The far-right surges but it’s too close to call Portugal’s election

With almost all the votes counted, the centre-right DA party and centre-left SP party are almost equal whilst the far-right Chega party gain third place.

ADVERTISEMENT

Results so far at 2333 CET:

With 97% of the votes counted the results are:

The centre-right Democratic Alliance, a grouping led by the Social Democratic Party, has 29.19%.

The centre-left Socialist Party is running second with 28.6%.

Populist party Chega (Enough) is third with 18.33%.

You can follow the results from the Interior Ministry live here:

https://www.legislativas2024.mai.gov.pt/resultados/globais

The candidates react:

“Chega could reach more than 20 percent of the votes tonight. It’s an absolutely historic result”, André Ventura, the leader of the far-right party said. “The Portuguese clearly said they want a two-party government: Chega and the Democratic Alliance,” he added.

First exit poll at 2110 CET:

Earlier in the evening a widely regarded exit poll by the Catholic University/ RTP had put the centre-right ahead, and the far-right Chega party at 14%-17% of the vote.

The poll predicted 29-33% of the vote for the centre-right Democratic Alliance, a grouping led by the Social Democratic Party. The centre-left Socialist Party gathered 25-29%, the poll indicated.

Populist party Chega (Enough) may have got 14-17% in third place, it suggested, up from 7% at the last election in 2022, in a drift to the political right witnessed elsewhere in the European Union.

The poll by Portugal’s Catholic University was published by public broadcaster RTP and in previous elections has proved largely accurate.

The Centre for Studies and Opinion Polls (Cesop) at the university earlier estimated turnout at between 62 and 68 percent. In comparison, in the 2022 general election, it was 51.46 percent.

A US based analyst suggested that this could help the far-right Chega party.

The election at a glance

A slew of recent corruption scandals has tarnished the two parties that have alternated in power for decades — the centre-left Socialist Party and the centre-right Social Democratic Party, which is running with two small allies in a coalition it calls Democratic Alliance. Those traditional parties are still expected to collect most of the votes.

Public frustration with politics-as-usual had already been percolating before the outcries over graft. Low wages and a high cost of living — worsened last year by surges in inflation and interest rates — coupled with a housing crisis and failings in public health care contributed to the disgruntlement.

The election is taking place because Socialist leader António Costa resigned in November after eight years as prime minister amid a corruption investigation involving his chief of staff. Costa hasn’t been accused of any crime.

The Social Democrats, too, were embarrassed just before the campaign by a graft scandal that brought the resignation of two prominent party officials.

ADVERTISEMENT

Voting began at 8 a.m. (0800 GMT) and most ballot results were expected within hours of polling stations closing at 8 p.m. (2000 GMT).

The far-right factor

If the first exit poll is accurate, it means the Populist party Chega (Enough) has gained around seven percent more of the vote in this election – seemingly a bigger gain than any other party.

That suggests it will be the third most-voted party in a political shift to the right that has already been seen elsewhere in Europe. Spain and France have witnessed similar trends in recent years.

Chega could even end up in the role of kingmaker if a bigger party needs the support of smaller rivals to form a government.

Chega party leader Andre Ventura has cannily plugged into the dissatisfaction and has built a following among young people on social media. Just five years old, Chega collected its first seat in Portugal’s 230-seat Parliament in 2019. That jumped to 12 seats in 2022, and polls suggest it could more than double that number this time.

ADVERTISEMENT

Ventura says he is prepared to drop some of his party’s most controversial proposals — such as chemical castration for some sex offenders and the introduction of life prison sentences — if that opens the door to his inclusion in a possible governing alliance with other right-of-centre parties.

His insistence on national sovereignty instead of closer European Union integration and his plan to grant police the right to strike are other issues that could thwart his ambitions to enter a government coalition.

Ventura has had a colourful career. He has gone from a practicing lawyer and university professor specialising in tax law to a boisterous TV soccer pundit, an author of low-brow books and a bombastic orator on the campaign trail.

The president urges people to vote

Portuguese President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, largely a figurehead but whose formal consent is needed for a party to take power, urged people to vote because uncertain times in world affairs threatened the country’s wellbeing.

In a televised address to the nation on Saturday night, Rebelo de Sousa said the unpredictable outcome of elections later this year for the European Parliament and in the United States, as well as the war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East, could bring more economic difficulties.

ADVERTISEMENT

He said that “it is at grievous times like this that voting becomes more important.”

Will the low standard of  living be the decide factor?

Meanwhile, voters have expressed alarm at Portugal’s living standards as financial pressures mount.

An influx of foreign real estate investors and tourists seeking short-term rentals brought a spike in house prices, especially in big cities such as the capital Lisbon where many locals are being priced out of the market.

The economy feels stuck in a low gear. The Portuguese, who have long been among Western Europe’s lowest earners, received an average monthly wage before tax last year of around 1,500 euros — barely enough to rent a one-bedroom flat in Lisbon. Close to 3 million Portuguese workers earn less than 1,000 euros a month.

The number of people without an assigned family doctor, meantime, rose to 1.7 million last year, the highest number ever and up from 1.4 million in 2022.

ADVERTISEMENT

Source link

#farright #surges #close #call #Portugals #election

Hobart’s stadium ‘has some problems’ as Tasmania’s AFL deal becomes a political football

Tasmania’s bid for its own AFL team has been intertwined with a stadium at Macquarie Point ever since Gil McLachlan turned up in Hobart in 2022 and pointed at the grey, mostly-vacant land.

The deal was then formalised in writing last year when the AFL stipulated if there was no stadium, there would be no team.

But now, it’s become a key sticking point on the first day of the state election campaign, as both the Liberals and Labor try to shape the narrative over the deal — and whether it can be changed.

The price tag is at the centre of the debate.

Jeremy Rockliff says the AFL deal doesn’t need to be renegotiated.(ABC News: Maren Preuss)

The Tasmanian government set the total cost at $715 million in 2022, with a state contribution of $375 million, and the rest to come from the federal government, borrowings, and the AFL.

Since then, various stadia projects in Australia have experienced major cost blowouts.

But Premier Jeremy Rockliff is sure of his figures.

And in an attempt to prove this, he announced on Thursday that the state’s contribution would be capped at $375 million, and “not one red cent more”.

“What this clearly says is that we’ve drawn a line in the sand,” Mr Rockliff said.

The original cost estimates included $85 million from “borrowings” through commercial leases.

Mr Rockliff said the stadium would continue to rely on private investment to become viable.

“We are now open to the private sector to come in and invest in the precinct,” he said.

“We always said that will need to be an equity injection through the private sector.”

Two men in suits stand on a football field

Jeremy Rockliff and former AFL boss Gil McLachlan at the announcement of the Tasmanian team deal.(ABC News: Luke Bowden)

The contract with the AFL states that the Tasmanian government is “solely responsible” for cost overruns.

The federal government has already capped its contribution.

But Mr Rockliff said his price cap did not breach this part of the AFL deal.

“There’s no need to renegotiate the arrangements,” he said.

Labor wants AFL back at the negotiating table

Labor, on the other hand, has promised to bring the AFL back to the negotiating table.

Another aspect of the AFL deal is that the stadium must be ready by the 2028 season, or the Tasmanian club will start facing financial penalties.

Labor leader Rebecca White said both the cost estimate for Macquarie Point, and the 2028 deadline, needed to be revisited.

Rebecca White flanked by two other women at a press conference, standing before a microphone.

Rebecca White has promised to bring the AFL back to the negotiating table if Labor wins the election.(ABC News: Ashleigh Barraclough)

“It’s evident to everybody that you can’t build a stadium at Macquarie Point for that price, and in the timeline that the premier has said he can,” Ms White said.

