Innsbruck 2002

EAPC • Europe Meeting • May 1 to 4, 2002 • Innsbruck /Austria

Speeches

Horst Becker
Erhard Busek
Michael Carmichael
Ana Fernandes
Peter Frei
Helmut Mader
Dominik Meier
Joe Napolitan
Fritz Plasser
Guido Schommer
Carlo Willeit


Guido Schommer

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The particular question put to me was this: what is changing? How are the next generations to be addressed? How can politicians and political advisers handle the rising generations?

I was asked to put my views as the Secretary General of a party in govern-ment, in a sense as both a practitioner and a "victim" of your consultancy activities. I want to make a few preliminary remarks to enable you to situate my comments in their context. The Swiss system of semi-direct democracy has a bicameral Parliament, consisting of the Cantonal Council (46 seats) and the National Council (200 seats). Four-fifths of these seats are held by the four par-ties in Government: the FDP (Free Democratic Party = liberals), CVP (Christian Democratic People's Party), SP (Social Democrats) and SVP (Swiss People's Party, Right-wing Conservatives). These four parties also provide from their midst the seven members of the Government, known as the Federal Council, which is elected every four years jointly by the two chambers of parliament. Since 1959, the membership of the Federal Council has been stable. Along-side this representative element, the Swiss Federal system of semi-direct de-mocracy also involves a process of the popular votes. Four times each year, the voting members of the population are called to the ballot box to pro-nounce on amendments to the constitution or laws. Some ten to twenty pro-posals are placed before the people in this way for a decision to be taken. The people may also themselves require such votes to be held: by taking what is known as a "popular initiative" (which requires 100,000 signatures in 18 months) or calling for a referendum (50,000 signatures opposed to a new law or revision). Then there are many cantonal (i.e. regional or provincial) and lo-cal elections and popular votes. The Swiss voters are therefore called upon to exercise their rights at frequent intervals. Traditionally, the voting turnout is cor-respondingly low - generally between 35 and 50 per cent.

The comments which follow are made with particular reference to the Swiss system and are therefore hardly likely to be valid for other democratic sys-tems. For this paper, we have taken the 18 to 39 age group as our reference for the "next generation", because the democratic behaviour pattern of these electors has already been observed.

In practice, I detect the following selected trends in the rising generations:

1. In general, participation is tending to decline

A good example is the swiss vote on membership of the UNO. While 65 to 70% of voters aged over 60 took part in this vote, the figure was just 37-53 per cent in the up to 40 age groups

2. Participation of the next generation depends on concern and mobiliza-tion

In Switzerland, this phenomenon is apparent in all age groups when for-eign policy proposals have to be considered and when two camps with strong arguments and adequate financial resources come into manifest conflict: accession of Switzerland to the European Economic Area or EEA (participation around 80 per cent), membership of the UNO (57 per cent turnout). We might also mention as an example the home ownership initia-tive which achieved what is for Switzerland a "normal" participation of 38 per cent; a subsequent survey showed that just 30 per cent of voters aged 18 to 39 said that they had taken part in the vote, while over sixty per cent of people aged over 60 did so . In other words, "special" referenda attract a higher than average turnout among the rising generations.

3. Ideological and party-political ties are declining

There was a time when membership of a particular social class, family, reli-gious community, or simply the place of residence in a region, determined how people voted in elections and referenda. In Switzerland, party ties are loosening nowadays, even in the traditionally rural areas.

4. Growing fluctuation on the part of the electorate

Once party loyalty or ideological ties have been left behind, the next step of fluctuating voting is not far away. The phenomenon of the multi-optional society which the St Gallen sociologist, Peter Gross, has for in-stance described, can also be observed in politics. Younger electors are making greater use of the freedom to choose between individuals, parties and subject areas than their elders.

5. Increasingly bi-polar perception of politics

For various reasons, younger citizens are having difficulty in understanding the highly complex political system and in making use of its possibilities. The presentation of politics in the mass media must state the processes which are often difficult even for insiders to understand in a simple manner and without "stealing" too much time to the citizens. There is a strong tempta-tion to reduce the political world to two poles and so pretend that things are clearer than they in fact are.

6. Socio-economic ties are giving way to value sets

For older citizens, the socio-economic and professional position continues to shape political opinions to a considerable degree. Manual workers and trade unionists vote for the social democrats, farmers vote SVP etc. But the rising generations are guided less by social strata than by the values which are represented by individuals or parties. The success of the non-governmental organizations (NGOs) among the younger generations speaks volumes in this connection.

