Party politics and the environmentFormost voters, if not all green activists, the primary test of Green gover-
nance is its policy impact. In short, can the Greens make a difference? The
ability of individual green parties to shape government policy has been lim-
ited by their status as junior partners in their coalitions, preventing them
from securing their preferred ministerial portfolios and winning support for
Green policy priorities. The nature of the coalition will also shape the influ-
ence of a green party. In Germany, a combination of ideological and political
factors meant that the Greens were the only credible coalition partners for
theSPD; in effect the red–green option was a ‘minimum winning’ two-party
coalition, so the SPD was effectively dependent on the Greens to form a
government, which strengthened their bargaining position. In Belgium the
government did not need the votes ofbothgreen parties, but as Ecolo and
Agalev had agreed only to enter a coalition together, or not at all, they
could exercise some negotiating influence. By contrast, the Finnish Green
League was part of a ‘surplus coalition’ where its involvement was not piv-
otal, so its departure would not bring down the government, as illustrated
when it voluntarily left the government in 2002 (see below). In France and
Italy the green parties were only in the government as a result of a multi-
party centre-left pact within which the green parties were minor players.
Consequently, the German and the Belgian green parties were the most suc-
cessful at securing ministerial portfolios: Die Grunen received three cabinet ̈
posts, including the senior position of Foreign Minister for Joschka Fischer,
while the Belgian green parties were also allocated three portfolios – trans-
port, health and environment. By contrast, the Finnish, French and Italian
green parties were initially rewarded only with the environment portfolio,
although Finnish and Italian Greens later briefly controlled further min-
istries. The German Greens were also most effective at getting their policy
priorities treated seriously: the closure of nuclear power stations and reform
of German citizenship laws bore a strong Green imprint (see Box5.4).
The policy impact of green parties has been shaped by the ministerial
portfolios under their control, so, not surprisingly, they have had most
impact on the environment. The iconic green issue of nuclear power has
figured strongly, with mixed results. Although the red–green government
encountered strong opposition in implementing its promise to initiate the
shutting down of the German nuclear industry, a thirty-year closure pro-
gramme was eventually agreed in 2001 (see Box7. 8).Amoreleisurelyforty-
year phase-out was approved in Belgium. However, in both cases agreement
wasonly reached after offering significant concessions to the energy indus-
try and these rather vague, long-term agreements could easily be altered or
revoked by future governments. There were other setbacks. Green attempts
toban nuclear waste shipments through Germany and the export of Bel-
gian nuclear material to Pakistan were rejected by coalition partners. The
Finnish Green League was unable to prevent its coalition partners from sup-
porting the construction of a new nuclear power station, and after the parlia-
ment supported the decision the Green League resigned from the coalition