She argued the premier’s price cap policy was an admission that the stadium would not come in under budget – and she questioned whether private investors would be lining up.

“Where are all the private investors coming from?” she said.

“The premier is dreaming if he thinks he’s going to pluck private investors out of thin air to prop up his pet project at Macquarie Point.”

It was unclear which aspects of the deal Labor would try to renegotiate.

The AFL did not respond directly to questions about whether the price cap was a breach of the deal, or if it would be willing to negotiate with a future Labor government.

Port area of a city with buildings, cars and hills in the background

The government is confident the stadium will fit on the Macquarie Point land.(ABC News: Maren Preuss)

AFL spokesperson Jay Allen said the club was proceeding as planned.

“The AFL’s position is that a clear requirement of the 19th licence is that the team is conditional on a new 23,000-seat roofed stadium at Macquarie Point,” he said.

“We look forward to the unveiling of the club’s name and colours in March.”

Stadium has some political problems 

Economist Saul Eslake believed the cap showed the premier had some issues to address.

“I think that’s a recognition from a political point of view that the stadium has some problems,” he said.

“I certainly think the AFL has extracted an extraordinarily high price from Tasmania, to have a team in the AFL.”

Economist Saul Eslake

Saul Eslake says private investors will be essential for the new stadium.(Four Corners)

It did not mean the stadium was cancelled, however.

Mr Eslake said that private investment was always going to be important for the project.

“If the government can attract private sector investment, or investment from super funds into this … I think there is a business case for entities like that to have some interest in it,” he said.

The group behind an alternative stadium proposal – on reclaimed land on the nearby Regatta Grounds – believes it has already secured private sector investment.

A artist's impression of a rounded silver building jutting into a river.

The alternative proposal for a waterfront stadium in Hobart put forward by a private consortium.(Supplied)

Proponent Dean Coleman has long been critical of the government’s $715 million price tag, arguing that a stadium would cost about $20,000 per square metre.

This would take the government’s proposal to $1.2 billion.

Mr Coleman said his group had private interest in its stadium proposal.

“We have written confirmation from three tier one financial corporations (including Australia’s largest investment bank) that want the opportunity to partner with the state government,” he wrote in a letter to the premier on Thursday.

“Unlike the stadium 1.0 proposal we can cap the cost at $750 million because our other components including the car park, hotel and apartment complex contribute significantly to the cost of the stadium.”

A concept design for different transportation modes at the Macquarie Point precinct.

The stadium was pitched as an “urban renewal project”, including improved infrastructure for the surrounding area.(Supplied: Macquarie Point Development Corporation)

The government’s stadium is being assessed by the Tasmanian Planning Commission.

At the conclusion of that process, it will require the approval of both houses of parliament – in the next term of government.

The Macquarie Point Development Corporation is appointing a quantity surveyor, which should provide an updated cost estimate for the stadium later this year.

LoadingLoading…

Source link

#Hobarts #stadium #problems #Tasmanias #AFL #deal #political #football

Everything you need to know about Serbia elections

The Serbian Parliament has 250 seats, and incumbent President Aleksandar Vučić will face off against his main opposition rivals from a right-wing bloc, and Belgrade Mayor Dragan Djilas.

ADVERTISEMENT

Serbia goes to the polls on Sunday 17 December in early parliamentary elections for the People’s Assembly of Serbia and for the provincial parliament of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina. 

People in more than 60 towns and cities will also vote, since the mayors of those municipalities resigned when the parliamentary elections were called.

Who are the main contestants?

Incumbents

On one side is the ruling coalition lead by the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) of the Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić. In the outgoing parliament this coalition, together with the supportive party of ethnic Hungarians had a comfortable majority of more than 150 deputies. The Serbian Parliament has 250 seats. This coalition has been ruling the country since 2012 when Aleksandar Vučić, having split from the nationalist Radical Party, lead the then new Progressive Party to victory. The second largest partner in the coalition is the Socialist Party of Serbia, once headed by the Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic who died in the Hague UN prison indicted for war crimes during the 90-ies wars in former Yugoslavia. 

During the previous decade the Vučić Party had significant success in economic development of the country, having built modern infrastructure, reduced unemployment and attracted foreign investment. But Vučić’s ruling style, where all the power in the country is centered in his office had him often branded populist autocrat. Both the European Parliament and the European Commission have addressed serious deficiencies in the Serbian democracy in all of their annual reports on the progress of Serbia towards the EU membership. Most complaints have to do with the rule of law and the freedom of the press. Vučić is often compared with the Hungarian PM Victor Orban with whom he has a very friendly relationship. Recently Vučić received a lot of flack from the European capitals and the US for refusing to join the western sanctions against Russia and openly stating his intention to maintain good relations with Moscow while condemning its attack on Ukraine.

Opposition

The opposition side is divided into two camps. The first is so-called pro-European opposition. The largest party there is the Freedom and Justice Party lead by the former mayor of Belgrade Dragan Djilas. This block includes civic, green and center-leftist parties whose programmes have the EU membership of Serbia in their focus. Their decade-long attempts to upset Vučić produced modest results. Some analysts point out that this is due to the lack of coherent programme or counter-offer to the voters. They themselves blame their sluggish performance on the fact that Vučić controls the national media, bashes them with his tabloid press and obstructs their work. In the outgoing parliament this block had around 40 deputies.

The second opposition block is that of the right-wing nationalists. They failed to agree on the pre-election coalition so they will face the voters in two camps. Both of them have similar programmes though. Apart from typically right-wing traditionalist, pro-family, pro-life, anti-abortion and anti-gay rhetoric a lot of their agenda is focused on Kosovo (a former Serbian province which declared independence in 2008, a move that Serbia refuses to accept). They say that saving the sovereignty over the “heart of Serbia” is the first of many reasons why the Serbs should say no to the EU membership. So far the parties from this part of the spectrum had around 20 deputies in the parliament.

Why are the elections early?

Indeed, why should a country with stable majority in the parliament and no crisis of government have a snap election? And not just one, but four in a row. The previous elections were last year.

Since the SNS came to power, this will be the seventh time that Serbian citizens have been called to the polls. Only once have the deputies had the chance to finish their four-year term.

“Vučić calls new elections when it suits him, when he perceives a decline in popularity or when he assumes that situations unfavourable to his government may arise in the future. By doing so, he manages to carve out room for maneuvre that allows him to postpone important decisions, primarily those concerning Kosovo,” wrote Antonela Riha, a well-known Serbian journalist and political analyst for Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa.

In the past, the opposition protested such elections, even boycotted them. This time around they demanded them albeit only for the Serbian and Belgrade parliaments.

“I solved neither side of this equation. I do not understand why the opposition demanded the elections, it’s a mystery to me. An even bigger mystery is why Vučić intended to have them anyhow. There is no crisis of the legitimacy of government which demands snap elections. You don’t have hundreds of thousands of people in the streets. When the people did take to the streets the leaders of the opposition addressing them shouted at Vučić: “Don’t you dare call the elections!”, says Ljilja Smajlovic, a journalist and political analyst.

What is at stake? Parliamentary electioned turned presidential

The opposition demanded the parliamentary elections be held separately from the Belgrade and Vojvodina ones and that Vučić does not lend his name to the campaigns he is not a candidate in. Vučić refused them flatly declaring the elections a confidence vote for him personally.

