Ed Turner

Regional policy variation in Germany: the diversity of living conditions in a ‘unitary federal state’

ABSTRACT The German federal system is conventionally understood as highly co-ordinated between federal and regional governments and aimed at producing a ‘uniformity’ of living conditions. This view has increasingly been challenged as new work focuses on innovation and diversity at the regional level, and also as a consequence of reforms to the federal system that took place in 2006. This contribution attempts to establish a more systematic basis for assessing and explaining the scope and significance of regional policy variation in Germany. Our findings suggest that – despite institutional structures that foster intense co-ordination between central and regional governments and apparent popular preferences for uniformity of policy outcomes – the extent of policy variation in Germany is much greater than conventionally understood and driven both by structural factors and partisan choices at the regional level.

Party Servants, Ideologues or Regional Representatives? The German Länder and the Reform of Federalism

This article considers recent attempts to reform German federalism, the failed 2004 reform, and the reforms agreed in 2006 and 2009. It compares partisan, ideological and territorial factors which contribute to an understanding of reform, finding that all three have a role in explaining actors’ views of reform proposals. Two other claims are developed: that in some aspects of the reforms, a division between ‘generalist’ and ‘subject specialist’ politicians became apparent; and that a decisive change between 2004 and 2006 was the formation of a grand coalition at a federal level, which paved the way for agreement upon reform proposals.

Understanding Policy Convergence in Britain and Germany

This introduction considers reasons why public policies might be expected to converge between Britain and Germany, arguing that the inter-related forces of globalisation, Europeanisation, policy transfer (in various guises) and the election of centre-left governance in 1997 and 1998 could be expected to lead to such convergence. It then outlines important reasons why such convergence may not occur, due to the radically different institutional settings, as well as ‘path dependence’ and the resilience of established institutions all playing a role in continuing divergence in a number of important areas of public policy.

Introduction to the special issue : reframing German Federalism

In recent years, Germanys federal system has been subject to a number of pressures for change. A constitutional debate on ‘disentangling’ the legislative roles of federal and Länder institutions which stuttered through the 1990s and into the 2000s finally led to a re-allocation of competences in 2006. These reforms shifted some areas of legislative responsibility from the federal to the Länder level and relaxed rules which had earlier justified a federal override when both levels held legislative responsibilities concurrently. At the very least, these constitutional adjustments increased the potential for policy outputs to diverge from one Land to another and give expression to territorial differences in priority and preference.

The CDU and Party Organisational Change

This article undertakes an empirical analysis of the internal organisation of the CDU along four key dimensions. First, it discusses the model of the ‘cartel party’, identifying its key features and then setting out four key questions to pose in relation to the CDUs internal organisation, to see whether it approximates to the ‘cartel’ paradigm. The questions of whether a centralisation of power is visible; whether professionalisation has occurred; whether there has been the anticipated weakening in the power of party functionaries; and whether the CDU has become reliant upon state finances are then answered in the empirical section of the article, drawing upon the authors primary research. It concludes that the ‘cartel party’ thesis fails in significant respects accurately to reflect the CDUs modern organisation. This is of interest to scholars of the CDU, but also offers some insights on the way in which the cartel party thesis fails adequately to develop an accurate account of internal party organisational change, in particular underestimating the ability of internal actors to thwart reforms, and also the potential functional usefulness of a decentralised party organisation.

Justice and prisons policy

The field of justice policy is, of course, a critical one for state activity – indeed, arguably it is the most important field of activity, as the state exercises its ability to develop and enforce its rules, including by depriving individuals of their liberty. Notwithstanding this, scholarship in the field was, for many years, dominated by experts coming from different perspectives of legal studies, rather than political science. Nowadays, that has shifted somewhat, as interest in the activity of constitutional courts in political systems has grown, inspired, for instance, by the work of Martin Shapiro, Alec Stone Sweet, R. Daniel Kelemen and many others (e. g. Shapiro 1988; Shapiro and Stone 1994; Stone Sweet 2000; Shapiro and Stone Sweet 2002; Kelemen 2006).

