Gallup CATIs Before and After the Union Referendum 1992

This survey forms part of a major project carried out in connection with the union referenda in 1992 (Maastricht) and in 1993 (Edinburgh). The main part of the data material, which was collected by the Danish Gallup Institute at the request of an election research group consisting of Jørgen Goul Andersen, Jens Hoff, Hans Jørgen Nielsen, Steen Sauerberg and Torben Worre, is based on daily voting barometers (the so-called CATI-measurements), but the project also includes omnibus surveys carried out as interviews in the home or by means of self-administered questionnaires. The project comprises the following surveys at the DDA: # #DDA-1835: Gallup Interviews Before the Union Referendum 1992. #DDA-1836: Gallup Interviews After the Union Referendum 1992. #DDA-1837: Gallup CATIs Before and After the Union Referendum 1992. #DDA-1838: Gallup CATIs Before and After the Union Referendum 1993. #DDA-1839: Gallup Interviews After the Union Referendum 1993. # #This survey contains data collected as telephone voting barometers before and after the referendum. # #The following background variables are included in the data material: #The respondent's sex, age and marital status; size of the household, number of adults (persons aged 13 or more) and children, and age of the children; the respondent's position in the household; the respondent's education, occupational status, public or private employment and income; gross household income; the housewife's occupational status; housing conditions and ownership of the dwelling as well as geographical location and degree of urbanization. # #In addition to this, the following special questions (dealing with topical events) are included: #Before the referendum: #Which party the respondent voted for at the general election on 12 December, 1990; which party the respondent would vote for at a hypothetical general election on the day after the interview; knowledge of the coming referendum on 2 June; whether the respondent will vote yes or no; whether a no will mean that Denmark has to resign from the EC, and the respondent's attitude to resigning in such a way; whether Denmark can continue as a member of the EC if the result is a no; vote at a hypothetical referendum on Danish membership of the EC and at a hypothetical referendum on resigning from the EC; attitude to a continued extension of the political co-operation in an economic union; attitude to a continued extension of the political co-operation in a political union; whether and what the respondent voted at the referendum on the so-called EC package in 1986; most important reasons for voting yes or no or not voting at the coming referendum; reasons why the respondent has not yet decided whether he/she will vote; the importance of Denmark being or not being a member of the EC; whether Denmark can live with becoming a sort of B-member of the EC if the result is a no and the other member countries continue the development of the union; attitude to a number of consequences in case of a no (Denmark leaves the EC while the other Nordic countries become members; Denmark stays as a member but loses influence; Denmark stays as a member while the other member countries establish the union; Denmark stays as a member while the other Nordic countries become members of the union; Denmark stays as a member and the other Nordic countries become members on Denmark's level; the admission of the other Nordic countries is delayed; the union treaty will be re-negotiated and there will be a new referendum; the union treaty will be suspended or will be annulled; a new referendum will be held on the separate items in the union treaty); attitude to the argument that the union treaty is not suitable for a referendum as its content is too complicated for ordinary people; assessment of the degree of objectivity and information in the yes and the no-campaigns, respectively; whether the information campaign has made the respondent change attitude to Danish membership of the EC; whether the use of the word 'union' in the treaty has made the respondent change attitude to the treaty; whether the attitude of the Social Democratic Party has influenced the respondent's decision; whether the attitudes of the Social Democratic Party is best for the yes or the no-campaign; whether the EC policy of the Social Democratic Party is clear or unclear; whether the change of chairman of the Social Democratic Party has influenced the campaign; whether it will be an economic advantage or disadvantage for Denmark if the result of the referendum is a yes or a no; time of decision; best source of information on the union treaty; as well as attitude to a number of statements about the union (as an economic and monetary union the EC should have a joint central bank; within the economic and monetary union a joint currency should replace the national currencies in five or six years; as a political union the EC should be responsible for foreign policy towards countries outside the EC and for a joint security and defence policy within the EC; the European Parliament should, together with the Council of Ministers, have the legislative power in the EC; the EC should take an active part in securing that the working environment and other working conditions are improved in the member states). #After the referendum: #What the respondent voted at the referendum; vote at a hypothetical referendum today; whether the government should issue the writs for a general election; preferred government; whether Denmark should take the consequence of the referendum and resign from the EC; and whether the result first and foremost is a reaction against the union, against the non-Socialist government or against the political system as a whole