“If they (the opposition) win the elections I will give them the mandate but I shall no longer be the President because I would no longer be able to do anything for the citizens of Serbia. I want the people to know that…. I want the people to know that when they vote, they do not only vote for the list of deputies, they also vote for their president, they vote for me or against me, just like they (the opposition) say,” said Vučić on the campaign’s starting rally.

Is it all about Belgrade?

Opinion polls suggest that the ratings of the ruling parties are not in sharp decline in comparison to the previous elections. If the SNS can maintain the same or similar coalition they have now, they should not have a problem forming the next government.

But the capital city is the traditional stronghold of civic, liberal parties, currently in opposition. In previous Belgrade elections the SNS struggled to form the city government and managed only after repeated voting and after some opposition deputies defected to them. This is the closest race again and the important one. Belgrade is home to one quarter of the Serbian population and produces more than half of the country’s GDP. It is where the money is and winning Belgrade is generally seen as the prelude

to assuming power in the whole of the country. Pro-EU opposition is the strongest one but the nationalist one, along with the Socialists could still be the king-makers.

ADVERTISEMENT

What is on offer for voters?

Throughout the campaign the ruling SNS party has been trying to capitalize on the economic achievements. Hundreds of miles of new, modern highways, high-speed trains, refurbished schools and hospitals and constant influx of foreign investment.

“As of the beginning of October, we have 3.42 billion euro worth of new foreign direct investment this year. Last year was a record one, with 4.4 billion but I hope we will surpass that by the end of the year,” said Vučić on a rally inaugurating a new road in the northern Serbian province of Vojvodina.

Unemployment rate of 9.1% (projected by the IMF) is lower than in some EU member states and the economy growth was steady throughout the COVID pandemic and the war in Ukraine (this year projected at 2.5% by the Government). The government also boasts record hard currency and gold reserves as well as a small budget deficit of 3%. The only data that spoils the picture, especially because it makes life hard for the people, is the second highest inflation in Europe (Turkey excluded) of over 10% as of November.

The opposition focuses on the rule of law, media freedom and corruption, all three being the constant point of criticism in several successive reports on the progress of Serbia towards the EU membership by the European Commission and European Parliament issued so far.

“The new technical government should set aside differences, arrest all the crimnals, you see that crime is rampant. Policemen who fight and arrest the drug dealers will lead the police, not the ones who prevent them from doing so. Everyone’s property will be examined as well as business deals and tenders. And we will free the media,“ promised Djilas (in a Euronews Serbia programme).

ADVERTISEMENT

What was the campaign like?

With the elections having been turned into a no-confidence vote on Vučić’s rule, the lengthy 45-day campaign soon turned into trading insults and accusations. The opposition used their media to accuse Vučić of organizing crime and corruption and he fired back salvos from the media he controls, notably the high-circulation tabloids to portray opposition leaders as enemies of the people.

After a visit to Serbia, Council of Europe observers underlined that the election campaign is characterised by “an unprecedented level of negative language, scaremongering, attacks on the opposition and journalists and serious problems affecting the media”.

However, the physical fights between party activists and poster wars that happened in the past, were not reported so far.

With the opinion polls showing that most of the older voters are already decided and unlikely to change their minds, the politicians engaged younger ones including the first time voters. Vučić announced that high-school children would be given a 10.000 dinars (€90) of financial aid each and students’ newly established benefit cards topped up with 1.000 (€9). The opposition accused him of bribing the voters with the money from the budget. Vučić, along with some of his ministers, also opened a Tic Toc account where he performs memes.

With the opposition crying foul because of the electoral conditions the monitoring of elections will be crucial to eliminate the possibility of irregularities or claims of thereof. Observation promises to be abundant. All the participating parties are allowed to send observers to all the polling places. As usual OSCE, Council of Europe and the EU missions will observe the vote as will some of the Serbian NGOs.

ADVERTISEMENT



Source link

#Serbia #elections

Everything you need to know about the Dutch general election

As voters in the Netherlands go to the polls on 22 November, here’s everything you need to know about the election.

ADVERTISEMENT

The longest-serving prime minister in the Netherlands steps down after 13 years in office after elections this month. Mark Rutte will leave his office in The Hague and will replace it with a classroom.

He made the announcement in July after his government collapsed, plunging the Netherlands into an unexpected election campaign.

The country goes to the polls on 22 November in a snap general election called two years early.

Here’s everything you need to know about Dutch politics, parties, personalities and the issues at stake when the European country goes to the polls:

How did we get here?

Nicknamed ‘Teflon Mark’ for his ability to keep government crises at bay, or ‘Mr Normal’ for his simple lifestyle, Rutte’s resignation marks the end of an era for the country.

After three terms in office, immigration was the turning point that brought down his fourth coalition government.

For months, the prime minister had been working on a package of measures to reduce the flow of new immigrants to the Netherlands.

But infighting within the coalition government over limiting family reunification and creating a two-tier asylum system led him to throw in the towel.

Two of the four parties in the ruling coalition – the Democrats 66 (D66) and the Christian Union (CU) – opposed the bill, while the other two, the VVD and the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA), supported it.

The idea was to reduce the number of family members allowed to join asylum seekers in the country and to make families wait two years before they could be reunited.

A few days after the coalition collapsed, Rutte announced: “I will not stand as leader of my party [the right-wing liberals, VVD] in the next elections”.

“Rutte’s ability to build consensus, his ‘managerial style’ and his pragmatic way of doing politics, notwithstanding his ability to survive political scandals and fend off the far right, are certainly among the main reasons explaining his longevity in office,” Philippe Mongrain, a postdoctoral researcher at the Media, Movement and Politics Research Group at the University of Antwerp, told Euronews.

“Rutte has been able to stay in power in one of the most fragmented party systems in Europe by showing a willingness to compromise and demonstrating ideological flexibility when needed. Perhaps, his successors will follow a similar path. Perhaps not,” he added.

The big question now is: who will shake up Dutch politics after Rutte?

How do Dutch elections work?

Unlike other European countries, elections in the Netherlands are usually held on Wednesdays. This is done to increase voter participation.

In the open list system used in the Netherlands, each party presents a list of candidates on the ballot paper and citizens can choose which candidate to vote for.

To win a seat in the Dutch House of Representatives, the only threshold a party has to meet is the number of valid votes cast divided by 150, the number of seats in the chamber. This absence of a threshold is rare in the EU.

Dutch residents on the islands of Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten can only vote if they have lived in the Netherlands for at least 10 years or have worked in the Dutch civil service on one of these islands, according to the Dutch government’s voting page.

ADVERTISEMENT

Since the Second World War, the country has taken an average of 94 days to form a new coalition, but the last cabinet was the longest in post-war history. It took 299 days of negotiations to reach agreement.

Opinion polls suggest that at least three political parties will be needed to form a coalition government after the next election.

Which are the main parties?

The vote for the 150 seats in the lower house of parliament will usher in a new generation of leaders after key members of Rutte’s fourth ruling coalition also announced they were leaving politics.

Among them was the country’s deputy prime minister and leader of the left-liberal D66 party, Sigrid Kaag. She took the decision because of the impact on her family of the repeated threats she received while in office.

Of the 26 political parties contesting the elections, only 17 are currently represented in Parliament.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Dutch elections are among the most volatile in Western Europe,” says Mongrain.

According to the postdoctoral researcher, in contrast to the 2021 elections, the ruling VVD now has two close rivals: the new centre-right and anti-establishment Nieuw Sociaal Contract (NSC), founded in August by former independent and long-time Christian Democratic Appeal MP Pieter Omtzigt; and the joint list of the Labour Party and the Green Left, formed in July and led by Frans Timmermans, former vice-president of the European Commission.

