Opposition is a fundamental element of democracy. Without the right to challenge and criticise ones government, its policies and its actions, democracy cannot develop. Political opposition, “ when B is opposed to the conduct of government A", can include opposition from parties not in government, as well as actors other than political parties.
The European Union (EU) has been characterised as lacking in a traditional government-opposition divide. This deficiency plays into the wider question of the EU's democratic legitimacy. Scholars have argued that due to the lack of legitimate avenues to voice “issue-orientated, policy-motivated” opposition within the EU, actors voice their oppositions against the EU as a whole.
The EU tends towards a consensus-driven model of decision-making. This can be explained by the need to accommodate a wide grouping of diverse interests, cultures and traditions into one system of government. The centrality of consensus to EU decision-making, and lack of avenues of political opposition within the EU legislative process, is inherent in the institutional structures and cultures of the European Parliament, the Council of the EU and the European Commission.
Theorising political opposition
Political opposition has been theorised as one of the central elements to a functioning of democracy. Mair outlined three forms of opposition within party politics:
Classic opposition: politicians not in the ruling party act as opposition, offering alternative policy proposals whilst still acknowledging the legitimacy of the government to govern. Opposition of principle: opposition not only towards the government and its policies, but also towards the legitimacy of the government overall. Elimination of opposition: a “surplus of consensus” results in a lack of meaningful differences between political parties. This has also been called "government by cartel".
These three forms of party-based opposition are interconnected. The extent to which classic opposition is presents has an impact on the degree of opposition in principle that exists. Furthermore, if there is classical opposition, government by cartel is not possible. Yet, if political actors cannot engage in classical opposition, two outcomes are possible. Oppositional actors either submit entirely and government by cartel occurs, or “revolt”, rejecting the legitimacy of the government as a whole.
Brack has criticised the binary division of between ‘pro’/’anti’-system opposition, given the risk that this can lead to ‘normativity’ and ‘relativism’. Dahl similarly warned about this characterisation, noting that "if all opposition are treated as dangerous and subject to repression, opposition that would be loyal if it were tolerated becomes disloyal because it is not tolerated”. Rather than an actor being considered as ‘objectively anti-system’, researchers should consider the way in which certain parties are characterised by others in the system, for example whether they are considered outsiders or “acceptable allies”.
Theorising political opposition within the European Union
Political opposition within the EU has been described as "paradoxical". The EU, as a polity, has been characterised as “fiercely opposed”. Since the Maastricht Treaty, there has been widespread public opposition to further European integration, known as a "constraining dissensus". The increasing salience of European issues in national politics and the frequency of referendums on European issues called by national governments correlated with a decline in public support for European integration. The United Kingdom's public's vote to leave the EU exemplifies the widespread public rejection of the EU polity.
Conversely, within the political system of the EU, opposition is lacking to the extent that it has been described as a "polity without politics". Between the Parliament, the council and the commission, it has been argued that there is a lack of "institutionalised site" to accommodate the "formulation and contestation of the agenda and policy choices". Classic opposition within the institutions is largely subsumed by a wider culture of consensus. To the greatest extent possible, the depoliticisation of issues enables representatives from 28 diverse member states to reconcile their varying interests and arrive at a common agreement.