After presenting a few selected trends, we will now turn our attention to the fundamentals underlying these trends. Why do the rising generations act and react differently from their elders? Once again, we will focus on a few basic ideas:

1. People are swamped with stimuli and information

The younger generations are exposed to a historically unique extent to all kinds of stimuli and have the possibility of choosing from a huge range of information. Many have difficulty in separating the relevant material from the flood of information. Specialization in particular interests occurs. Politi-cians are in direct competition with the growing demands made by the workplace(s), social environment, leisure industry, other kinds of voluntary work etc. on the individual's available time.

2. The relevance of politics and participation is being called into question

Younger people tend to regard politics as particularly relevant in excep-tional security situations (for example in the autumn of 2001 which saw a succession of disasters). In their everyday life everyone is affected all the time, but the representation of interests and the political slant of the solu-tions are so finely tuned in our advanced democracies that fundamental controversies seldom occur over different models of society. But if this di-mension does break through and the relevance comes to light again, the mobilization can be exceptionally high even among the rising generations - which brings us back to the mobilization of individual concerns and campaigns to which we referred above. THE example of an effect of this kind is the mobilization observed in France at present following Le Pen's election success. The outright fear of the image of France for which Le Pen stands is generating a massive political movement.

3. Declining awareness of citizenship

The mature, self-responsible citizen who performs his civic duties - like, in former years, his obligation to attend church on Sunday - is no longer taken as a model by the younger generation.

4. Declining confidence in politics

Political parties and party politicians have moved right down to the bot-tom of the credibility scale. Younger people, in particular, are disillusioned with promises made during election campaigns. History has shown in very many cases that these promises cannot be kept - and so still more credibil-ity has been lost. Politics, and in particular party politics, is increasingly seen as a PR event. Nevertheless, in Switzerland, the government (the Federal Council) is still a strong counterweight. It is regarded as a problem-solver: undogmatic, indeed almost technocratic, but inspiring a high degree of credibility. It enjoys confidence.

The trends and underlying changes in value sets and behaviour patterns among the younger generations present a real challenge to Swiss politics which has been accustomed first and foremost to stability for several dec-ades. In practice, all the parties must look for an answer because the declin-ing, or at least realigned, willingness to participate presents a problem to all concerned. Political legitimacy would be damaged if this trend were simply to be accepted in a fatalistic manner without taking any action.

So how should politicians respond to these challenges? Here too we can point to several tentative ideas for further thought:

1. Underlying credibility

There is no future for "all spin and no delivery." Ducking and weaving par-ties and politicians with no firm opinions have no future. The next genera-tion wants open and honest answers to their fears and solutions to prob-lems. Contradictions in reasoning are exposed mercilessly and cause mas-sive damage to their authors. There are no longer any traditional ties to compensate such incapacity. Compromises are only accepted if the original attitude was recognisable and the process leading up to the compromise is transparent and readily understandable after the event.

2. Back to basics

Technocratic communication with the emphasis on points of detail is no longer accepted by younger people. Increasing importance attaches to the credible presentation of values - in our case (FDP) these mean free-dom, responsibility and tolerance. Reference to these values which must be lived out and shown as a model in everyday life is becoming increas-ingly important. When practical politics is permanently based on these fundamental values, the complexity is reduced and the understanding of political action and the reasons for it enhanced.

3. Relevance must be demonstrated

In the days when they were first formed, most political parties stood for models of society with very different contours. The liberals were founded on freedoms, the market economy etc.; the social democrats on equality and solidarity etc. Our prosperous democracies have blurred the differ-ences between the outcomes of the policies pursued by governments of different political persuasions. The power of circumstances dictates the possible problem solutions in large measure. On the other hand, if we turn to the level of the political outcomes and look what would happen, if the different party programmes were followed and realized, we still find a clear partitioning and profiling of the individual parties. Absurd political outcomes help to show that participation is necessary and that politics is, after all, relevant - as the French people are finding today.

I was also asked to show how political consultants can be expected to in-fluence these rising generations and how consultancy is changing in this new environment - but I am perfectly happy to leave that to you. You are the professional consultants. You know your market and you are familiar with the principles and methods of consultancy. I do not want to play the schoolmaster and give you lessons in your own specific domain. But I hope that I have been able in the last few minutes to give you some prac-tical pointers to the way in which politics is moving in relation to the next generation - my generation. Thank you very much for your attention.