The latest poll by I&O Research shows that these three parties are vying for power: Pieter Omtzigt’s NSC with 27% of the vote, the former prime minister’s party VVD with 26% and the coalition of the Green Left and the Labour Party with 25%.

“The former prime minister’s party, the VVD, is not in a particularly good position, but the premiership is certainly not out of reach, especially as Omtzigt seems to have ruled out taking the premiership if his party is successful,” says Mongrain.

“Omtzigt’s new party is attracting voters from several parties, including the VVD, CDA and D66, which could at least partly explain the somewhat disappointing performance of these parties in the voting intention polls,” he adds.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Farmer-Citizen Movement (BoerBurgerBeweging, BBB) is another party that made a strong showing in the recent regional elections.

The Rutte government’s anti-climate change policies affected the country’s farmers, and they turned out in force to protest.

Who is Omtzigt and why is he shaking up Dutch politics?

Pieter Omtzigt is one of the most popular conservative politicians in the Netherlands, and although he only founded his political party, NSC, two months ago, many are betting on him to win the elections.

The technocrat wants to bring radical change to the country: “We want to realise our ideals, not seek power for power’s sake,” the 49-year-old politician told reporters.

His popularity lies in his charisma and his fight against the political establishment.

ADVERTISEMENT

The former Christian Democratic Appeal MP, now an independent, became a martyr by leaving his party after writing a critical report on it.

Omtzigt played a key role in uncovering the child benefit scandal that led to the collapse of Rutte’s government in 2021.

The Dutch tax authorities had used an algorithm to create risk profiles to detect tax fraud. Based on these indicators, the authorities penalised families simply on suspicion of fraud.

Tens of thousands of families from the most disadvantaged backgrounds were left with debts they could not pay.

His track record of exposing what happened and investigating political scandals has positioned him as a rising star, but will he be able to seize his moment?

ADVERTISEMENT

What is on the voters’ minds?

When asked what keeps the Dutch voter awake at night, there are three clear winners: purchasing power, migration and the Dutch healthcare system, according to recent research by AD Nieuws.

As Mongrain points out, monthly food inflation was approaching 20% at the beginning of the year and is currently around 10%, according to Statistics Netherlands, a significant burden for Dutch consumers.

“In order to maintain consumer purchasing power and fund the healthcare system, many voters see cutbacks on migration as a viable solution to free up public funds,” he adds.

Over 40% of voters surveyed by AD believe that too much money is spent on the system of resettling asylum seekers in the country, as well as other financial costs associated with migration.

Housing shortages, energy transition and climate change are also on voters’ minds ahead of the election later this month.



Source link

#Dutch #general #election

Are Polish elections taking place on a (grossly) uneven playing field?

By Wojciech Sadurski, Professor, University of Sydney Law School, University of Warsaw

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

The ruling authoritarians have fundamentally subverted democracy, including the electoral process. For the democratic opposition to win, it will almost take a miracle, Wojciech Sadurski writes.

ADVERTISEMENT

While it is impossible to predict today who will win the parliamentary elections in Poland in a few weeks, one thing is sure: these will not be fair elections. 

Free, perhaps, but not fair. The right-wing populist incumbents have tilted the playing field so that the opposition is denied an equal opportunity in the electoral contest. And it’s not even close.

The elections to be held on 15 October will determine the future of Poland — and, in the process, of the European Union and Europe more broadly — for many years, perhaps decades to come. 

If the incumbent Law and Justice or PiS party is re-elected, the populist-authoritarian regime in Poland since 2015 will enter into a stage of comfortable consolidation. 

After two consecutive parliamentary and presidential elections over the last eight years, PiS leader Jarosław Kaczyński will be on a safe road to emulate his role model, Viktor Orbán of Hungary.

Can Pis skew the dead heat race to its own advantage?

As Kaczyński and his closest collaborators have made abundantly clear, his party needs a third consecutive mandate in order to complete its “reforms” — read: capture or disable the last remaining traces of pluralism and institutional independence, such as some recalcitrant judges or private media and NGOs critical of the ruling elite. 

Poland will radically loosen ties with the EU, perhaps all the way down to “Polexit”. 

If one wants to see a blueprint for Kaczyński’s program for the third term, today’s Hungary offers a good insight into — in Kaczyński’s own words — the “Budapest in Warsaw”  scenario. It is not a pretty picture.

The election results cannot be foreseen today: it’s too close to call. PiS, together with its likely government coalition partner, the extreme right-wing Konfederacja or Confederation, scores in opinion polls about the same as the three democratic opposition parties combined: the centrist Civic Coalition, the Left, and the centre-right Trzecia Droga or Third Way.

But the democratic opposition’s marginal lead may be easily wiped out by the peculiarities of the electoral system, which penalises fragmented oppositions — as the democrats in Poland, unfortunately, are. 

More importantly, it is likely to be eviscerated by how PiS has skewed the playing field to its advantage, in a big way.

A referendum amid elections?

The main dirty trick is combining parliamentary elections with a “referendum”: a propaganda hoax and a shameless money grab. 

The referendum, held at the same time and in the same locations as the elections, will have four questions — all loaded, and all based on false factual premises. 

For instance, there is a question about accepting thousands of illegal migrants as a result of “the forced relocation mechanism imposed by the European bureaucracy”. The other three referendum questions are similarly disingenuous.

None of the questions is asked in good faith, and none seek a popular response about legislation contemplated by either the government or the opposition. 

They are no one’s policies, but the referendum insinuates a stark choice between the government which condemns them and the opposition to which PiS attributes them, falsely. 

In this sense, an intimate connection exists between the electoral campaign and the referendum questions. 

The referendum serves to amplify all the fears that PiS is exploiting in its campaign. It is not distinguishable from that campaign but is part and parcel of it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Last-minute changes to electoral rules and overburdened diaspora ballot commissions

Yet, here’s the thing: the referendum opens up virtually unlimited campaign finances. PiS has access to greater financial assets than the opposition, having captured all the key state-owned industries. 

But there are some campaign limits, policed by the Election Committee, which apply to elections but not to referenda. 

So, under the disguise of the referendum campaign, virtually unlimited funds will go to the PiS election campaign.

That is not all. In the eleventh hour before the elections, PiS pushed through a change in electoral district rules, creating many new districts in villages and small towns. 

This is nothing short of gerrymandering: the countryside and small towns are the main reservoir of PiS political support. 

ADVERTISEMENT

At the same time, PiS makes it more difficult for the Polish diaspora, especially in the UK and Western Europe, where the greatest numbers of émigré Poles live, to vote and have their votes counted. 

Ballot commissions in places such as London or Dublin will be overburdened with voters, but under the new rules, the commissions will have to proceed in a more time-consuming way — all members of the commission must look at every single ballot, one at a time — and must complete all their paperwork within 24 hours. 

Simulations prove this will be virtually impossible in some districts, especially with the added effort needed to serve the referendum. 

And yes, you guessed it: the Polish diaspora in the UK and other EU member states have voted predominantly for anti-PiS parties in recent years.

‘No one will give you as much as PiS can promise’

Good old-fashioned pork-barrel policies are in full swing: PiS has been throwing gifts at its usual clients since late spring this year, and over time, the speed and the size of those presents have grown exponentially. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Upgrading of family subsidies, an extra monthly pension to retirees (aka the 14th pension), a ludicrous cut in interest rates by the subservient central bank, an artificially low level of petrol prices maintained against the worldwide trends by the state-controlled oil company Orlen — you name it, they’ll give it. 

The long-term disastrous effects of these policies don’t count; what matters is instant gratification by the electorate. 

