And now which government?” “

What government will Austria have after the startling success of Chancellor Schüssel and his People’s Party in the political elections of 24 November? It’s difficult to predict. The People’s Party (ÖVP) obtained 79 seats, the Social-Democratic Party (SPÖ) 69, the Liberal Party (FPÖ) 19 and the Greens (Grüne) 16. Among the main points of the elector results: 1. For the first time since 1966 the ÖVP has regained a relative majority in parliament. 2. Schüssel’s controversial strategy to curb the rise of Haider’s party paid off. The chancellor wanted to involve the Liberals in the management of power to remove from them the fruitful field of electoral victories: the SPÖ-ÖVP coalition that had permitted Austria’s economic miracle in the post-war period, but that had at the same time contributed to create a system of “corporativism”, exacerbated by the marked carving up of the whole public sector between the two main parties. Schüssel had clearly seen things in the right way: the Liberal Party effectively collapsed, thanks both to the erosion of its support by the exercise of power, and by the marked tensions between its moderate and government wing and its “populist” wing. The Haider phenomenon that had instilled fear into the whole of Europe is effectively over. 3. The “red-green” proposal – the dream of the Social-Democrats and the Greens to form a coalition government, copying the German model – was rejected by the Austrian electorate. Only the People’s Party succeeded in achieving its electoral goals (raising its percentage of votes from 26.9 % in 1999 to 42.3 % in this election); the other three parties more or less had to accept a net defeat. This will have an impact on the consultations to form a new coalition government. The Catholic Church in Austria abstained from entering into the pre-electoral debate, following a line of conduct consolidated for several decades, in effect since 1945. The Austrian Episcopal Conference limited itself to appealing to Catholics to consider participation in the elections as a civic and Christian duty. It also reminded Catholics of four key points for evaluating the various proposals of the parties running in the elections: namely, defence of the right to life; importance of the concept of solidarity to the disadvantaged both at home and abroad; defence of the family; and positive attitude to the enlargement of the European Union. At the same time the bishops – as emphasized by Cardinal Schönborn in his role as president of the Austrian episcopate – declared their conviction that there were Catholics within all four parties who were ready and willing to dedicate themselves to the afore-mentioned values. It is interesting, in this regard to see how “practising” Catholics voted: 69 % of them voted ÖVP (1999: 59 %), 22 % SPÖ (1999: 20 %), 3 % FPÖ (in 1999: 13 %), 1 % the Greens (in 1999: 1 %). Does that mean that the People’s Party regained its Catholic soul, which had become obfuscated during many years of the exercise of power by rather “mundane” considerations? Over the last two years Schüssel’s party has succeeded in asserting this Christian soul in various fields – for example in its family policy; but in other fields – for example in that of immigration – the party has remained deaf to the criticisms of the bishops and Catholic relief organizations; it has preferred to aim instead at gaining an electoral advantage.