Is the populist Robin Hood just a tale? A comparative study of parliamentary representation of the poors in seven countries

The existing literature points to a variety of reasons why, as income inequality grows, the parliamentary representation of the poorest segments of society should be negatively affected: while the lobbying asymmetry between social classes widens, lower-income groups may become less inclined to participate politically. One of the strongest claims made by populist parties is that they provide a solution to the existing representation gap afflicting liberal democracies: they champion the interests of the marginalised against the elites willing to protect the status quo. This study aims at testing this assertion by exploring the activities of populist parties in parliament. In particular, we ask whether and to what extent populist MPs are more likely to address issues related to the well-being of the poor. The empirical analysis focuses on political parties’ issue attention in parliament using data on the policy content of legislative bills, parliamentary oral questions and prime ministers’ annual speeches in seven countries (Belgium, Denmark, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain). The topic coding is based on the Comparative Agendas Project methodology.