As the saying in Poland goes: “No one will give you as much as PiS will promise”.

The central imbalance, though, is in the media scene. Public media in Poland are “public” only in name and the source of their financing — through taxpayers’ money. 

In their contents, they are one-sided, aggressive governmental propaganda outfits addressed against the opposition.

ADVERTISEMENT

The vulgarity and partisanship of TVP — the state-controlled broadcaster, which has a monopoly in some areas of the country — is difficult to describe; especially in pre-election times, it becomes a non-stop electoral propaganda machine. 

‘The Law to Take Out Tusk’

It airs all the PiS official events, including Kaczyński’s speeches, but never goes live for an opposition rally with the leader of the main opposition party, Donald Tusk. 

The Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza reports that on a randomly chosen recent date, Tusk was shown five times in the main evening news on TVP, always in a negative light (including a historic photo with Russia’s Vladimir Putin), while Kaczyński appeared eight times, always positively portrayed.

This is a long list, but “The Law to Take Out Tusk” also merits a mention: setting up a kangaroo court tasked with demonstrating that the leader of the main opposition party has been acting under the influence of Russians. 

The venerable Venice Commission has already warned that the new body may become a tool to eliminate political opponents. 

ADVERTISEMENT

This is a tool Kaczyński may well activate any time now if the polls look bad to him. Nor have I mentioned the new chamber of the Supreme Court peopled only with judges handpicked by the ruling party, which will have the last word on the legality of election results. 

On top of that, there is also the issue of illegal use by the secret services of surveillance devices, such as Pegasus spyware, against the opposition.

Would opposition victory be a miracle?

So, whatever the outcome of the elections in Poland that you hear about on or just after 15 October, remember that the field will have been badly skewed in favour of the current rulers. 

The ruling authoritarians have fundamentally subverted democracy, including the electoral process. 

For the democratic opposition to win, it will almost take a miracle. But perhaps it’s not hopeless. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Miracles happen, especially in Poland.

Wojciech Sadurski is a Professor at the University of Sydney Law School and the  University of Warsaw’s Center for Europe. He is the author of “A Pandemic of Populists”(Cambridge 2022).

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#Polish #elections #place #grossly #uneven #playing #field

Here’s How Much 2024 Presidential Candidate Larry Elder Is Worth

Larry Elder has spent his life chasing the limelight. His yearning for stardom transported him from L.A.’s struggling South Central to its glamorous Hollywood Hills—but also took him to the brink of financial ruin.

By Monica Hunter-Hart, Contributor


Larry Elder pitches his presidential campaign as an act of personal sacrifice. “I’m not flush like some of the other candidates, so this is a big financial hit for me,” says the California media icon, who Forbes estimates is worth $4 million. “I gave up my nationally syndicated column. I gave up my radio show. I gave up my TV show.”

But if Elder’s career is any indication, running for president might not prove to be a big sacrifice after all. For years, he has chased brighter lights and bigger platforms. That’s how he became an entrepreneur, swerved into media, then emerged as a contender in the California governor recall election. His career shifts haven’t always produced immediate success, but they have led to million-dollar opportunities over time. At 71 years old, Elder is surely savvy enough to know that he is not likely to end up as the next president. But he’s also taken enough risks to learn that he has plenty to gain by trying.

The son of a janitor, Elder grew up the second of three brothers in L.A.’s South Central neighborhood. He graduated high school near the top of his class in 1970 and headed to Brown University, where he studied political science. Law school at the University of Michigan followed, and then a job at the prominent Cleveland firm Squire, Sanders & Dempsey (now known as Squire Patton Boggs).

Unsatisfied with the pace of advancement—he told the libertarian magazine Reason in 1996 that “I wanted to make more money, and I wanted to make it faster”—he left the firm after a few years to start his own headhunting business, Laurence A. Elder and Associates. By 1988, he was making enough to buy two homes, a $167,000 condo in Cleveland and a $550,000 house in Hollywood Hills.


California Dreaming

Larry Elder has thrown millions at Los Angeles real estate over the years. He lost one home in a foreclosure but held onto another and inherited a third.


But he remained unfulfilled. Elder’s real interest lay with political and cultural commentary, so he began cultivating a new career, starting with guest appearances on the radio and a stint hosting a PBS show. At a time when racial tensions were high—his parents’ home was just a mile from the spot where riots broke out in the wake of the 1991 Rodney King beating—Elder attracted attention by arguing that racism was no longer a significant problem in the United States.

In 1993, he nabbed the job for which he would become known: host of a show on the Los Angeles radio station KABC. His fiery takes about race, including rants against affirmative action (of which he admits he was a beneficiary), quickly shot him to notoriety. KABC briefly shortened his time slot in 1997, reinstating it after a conservative group reportedly spent hundreds of thousands on ads accusing the station of prejudice. Onlookers speculated that activist pressure on advertisers to boycott Elder’s show might have influenced the waffling. In 2000, Elder released his first book, The Ten Things You Can’t Say In America, which spent two weeks on the New York Times bestseller list.

With fame came luxury. By the end of that year, Elder had offloaded his existing properties, selling both at a slight loss. Undeterred, he splurged on an upgrade, paying $1.65 million for his current home and financing the entire purchase price. He ended up with a lavish property that features an infinity pool looking over the city, but also the beginning of a series of financial issues. The federal government briefly placed a lien on the property months after Elder bought it, saying he owed $47,000 in income taxes. Elder says the IRS made a mistake; the agency declined to comment on the case.

“I’ve never not paid taxes,” Elder says. “I don’t have any tax liens. I’m current in everything. I’m not a tax deadbeat. I pay off my credit cards, 100% every single month. I don’t even have any credit card fees.”

As Elder’s media opportunities multiplied—he kept up his long-running radio gig, published a new book and hosted shows for MSNBC and Warner Brothers—he got even more aggressive with real estate. In May 2007, near the peak of the U.S. property bubble, Elder took out two new loans against his house, piling on $3.2 million of debt. The next month, he used the entity that held his Hollywood Hills home to purchase a second Los Angeles property, paying $3.6 million and borrowing another $2.9 million.

His timing could not have been much worse. Two years later, the housing market was in crisis and Elder was short on cash. He defaulted on the second home. His lenders confiscated the property, selling it at auction for $2.4 million in 2010. By then his debt load on the place measured over $3 million, apparently leaving Elder to come up with roughly $600,000 out of pocket.

He almost lost his other house, too. His creditor started issuing notices of default in 2011, declaring that Elder wasn’t paying back his debt there, either. He fought back. Claiming financial hardship, Elder successfully appealed for a mortgage modification plan in 2014, requiring him to pay $6,000 a month initially and up to $10,000 per month by 2018.

As all of this was going on, Elder was also experiencing a rocky period at work. KABC dropped him briefly in 2008, then permanently in 2014. He moved onto other outlets and settled in at the conservative network Salem Radio.

“Wow,” he says when asked about his financial troubles. “All I can tell you is that I am a homeowner. I am somebody that has lived in the same house since 2000.”

Elder did indeed manage to hang on. Today, he owes an estimated $2.7 million on his home loan. The value of the property, which he purchased for $1.65 million in 2000, now stands at an estimated $5 million. Elder’s interest, therefore, amounts to roughly $2.3 million net of debt—making it, by far, his most valuable holding.

In 2021, after years of flirting with the idea of entering politics but flinching at the pay, Elder finally gave it a shot. He threw his name into the hat in California’s 2021 recall election against Governor Gavin Newsom. Elder won more votes than any other replacement candidate, though he fell well short of the tally needed to oust the governor.