Let's stick together? Explaining boundaries to territorial policy variation:the case of Germany's prisons legislation

This article offers an initial impact assessment regarding the introduction of new legislative responsibilities at the Land level in a case study of prisons policy (Strafvollzug). Combining an analysis of new legislation produced across the 16 Länder since the responsibility for prisons policy was transferred to the Land level, and insights into the mechanics of policy development obtained through a series of interviews with senior politicians and officials, this article finds that the desire among Länder to legislative independently has varied, with substantial backing for co-ordination in the development of new legislation. This has helped to confound expectations of a ‘competition of harshness’ which many expected to result from decentralisation. However, even before the 2006 reforms, there were substantial variations between the Länder when it came to implementing prisons policy, so consideration of the sub-national level in this area remains essential.

Introduction: Understanding the Transformation of the CDU

This article introduces the special issue on the transformation of German Christian Democracy and sets the context for organisational and policy change in the CDU. As a starting point, it identifies both contemporary challenges to the CDU, locating its discussion within the wider literature on European Christian Democracy, and considers the extent to which these apply to the German case. It then outlines the key dimensions of the contemporary CDU which are examined in this collection.

Empowering local government or just passing the austerity buck? The changing balance of central and local government in welfare provision in England 2008–2015

ABSTRACT This paper asks two questions: first, how did the balance of decision-making between central and local government in welfare policy in England change between 2010 and 2015? Second, to what extent has that led to divergence in the extent and manner of such provision? It finds significant areas of policy where local flexibility has been increased (such as council tax benefit, crisis loans, and funding for specialist housing), either through a change in the tier of government responsible, or ‘unringfencing’ of grants allowing local authorities greater discretion in whether to deliver particular services, although in other important areas decisions on welfare remain firmly centralized. It also concludes that in areas where responsibility has been localized, divergence has been immediate and substantial. Localization may well reduce entitlements where local authorities enjoy a financial reward for so doing and political costs are low.

The SPD at the Bundestagswahl 2017: Die Hoffnung stirbt zuletzt?

As one of the Germany’s two Volksparteien, the SPD’s great hope, indeed its raison d’être, is to lead the German government. And for 20 of the post-war years it has done precisely that, under chancellors Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt, and Gerhard Schröder. However, since losing the chancellorship in 2005 the party has held two unenviable roles, either serving as the junior partner of Angela Merkel’s CDU in a grand coalition (from 2005 to 2009, and from 2013 to 2017), or forming the opposition. A year before the elections, the SPD looked to be in a difficult position. Although Angela Merkel was under some domestic pressure (notably that arising from the refugee crisis of 2015), the SPD did not appear to be benefiting. It had chalked up some policy successes (such as the introduction of a national minimum wage), but its position as minor coalition partner put it between a rock and a hard place: those who supported the government’s pragmatic, centrist agenda would back its leading party, the CDU/ CSU, while those who criticised the government from the left were not attracted to supporting a governing party. Indeed, the fragmentation of the German left (particularly with a growth in support for the Left Party) has been a major problem for the SPD, a process to which Chancellor Schröder’s package of welfare retrenchment, the Hartz reforms, served as a catalyst. Then, in early 2017, the party unexpectedly announced that Martin Schulz, the Speaker of the European Parliament and former leader of the Social Democrat group (S&D) there, would be the candidate for chancellor and would also take over the party leadership. The party enjoyed an immediate bounce in the polls: Schulz took the lead over Merkel as the preferred choice of chancellor in the polls in February and March, and he was elected unanimously to the leadership at the party conference in March 2017. It seemed Schulz might combine personal dynamism and political experience with being ‘untainted’ by direct involvement in the grand coalition or indeed the Hartz reforms under Schröder. However, this proved to be the high point of the SPD’s campaign. It lost three state elections – in the Saarland, Schleswig-Holstein, and, most bruising, in Schulz’s home state of North Rhine-Westphalia. The SPD dropped back in the polls. Any possibility of forming a Red–Red–Green coalition with the Greens and the Left Party receded (although it was never formally ruled out), and the only viable option to continue in government appeared to be a further term as Merkel’s junior partner. This became rather painfully obvious in the TV debate between Schulz and Merkel, where commentators noted the similarity of their positions. Tensions between the Bundestag group and Schulz occasionally surfaced, and Schulz periodically stumbled over issues of domestic