   #copyright

Parliamentary system

2007 Schools Wikipedia Selection. Related subjects: Politics and government

   A parliamentary system, also known as parliamentarianism (and
   parliamentarism in U.S. English), is distinguished by the executive
   branch of government being dependent on the direct or indirect support
   of the parliament, often expressed through a vote of confidence. Hence,
   there is no clear-cut separation of powers between the executive and
   legislative branches, leading to a lack of the checks and balances
   found in a presidential republic. Parliamentarianism is praised,
   relative to presidentialism, for its flexibility and responsiveness to
   the public. It is faulted for its tendency to sometimes lead to
   unstable governments, as in the German Weimar Republic and the French
   Fourth Republic. Parliamentary systems usually have a clear
   differentiation between the head of government and the head of state,
   with the head of government being the prime minister or premier, and
   the head of state often being an appointed figurehead or hereditary
   monarch with only minor or ceremonial powers. However, some
   parliamentary systems also have an elected president with many reserve
   powers as the head of state, providing some balance to these systems
   (called a parliamentary republic). As a general rule, constitutional
   monarchies have parliamentary systems.

   The term parliamentary system does not mean that a country is ruled by
   different parties in coalition with each other. Such multi-party
   arrangements are usually the product of an electoral system known as
   proportional representation. Parliamentary countries that use first
   past the post voting usually have governments composed of one party.
   The United Kingdom, for instance, has only had one General Election
   since the Second World War, where no single party had a majority of
   seats, (February 1974). However, parliamentary systems of continental
   Europe do use proportional representation, and tend to produce election
   result where no single party has a majority of seats.

   There are broadly two forms of Parliamentary Democracies.
     * Westminster System or Westminster Models tend to be found in
       Commonwealth of Nations countries, although they are not universal
       within and exclusive to Commonwealth Countries. These parliaments
       tend to have a more adversarial style of debate and the plenary
       session of parliament is relatively more important than committees.
       Some parliaments in this model are elected using " First Past the
       Post" electoral systems, (Australia, Canada, India and the UK),
       others using proportional representation, e.g. Ireland and New
       Zealand. However even when proportional systems are used, the
       systems used to tend to allow the voter to vote for a named
       candidate rather than a party list. This model does allow for a
       greater separation of powers than the Western European Model,
       although the extent of the separation of powers is nowhere near
       that of the United States.

     * Western European Parliamentary Model (e.g. Spain, Germany) tend to
       have a more consensual debating system, and have hemi-cyclical
       debating chambers. Proportional electoral systems are used, where
       there is more of a tendency to use party list systems than the
       Westminster Model legislatures. The committees of these Parliaments
       tend to be more important than the plenary chamber. This Model of
       Parlimanetarism is sometimes called the West German Model- since it
       was used in the Parliament of the West German, later united Germany
       Parliament.

   There also exists a Hybrid Model, drawing on both presidential systems
   and parliamentary systems, for example the French Fifth Republic. Much
   of Eastern Europe has adopted this model since the early 1990s.

   Parliamentarianism may also be heeded for governance in local
   governments. An example is the city of Oslo, which has an executive
   council as a part of the parliamentary system.

Advantages of a parliamentary system

   Some believe that it's easier to pass legislation within a
   parliamentary system. This is because the executive branch is dependent
   upon the direct or indirect support of the legislative branch and often
   includes members of the legislature. In a presidential system, the
   executive is often chosen independently from the legislature. If the
   executive and legislature in such a system include members entirely or
   predominantly from different political parties, then stalemate can
   occur. Former US President Bill Clinton often faced problems in this
   regard, since the Republicans controlled Congress for much of his
   tenure as President. That being said, presidents can also face problems
   from their own parties, as former US President Jimmy Carter did .

   In addition to quicker legislative action, Parliamentarianism has
   attractive features for nations that are ethnically, racially, or
   ideologically divided. In a unipersonal presidential system, all
   executive power is concentrated in the president. In a parliamentary
   system, with a collegial executive, power is more divided. In the 1989
   Lebanese Taif Agreement, in order to give Muslims greater political
   power, Lebanon moved from a semi-presidential system with a strong
   president to a system more structurally similar to a classical
   parliamentarianism. Iraq similarly disdained a presidential system out
   of fears that such a system would be equivalent to Shiite domination;
   Afghanistan's minorities refused to go along with a presidency as
   strong as the Pashtuns desired.

   In the English Constitution, Walter Bagehot praised parliamentarianism
   for producing serious debates, for allowing the change in power without
   an election, and for allowing elections at any time. Bagehot considered
   the four-year election rule of the United States to be unnatural.

   There is also a body of scholarship, associated with Juan Linz, Fred
   Riggs, Bruce Ackerman, and Robert Dahl that claims that
   parliamentarianism is less prone to authoritarian collapse. These
   scholars point out that since World War II, two-thirds of Third World
   countries establishing parliamentary governments successfully
   transitioned to democracy. By contrast, no Third World presidential
   system successfully transitioned to democracy without experiencing
   coups and other constitutional breakdowns. As Bruce Ackerman says of
   the thirty countries to have experimented with American checks and
   balances, “All of them, without exception, have succumbed to the
   nightmare [of breakdown] one time or another, often repeatedly.”

   A recent World Bank study found that parliamentary systems are
   associated with lower corruption.

Criticisms of parliamentarianism

   A main criticism of many parliamentary systems is that the head of
   government cannot be directly voted on. Occasionally, an electorate
   will be surprised just by who is elevated to the premiership. In a
   presidential system, the president is directly chosen by the people, or
   by a set of electors directly chosen by the people, but in a
   parliamentary system the prime minister is elected by the party
   leadership.