But politicians have plenty of ways to make money beyond collecting government paychecks. In 2022, Elder created a federal political action committee. The group has so far raised $1.8 million and spent more than 90% of that on operating costs, including $150,000 to pay Elder personally. He also joined former housing secretary Ben Carson and country music singer John Rich to open a “cancel-proof” bank named Old Glory. The institution launched in May and claims to have over 100,000 clients. It recently started a loan program and its balance sheet remains small (executive Eric Ohlhausen says it has over $60 million in assets). Elder listed the value of his stake at over $1 million on a financial disclosure form, which would make it the second-biggest asset in his portfolio.

He doesn’t own much else. Elder has a SAG-AFTRA pension from his radio days and inherited a 50% stake in his parents’ home. On the disclosure, which records the value of assets in broad ranges, he lists $15,000 to $50,000 worth of stock in a liver disease and cancer research company as well as a $100,000 to $250,000 stake in the Black News Channel, now called TheGrio.

The exposure he gains from this run could create more opportunities for him soon, like speaking appearances, media plays or business deals. Plus, there’s always the chance that Donald Trump might be looking for a fellow media-savvy, controversy-courting politician to serve as his running mate. “If I’m not the party nominee,” says Elder, “and if Trump or some other nominee calls me, I will not let the call go to voicemail.”

MORE FROM FORBES

MORE FROM FORBESHere’s How Much Mike Pence Is WorthMORE FROM FORBESHere’s How Much 2024 Presidential Candidate Asa Hutchinson Is WorthMORE FROM FORBESHow Nikki Haley Built An $8 Million Fortune (And Helped Bail Out Her Parents)MORE FROM FORBESHow 2024 Presidential Candidate Francis Suarez Built A $6 Million FortuneMORE FROM FORBESHere’s How Much Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Is Worth

Source link

#Heres #Presidential #Candidate #Larry #Elder #Worth

In Zimbabwe, Zanu-PF are trying to steal the election again

It is imperative that the EU, UK, US and other democratic voices help Zimbabwe stand tall and show the rest of Africa that the retreat of democracy is not inevitable, Lord Oates writes.

Long-time observers of Zimbabwe will feel a strong sense of déjà vu ahead of Wednesday’s parliamentary and presidential elections. 

ADVERTISEMENT

An ageing leader is boxed in by an economic crisis. He clings to power in the face of deep unpopularity by clamping down on opposition activists and stifling media freedom. 

Fears mount that the president will refuse to leave office even if he is defeated, and will try to steal the election through spreading misinformation and intimidating his political enemies.

When Emmerson Mnangagwa succeeded Robert Mugabe in a palace coup backed by the army six years ago, those who did not know — or chose to ignore — Mnangagwa’s blood-soaked history had high hopes that he would bring political reform. 

Instead, democratic space has been further shut down as the president’s repressive rule deepens the suffering of ordinary Zimbabweans.

It’s not the first time this is happening

Faced with triple-digit inflation, a sinking currency, and billions of external debt, Mnangagwa can barely pay teachers or nurses, or provide food to almost half of the population living in rural areas who are at risk of hunger. 

He has responded to his growing unpopularity by harassing and detaining opposition activists, trade unionists and journalists.

The opposition, Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC), fears a rerun of the last presidential elections, in 2018, when a widely predicted opposition victory crumbled to dust.

Zimbabwe’s politicised electoral commission mysteriously delayed the announcement of the official results for five days. 

 In this fog of confusion, Zanu-PF were awarded hundreds of thousands more votes than election observers had seen being cast at polling stations. 

When voters took to the streets to protest, Mnangagwa’s security forces opened fire on civilians at random, killing six.

This time around, the EU has sent 150 election observers, and the Carter Center in the US has deployed 30 observers to observe polling, counting, and tabulation on election day. 

ADVERTISEMENT

This presence, together with a nationwide system in which volunteers will count the number of votes cast, should make attempts to steal the elections harder.

‘Patriotic Law’, intimidation and violence

But the opposition have formidable obstacles in their way. Mnangagwa recently imposed the “Patriotic Law”, which threatens anyone who is deemed to be “wilfully injuring the sovereignty and national interest of Zimbabwe” with the death penalty. 

This has had a dampening effect on free speech, making opposition politicians and activists fearful of engaging with international media. 

Under another new law, NGOs can also be summarily banned, or their leadership replaced, with no recourse to the courts.

The election campaign has been marked by widespread intimidation and violence against opposition supporters, the banning and obstruction of political rallies, and candidates burnt out of their homes. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Recently, an opposition campaigner, Tinashe Chitsunge, was brutally murdered.

The greatest barrier to the election of an alternative government is the capture of the Electoral Commission by Zanu-PF. 

 It is currently packed with party supporters, run by a retired army general, who has been accused of passing on voter data to Zanu-PF, which they have used to send campaign text messages to voters. 

Such information, needless to say, is not available to the opposition. This has been combined with attempts to deregister opposition candidates, fewer polling stations in districts where the opposition are strong, and a state-controlled media that barely offers airtime to the opposition.

The question may be asked: if democracy is under such sustained attack, how can the rest of the world support the Zimbabwean people?

ADVERTISEMENT

Ignoring the issues won’t win friends in Africa

Firstly, we must pressure Western governments not to cave in and legitimise an election that has been stolen. 

 China is buying up lithium mines in Zimbabwe — the continent’s largest producer of the mineral — to provide components for batteries in electric cars. 

 It, and other authoritarian states, do so with the advantage that they avoid accusations that they are lecturing Africans on human rights. 

The West, which also wants access to these resources, may be tempted to mirror this behaviour.

But this would set a terrible precedent. Zimbabwe and its people cannot live better lives until the rule of law is restored, and free and fair elections can legitimately take place. 

Ignoring democratic shortcomings will not win friends for the West in Africa or secure a brighter future for Zimbabweans.

Western countries are understandably nervous about standing in judgement on African politics, given their history of colonialism. 

However, ignoring extrajudicial killings, torture, arbitrary arrests, summary trials, censorship, bans on assembly, and obvious vote-rigging by Zanu PF, will not atone for past oppression inflicted under colonial rule.

Democratic voices need to step in

The elections offer hope to millions of Zimbabweans that there might be a brighter future. And there is reason for some optimism. 

In neighbouring Zambia, the political opposition recently managed to win and secure a democratic transition.

Such a path exists for Zimbabwe, in the event of a free and fair election bringing about democratic change. 

But to help this come about, it is imperative that the EU, UK, US and other democratic voices, offer a swift plan to ease some of the country’s international debt burdens and help with the democratic transition. 

By doing so, they can help Zimbabwe stand tall and show the rest of Africa that the retreat of democracy is not inevitable.

Lord Oates is a member of the UK House of Lords and Co-Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Zimbabwe. He taught in rural Zimbabwe in the late 1980s.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#Zimbabwe #ZanuPF #steal #election

We need EU-wide voting to make European ideals a reality

By Damian Boeselager, European Parliament Member

Every citizen of any of the 27 EU member states should be able to vote for any other EU citizen up for election. This is what the European Union stands for — all of us being equal, Damian Boeselager writes.

A year before the European elections, anti-EU parties are on the rise again. 

In their upcoming campaigns, they will try to convince people that the EU is far away and that Europeans are better off without it. 

And, of course, they will point towards the seemingly opaque decision-making procedures of a confusing technocratic government: how was European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen elected? What are the EU government’s main building blocks? Who sits in the European Parliament?

Many people don’t know the answers to these questions. I admit that before becoming politically active, I would not have been able to name a single European Parliament member. 

