahead in the polls, it will be further emboldened by
Løkke Rasmussen's being less than wildly popular among voters. He's a
more colourful character than his predecessor: he's a smoker who likes a
drink, too - and the latter trait has featured in at least one of the
less than flattering stories about his expense claims.
No election is necessary until late 2011, so Løkke Rasmussen will have
time to make his mark. The resignation on Friday of another colourful
character, welfare minister Karen Jespersen, gives him an early chance
to reshape the cabinet.
2. Meanwhile, things are not going nearly so well for the left-of-centre
OPPOSITION PARTIES IN SWEDEN.
Six months ago, polls put them up to 20 points ahead of the four
centre-right government parties. Since then, that lead has consistently
shrivelled. Yesterday one poll not only put the governing quartet ahead,
it even gave the Moderates, the dominant party in the coalition, a
significant lead over the Social Democrats, whose support has seemingly
collapsed. The economic situation, meanwhile, is disastrous. So what's
going on?
One short-term cause, which the Social Democrats' new secretary-general
has acknowledged, is a desperately embarrassing twist to a controversial
issue that will be familiar in lots of countries - namely, the excessive
rewards claimed by corporate executives. The left-wing parties were
preparing to make hay with the eyebrow-raising pay rises and other
benefits that various bosses, including those of banks in precarious
financial positions, had obtained. But then it emerged that one
particularly grotesque act of self-aggrandisement had occurred in a big
pensions provider, AMF - on whose board sits Wanja Lundby-Wedin, chair
of the trade-union confederation LO and member of the Social Democrats'
executive committee. Her furious protests that she had been mislead by
others in the company over the issue have not won widespread sympathy in
the Swedish media.
But there may be other, longer-term causes of this remarkable turnaround
in political fortunes. One is that it's hard to blame the government for
the main cause of the economic downturn, which is the drastic fall in
demand in Sweden's' main export markets. Unlike in Britain, for example,
the Swedish government's finances were in robust shape when the
recession started to bite. It may be that these considerations have
reinforced Swedish voters' tendency to rally behind their current
leaders in times of crisis.
But yesterday's opinion poll also marks the culmination of a dreadful
period for the Social Democrats' leader, Mona Sahlin.
For a year and a half after the 2006 election, she could do little wrong
- mainly because she hardly did anything at all, at least publicly.
Instead, she kept her head down and concentrated on renewing her party's
policy platform, a task that she delegated to several party commissions.
Then, however, she made her only really big decision so far - and it
looks like it might prove to be a huge mistake.
As I wrote to the list in December, Sahlin stumbled badly when her own
party forced her to include the Left Party in the pre-electoral alliance
that she wanted to form with the Greens. Her initial reason for
excluding the Left was its reluctance to commit itself to existing and
quite restrictive rules on budget finance. That tactic proved
unfortunately timed once nearly all Western governments had decided that
budget discipline is now, as one columnist put it, all very 1990s.
More fundamental, however, is the fact that the three members of this
nascent red-green alliance are - in marked contrast the centre-right
four when they formed their Alliance for Sweden - still quite far apart
ideologically. This was cunningly exposed by the governing parties in
February, when they announced a major policy turn towards nuclear power.
To the dismay of many in her party, but presumably at the behest of her
deeply anti-nuclear alliance partners, Sahlin immediately declared her
continued support for decommissioning the industry, which is not popular
these days among voters. (All three parties have since rowed back from
this a bit.)
Perhaps above all, it has also become increasingly clear that the Social
Democrats have had little to say about the economic crisis. The party's
policy commissions are due to finalise their work only in the run-up to
this autumn's party congress. As the economic context has changed, what
seemed a year ago like patience now looks like paralysis. And now, even
before the party has decided what it thinks about major issues, it needs
to co-ordinate with two other parties with some very different positions.
No wonder Sahlin has cut an unhappy figure recently. The argument that
the party should stick to its traditional strategy of running its own
election campaign and trying to form a government after the vote, rather
than making pre-electoral commitments to govern with other parties, may
just have been right all along.
Have a good Easter.
Nick Aylott.
--
Dr Nicholas Aylott, senior lecturer (docent) in political science
School of Social Sciences, Södertörn University, Stockholm
SE-141 89 Huddinge, Sweden
www.sh.se/statsvetenskap
Please feel free to forward this message to anyone who might be
interested. To join the Scandinavian Politics mailing list, send a
message to me, the convenor (nicholas.aylott@sh.se). If you want to send
something to the list, or if you don't want to receive these occasional
messages, just let me know. See also www.psa.ac.uk/scandinavia/
No comments:
Post a Comment