   Another major criticism comes from the relationship between the
   executive and legislative branches. Because there is a lack of obvious
   separation of power, some believe that a parliamentary system can place
   too much power in the executive entity, leading to the feeling that the
   legislature or judiciary have little scope to administer checks or
   balances on the executive.

   In the United Kingdom, the prime minister is traditionally thought of
   as the " first among equals" of the cabinet. It has been alleged in The
   Economist and by a former UK Member of Parliament Graham Allen that the
   prime minister's power has grown so much in recent years that he or she
   is now dominant over the government and that collegiality is no more.
   Rather than being "first among equals," the modern British prime
   minister is "like the moon among the stars," as The Economist once put
   it. "Instead of a healthy balance we have an executive [the prime
   minister] who stands like an 800 lb. gorilla alongside a wizened
   legislature and judiciary." (Allen, 12)

   Although it is possible to have a powerful prime minister, as Britain
   has, or even a dominant party system, as Japan has, parliamentary
   systems are also sometimes unstable. Critics point to Israel, Italy,
   the French Fourth Republic, and Weimar Germany as examples of
   parliamentary systems where unstable coalitions, demanding minority
   parties, no confidence votes, and threats of no confidence votes, make
   or have made effective governance impossible. Defenders of
   parliamentarianism say that parliamentary instability is the result of
   proportional representation, political culture, and highly polarised
   electorates.

   Although Walter Bagehot praised parliamentarianism for allowing an
   election to take place at any time, the lack of a definite election
   calendar can be abused. In some systems, such as the British, a ruling
   party can schedule elections when it feels that it is likely to do
   well, and so avoid elections at times of unpopularity. Thus, by wise
   timing of elections, in a parliamentary system a party can extend its
   rule for longer than is feasible in a functioning presidential system.
   In other systems, such as the Dutch, the ruling party or coalition has
   some flexibility in determining the election date.

Parliamentarism and party formation

   Parties in parliamentary systems have had much tighter ideological
   cohesiveness than parties in presidential systems. It would be
   difficult for a parliamentary system to have a party like the United
   States Democratic Party, which until the 1980s was a coalition of
   Southern conservative Protestants (' Dixiecrats') and urban liberals
   with no single unified ideology. In a parliamentary system, a party
   such as this would typically splinter because, if in government, it may
   be unable to govern effectively. Having splintered, though, the
   resulting parties might join in a governing coalition.

   This form of government is often compared to a Presidential system.

Countries with a parliamentary system of government

Unicameral system

   This table shows countries with parliament consisting of a single
   house.
               Country                     Parliament
   Albania                          Kuvendi
   Bangladesh                       Jatiyo Sangshad
   Bulgaria                         National Assembly
   Burkina Faso                     National Assembly
   Croatia                          Sabor
   Denmark                          Folketing
   Dominica                         House of Assembly
   Estonia                          Riigikogu
   Finland                          Parliament
   Greece                           Hellenic Parliament
   Hungary                          National Assembly
   Iceland                          Althing
   Israel                           Knesset
   Latvia                           Saeima
   Lithuania                        Seimas
   Malta                            House of Representatives
   Moldova                          Parliament
   Mongolia                         State Great Hural
   New Zealand                      Parliament
   Norway                           Storting
   Papua New Guinea                 National Parliament
   Portugal                         Assembly of the Republic
   Saint Kitts and Nevis            National Assembly
   Saint Vincent and the Grenadines House of Assembly
   Singapore                        Parliament
   Slovakia                         National Council
   Sweden                           Riksdag
   Tanzania                         National Assembly
   Turkey                           Grand National Assembly

Bicameral system

   This table shows countries with parliament consisting of two houses.
   Country Parliament Upper chamber Lower chamber
   Australia Parliament Senate House of Representatives
   Austria Parliament Federal Council National Council
   Antigua and Barbuda Parliament Senate House of Representatives
   The Bahamas Parliament Senate House of Assembly
   Barbados Parliament Senate House of Assmebly
   Belize National Assembly Senate House of Representatives
   Belgium Federal Parliament Senate Chamber of Representatives
   Canada Parliament Senate House of Commons
   Czech Republic Parliament Senate Chamber of Deputies
   Ethiopia Federal Parliamentary Assembly House of Federation House of
   People's Representatives
   Germany Bundesrat Bundestag
   Grenada Parliament Senate House of Representatives
   India Parliament Rajya Sabha Lok Sabha
   Republic of Ireland Oireachtas Seanad Éireann Dáil Éireann
   Iraq National Assembly Council of Union Council of Representatives
   Italy Parliament Senate of the Republic Chamber of Deputies
   Jamaica Parliament Senate House of Representatives
   Japan Diet House of Councillors House of Representatives
   Malaysia Parliament Dewan Negara Dewan Rakyat
   the Netherlands States-General Eerste Kamer Tweede Kamer
   Pakistan Majlis-e-Shoora Senate National Assembly
   Poland Parliament Senate Sejm
   Romania Parliament Senate Chamber of Deputies
   Saint Lucia Parliament Senate House of Assembly
   Slovenia Parliament National Council National Assembly
   South Africa Parliament National Council of Provinces National Assembly
   Spain Cortes Generales Senate Congress of Deputies
   Switzerland Federal Assembly Council of States National Council
   Thailand National Assembly Senate House of Representatives
   Trinidad and Tobago Parliament Senate House of Representatives
   United Kingdom Parliament House of Lords House of Commons
    1. ^ The Council of Union is defined in the constitution of Iraq but
       does not currently exist.
    2. ^ Prior to the coup d'etat of September 19, 2006

   Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_system"
   This reference article is mainly selected from the English Wikipedia
   with only minor checks and changes (see www.wikipedia.org for details
   of authors and sources) and is available under the GNU Free
   Documentation License. See also our Disclaimer.