Today, I am still aware of how little people my age know about the European Union. 

However, I believe this is as much an issue of trust as it is one of knowledge. Even if many of us do not know the national system well, we often still trust it more than what some see as the “obscure corridors of power” in Brussels.

So how can we bridge this gap?

Crises don’t care for borders

First, global trends make the need for European cooperation more pressing, and recent events have shown that us standing together is elementary to all of us. 

Europe has finally seen that national politics are not enough to handle crises that don’t know of or care for borders between our nations. 

In fact, we have learned that European citizens in Lithuania can be just as affected by the same emergency as those in Portugal, for example.

Over the past decades, a European financial and banking crisis, a refugee emergency, a devastating pandemic, Russia’s all-out war against Ukraine, and climate-related disasters have made national answers look less relevant. 

During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments rushed to help each other, for example, at the border of France and Germany. Nurses from Romania were deployed to Italy amid the worst peak of the pandemic.

But it was the EU that ensured borders remained open for essential goods such as pharmaceutical products, masks, and food. 

And it was the EU — with the approval of national health ministers — that ensured we have vaccines produced and distributed across the continent.

After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, our union showed unprecedented solidarity and goodwill toward Ukrainians, our fellow Europeans who are still not a part of our union — at least for now.

The bad habit of stealing the union’s thunder

However, the bad habit of national politicians taking credit for EU achievements and blaming national mistakes on Europe stands against this trend. I personally experienced this in my negotiations for the BlueCard visa programme. 

We updated this visa —a special residence permit issued to highly qualified foreign workers — on the EU level to be more attractive to IT personnel and to allow for more freedom of movement. 

But just this month, the German government marketed these improvements as part of their new “skilled migration package”. 

We should not be surprised if people don’t know about the achievements of the EU if everyone on the national level actively tries to hide them. And usually, the belief in our union pays the price.

The EU is all about everyone being equal

Elections play a crucial role in building trust between politicians and their voters. 

That’s why I worked on a new law for the EU elections to strengthen that bond. With a couple of other people, I supported the idea that we shouldn’t only vote for national parties but also get the choice of who we want to support on the European level. 

After all, the European factions form the powerhouses in the European Parliament and decide on many important issues. They should be held accountable with our vote. 

This idea that became known as “transnational lists” would also have additional positive side effects where European political parties would gain further visibility, we could have multiple nationalities on the same party list, and we could measure the success of the European parties against their election promises.


People would be able to have their say on whether they want a more conservative or progressive Europe, regardless of whether they like their national conservative or progressive party or not. 

And most importantly: every citizen of any of the 27 EU member states could vote for any other EU citizen up for election. 

This is what the European Union stands for — all of us being equal. In fact, it embodies the promise of the “European dream” we all believe in.

We need to work together as one united continent

That’s why it’s a shame that our idea of European lists has been stalled among the 27 relevant national ministers. 

Some people argue that an additional vote for European lists would only create seats for representatives who are too far away from voters and the issues that matter to them the most. 

But let’s be honest: would another 28 MEPs — on top of the existing 705 — coming from member states other than those of their voters be different compared to the existing European parties wielding power in the European Parliament when it comes to responsibility and accountability? 

I honestly think it’s quite the opposite. As voters would become more involved by the nature of the fact that they would be made to choose their representative at the European level, they would also be inclined to demand more clarity and presence from European politicians and administration. 

Europeanisation of elections could bring a much-needed more profound understanding of the union’s functioning, its past, present, and future, and could further the fact that we need to work together as one united continent.  

It is sad that due to national party interests, our European democracy operates well below its potential. 

As an MEP, I can promise to continue to fight for a better European democracy — and after the next elections, I am confident we will have additional friends in the house to make an even bigger difference and try and bring fellow Europeans closer again. 

Damian Boeselager (Greens/EFA) is a Member of the European Parliament (MEP).

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#EUwide #voting #European #ideals #reality

Finland election: The issues making headlines on the campaign trail

The latest election polling in Finland is too close to call between the incumbent Social Democrats, the conservative National Coalition Party and the far-right nationalist Finns Party. 

Any one of those parties could find themselves in pole position to lead a new government when all the votes are counted. 

Every policy question is being closely scrutinised by the media, every media gaffe or public slip-up is being pounced upon, and the three main party leaders — Sanna Marin, Petteri Orpo, Riikka Purra — are under the microscope like never before. 

So what are some of the main policy strengths and weaknesses the parties face? 

This election season it’s more about traditional party ideology — left versus right — than values-based issues like the environment, equality, or even joining NATO, which is now done and dusted. 

Marin’s Social Democrats have been under fire from right-wing opponents for what they see as wasteful economic policies that have done nothing but add to Finland’s debt burden in an irresponsible way over the last four years. 

And Marin herself has come under fire for comments she made during a recent trip to Kyiv, and not just from rival politicians. Commercial television channel MTV3 wrote an editorial branding her “either completely ignorant or downright unscrupulous” for saying that Finland “could” talk about giving up its Hornet fighters to Ukraine, with the Nordic nation waiting for deliveries of their next generation fighters from the US starting in 2025. 

The country’s most-read newspaper Helsingin Sanomat went as far as to say the Hornet issue (Finnish politicians can be particularly prickly around discussions of national security) could tip the balance of Sunday’s election. 

There’s also regular criticism that Marin rarely — if ever — takes responsibility for policy missteps and instead likes to pass the blame on to her opponents (which, to be fair, is something that most politicians try to do!) 

The National Coalition Party — or Kokoomus as it’s known locally — has been criticised by politicians and economists who say its plans to balance the national budget simply don’t add up, and they’ll have to cut so deeply into basic services that it would hurt the lives of everyone in the country.

This week, economist Jussi Ahokas told public broadcaster Yle that Finland is “in a very good situation” compared to European countries when it comes to finances.

Kokoomus also has a problem that it’s seen by many — and repeatedly framed by Marin — as being too close to the far-right nationalists: and if you vote for Kokoomus, you’ll end up with a Finns Party government. 

For their part, the Finns Party are perennially dogged by allegations of racism and xenophobia among their candidates; they’ve promised to take Finland out of the EU in one manifesto, while at the same time also said that’s not their goal any more.

Their humourless leader Riikka Purra drew astonished gasps by saying on TV that culture was a “luxury” item – a hard sell in a country which revels in its rich literary, musical and visual arts scene: from small-town libraries to big international festivals and all points in between.

But what do election candidates on the streets, in the market places and in shopping centres talk to voters about?

Ahead of Sunday’s election, Euronews spoke with candidates on the campaign trail to find out which policies are most important to them, and where their opponents are falling short.

Finland’s Minister for Transport and Communications Timo Harakka tells Euronews that his political opponents have dropped the ball when it comes to education policies. 

“Kokoomus has been in charge through the 2010s when Finland cut education and research and development funding, and fell behind in percentage of college graduates. 

They broke their explicit promise not to cut education in 2015 and removed the right for every child to attend pre-school,” the Social Democrat MP explains.

“They opposed the Marin government’s school reform, which extended compulsory education until 18-years-old, just as they opposed equal comprehensive education back in the 1970s. 

“Again, now, they vow otherwise. They cannot make the cuts they propose without jeopardising our good school system,” he says. 

Green candidate Alviina Alametsä says that her party has put a particular focus on mental health services. 

“We are pushing different ways to prevent mental health issues including with universal basic income, and the wellbeing of nature,” she tells Euronews. 

Alametsä, who is one of Finland’s two Green MEPs in Brussels, says that programmes like one in Helsinki where three clinics provide therapy for free, are a good example of the concrete changes they’d like to see. 

“I am worried though, that if the National Coalition Party is making it to government, or if they are the prime minister, I am worried they will put a lot of cuts to education and mental health budgets, and to social security.”

“I think they are trying to push for economic growth from the wrong angle, and we have research to show this is not working.” 

National Coalition Party politician Sinuhe Wallinheimo represents a constituency in Central Finland, and says that other parties aren’t concerned enough about the economic “crisis” in Finland. 

“And by that I mean the amount of debt that Finland has right now, and what has to be done about it,” he tells Euronews. 

“I think in my party we are better at pro-market politics than the other ones. We rely on the state but we believe in pro-market and competition between individuals, and competition between the companies, which is better for society,” he adds. 

“When we discuss immigration policy, I believe our party understands the facts,” says Fatim Diarra, who is a Green League candidate in Helsinki. 

“We need people to come to Finland, but at the same time we cannot treat immigrants as cows we milk to put money into the system. But instead, we must see Finland as a place where we welcome people to build a life to suit their circumstances,” she tells Euronews.

Diarra, who missed out on a seat in parliament in the 2019 election by just 200 votes, says that people who come to Finland to make a better life for themselves need access to education and labour markets, and shouldn’t only be thought of as candidates for low paid jobs. 

“Some parties see immigration only as a tool to make people work for Finns. When I discuss this with people from some parties, they want immigrants to work in the service industry and health care.

“They see immigration as a cheap labour force, but this is not the way the Greens see it. Finland is a good country, our social structure is strong and we welcome people to come here and build a good life for themselves.” 

The city of Jyväskylä in Central Finland has traditionally been a bastion of support for the Centre Party, Keskusta. Once a powerhouse of Finnish politics, Keskusta has slumped dramatically over the last four years despite being in government, and they’re now polling their lowest ever numbers. 

They are predicted to lose up to ten seats on Sunday. 

MP Joonas Könttä, a former Finnish diplomat, says his party’s focus has been on “aluepolitikka” or regional policies. 

“We want to take care of the countryside and the cities, so the same level of services are available all over the country,” he tells Euronews. 

“No other parties are underlining the possibilities of the whole country.”



Source link

#Finland #election #issues #making #headlines #campaign #trail

Estonia election analysis: Why liberals won, and the far-right lost

The votes are all tallied, the winners declared, and the dust is settling on Estonia’s first election since the COVID pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine is over. 

The makeup of the next parliament – Riigikogu – looks familiar but also different: at the previous election in 2019 there were five parties represented, but now six parties have made it over the 5% threshold and returned MPs. 

Now talks begin to form the next government and here’s where PM Kaja Kallas is hoping history doesn’t repeat itself: in 2019 her Reform Party won the most seats in parliament but she was outflanked by right-wing parties who went on to form a coalition of their own. 

So what did we learn from the campaign and the elections? Here’s our key takeaways: 

1. Strong new madate for Kaja Kallas and her Reform Party

Incumbent Prime Minister Kaja Kallas had a strong night, with her centre-right Reform Party picking up three new seats, while opponents further right in the political spectrum suffered losses. Estonia’s public broadcaster ERR called it a “landslide” win as Reform extended its lead over the far-right EKRE party to 15 seats. 

The win, Kallas said, “also shows that Estonians overwhelmingly value liberal values, security founded on EU and NATO, and firm support to Ukraine.”

The new liberal bloc which has now emerged in Estonian politics could in theory mean that Reform would only need the support of one other party to form a majority government, but Kaja Kallas talked on the campaign trail about the need for building sustainable and solid alliances with other parties, so she’s likely to look at two other parties with similar values to form her coalition: Estonia200 and the Social Democrats. 

2. Big breakthrough for Estonia200 party

At the last general election in 2019, the Estonia200 party fell just short of the 5% threshold to return MPs to parliament. At the regional elections they sharpened their message, targeted seats in urban areas in particular where they felt their strengths and core support lay, and now translated this into national success with 14 seats in the Riigikogu — and a likely spot in government. 

So why has this liberal, centre-right party resonated now with voters? Party co-founder Kristina Kallas (no relation to Kaja Kallas) tells Euronews that her party succeeded by appealing to people across the political spectrum. 

“At this election, people were looking for the option of a new, liberal force,” says Kallas. 

“In Tartu, where I campaigned, it’s not just young liberal progressive voters worried about populism, it was also quite elderly people who might not be value-liberal as we understand it, but populism was also something they didn’t want,” she explains. 

“Estonia200 brought more liberal voters out to vote, and to vote for a new party,” says Kallas. 

3. Parties on the right took a fall in support

“This year it seems to be more important who doesn’t get the votes, than who does,” one Estonian voter told Euronews on election day, and that feeling seems to have prevailed with a liberal, values-based centre-right bloc emerging strongly, while parties with more traditional views (Centre Party and Isamaa) or more polarising policies (EKRE) took a hit. 

“Reform Party and EKRE presented themselves as the main opponents in the election, calling for supporters of other parties to vote for them to make sure that the other one does not stand a chance to become a prime minister’s party,” explains Merili Arjakas, a research fellow at the International Centre for Defence and Security in Tallinn.

“While EKRE’s nominal loss of two seats is not major, they had expected to take over the Centre Party’s position of being a strong second party with give-or-take of 25 seats. This did not happen,” she tells Euronews.

Additionally, having the Social Democrats and Estonia200 fare better than in recent opinion polls also added salt to the the right wing’s wounds. 

“This is why there is a widespread perception that the nationalist right lost the election,” says Arjakas.

The Centre Party’s vote share was down more than 36,000 votes from the last election, likely lost due to a number of factors including a popular figure who was expelled from the party last year who ran as an independent; but the security situation, the war in Ukraine, a feeling of neglect or alienation among Russian-speaking voters who traditionally vote for the Centre Party, and generally lower level of political engagement. 

4. Internet voting is more popular, and trusted, than ever

For the first time in an Estonian election cycle, more than 50% of people cast their ballots on the internet. That’s only possible because of the wide range of services that are available to Estonians online, the investment in system security that authorities have invested in, and the high level of trust the public has in the integrity of internet voting. 

The fly in the ointment the after the votes were counted is that far-right party EKRE now reportedly wants to challenge those electronic ballots in court. 

Kristi Raik, Deputy Director of the International Centre for Defence and Security in Tallinn, calls that a “Trumpist” move. 

“EKRE is bringing into question the reliability of the voting procedure and wants to contest the e-vote in court. This is a dangerous game of undermining people’s trust in institutions,” says Raik. 

“The real reason being that EKRE gets relatively few e-votes.”

5. What happened to Russian-speaking voter turnout?

Estonia’s Russian-speaking voters have found themselves a bit politically adrift in the last year or so. Although they have traditionally sided with the Centre Party, they felt let down when it comes to continuing Russian-language education in parallel with the Estonian-language education system. 

EKRE had tried to woo them, and use the arrival of Ukrainian refugees as a wedge issue: but EKRE had also been very vocal about calling for the removal of Soviet-era monuments which could in turn alienate some Russian-speaking voters. 

“Looking at the districts, the turnout was remarkably lower than national average in Ida-Virumaa county and a bit lower in Tallinna Kesklinna, Lasnamäe and Pirita districts, where many Russian-speakers in the country live,” explains ICDS’s Merili Arjakas. 

While the methodology for calculating turnout has changed slightly in this year’s elections, turnout in those Russian-speaking districts has always been lower than average.



Source link

#Estonia #election #analysis #liberals #won #farright #lost