More handpicked essays just for you.
Parliamentary system vs presidential system
Parliamentary system vs presidential system
Parliamentary system vs presidential system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Since the 1950s there has been a rise in the power of the Prime Minister, specially Crossman in 1962 and Benn, who in 1979 referred to “a system of personal rule in the very heart of our Parliamentary democracy”. As Britain has remained the “world’s most successful representative democracy”. The role of the executive has significantly increased at a great deal since the end of World War 2, however, the outward dangers of a supplementary individual hegemony attached to the Prime Minister shouldn’t be overemphasized. Although the modern examples of Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair whose styles of leadership have each been labelled as presidential. In this essay I will be assessing the four main prime minister’s power and if his or her powers constrained under the British system. For instances, the power of patronage, cabinet power, the party leadership and the mass media. These are four main factors of the prime minister and its effectiveness can be argued.
The fundamental power of the prime minister is the “power of patronage”, meaning the capability to appoint and sack, encourage and relegate all ministers in the government. This reinforces the power of the prime minister in two approaches: the prime minister can ensure the appointment and promotion of loyal supporters and “especially of politicians who share his or her political or ideological preference”. This suggests that the rivals, critics or political opponents can be circumscribed from the government and put into lower positions. Also as the prime minister regulators their governmental careers, it ensures that the ministers and back benches cooperate together in order to remain loyal and supportive. As they serve under the prime ministers will, this gives the prime ministe...
... middle of paper ...
...so the mass media plays a significant role in prime ministers power, as it enables political information to flow to the society and most importantly it is under the government’s control, therefore the prime minister can structure the news before it is established on the newspapers. However, having a bad communication with the mass media may lead you to look as an unsuccessful leader that lacks skills and this can overall damage your image. Overall, as I have explained the Prime Minister Lack power under the system he operates due to the other factors that have taken more power over the prime minister. A call for an action is necessary as the system no longer seems stable, many of the people who stand on behalf of us are under a party loyalty and party discipline system, and therefore they cannot express their interest in case it contradicts to the party’s ideology.
For the MPs in Canada, party discipline is the core for their actions. For them, collective responsibility plays a big part in their agenda. As a party, they are held responsible for any decision that their party makes, and are expected to defend it at any given point of time. For a majority government, party discipline becomes an even more important issue as it is directly related to the term of the Prime Minister (PM). Under the rule of maintaining the confidence of the House, the PM must gain the support of the House in order to stay in his role. This is where high party discipline comes into place. With it, the PM will not have to worry about being dismissed by the Governor General. Should the high party discipline deteriorate and gives away into a low one, such as the one in the States, the government will be in a constant potential risk of collapsing into paralysis. Once the leader of the cabine...
The effectiveness of Westminster Parliament in holding the executive to account relies on a number of variables, arguably, the most important being the degree of the government’s majority. Other variables include the unity of the party, the presence of a foreign war or the presence of a hostile media. This being said, there are also a number of mechanisms by which Parliament is able to hold the executive accountable.
The ideology of parliamentary sovereignty represents a constitutional order that acknowledges the necessary power of government, while placing legal limits and conditions upon its excise due to the Rule of Law, developed by the judiciary in cases such as Pickin v British Railways Board [1974] AC 765. The Diceyan theory represents a definition of parliamentary sovereignty. A general summary recalls that,
This essay has argued that there are many limitations that the Prime Minister is subjected too. The three most important are federalism in Canadian society, the role of the Governor General, and the charter of rights and freedoms. I used two different views of federalism and illustrated how both of them put boundaries on the Prime Minister’s power. Next I explain the powers of the governor general, and explained the ability to dissolve parliament in greater detail. Last I analyzed how the charter of rights of freedoms has limited the Prime Minister’s power with respect to policy-making, interests groups and the courts. The Prime Minister does not have absolute power in Canadian society, there are many infringements on the power that they have to respect.
I will be attempting to evaluate and analyse the term of Thatcherism'. I will raise issues and introduce her consensus and strategies as a PM. To what extent or degree has the Thatcher government dominated British politics.
The Prime Minister is the Head of Government in Canada. Almost always, the Prime Minister is also the leader in the House of Commons, the assembly of ‘common’ people elected by the population to run government. Multiple steps are required to select a Prime Minister. First, there must be a vote of party members at a national convention that decide who will be their leader. If their party is already in power, or holds the majority of seats within Parliament, the chosen leader will assume the role of Prime Minister immediately. If not, the leader must lead the party through a successful election process to become Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is not elected directly by the entire population through the election. He or she is elected in an indirect manner when his or her party wins an election with the most seats in the House of Commons. The Prime Minister can lead the country for a maximum of five years before another election. However, historically and by tradition, most will call an election within four years depending on their perceived standing among the voters. If after four years, they feel that they are still held in high regard by the general public, and it is probable that they will maintain or enhance their power in government, the likelihood of calling...
In Mellon’s article, several aspects are mentioned supporting the belief that the prime minister is too powerful. One significant tool the prime minister possesses is “… the power to make a multitude of senior governmental and public service appointments both at home and abroad,” (Mellon 164). Mellon goes on to state the significance the prime minister has when allowed to appoint the government’s key member...
Within parliamentary systems, the government i.e. the legislature consist of the political party with the most popularly elected Members of Parliament (MPs) in the main legislative parliament e.g. the House of Commons in the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister is appointed by the party to lead as the executive decision-maker, and the legislature work to support and carry out their will (Fish, 2006). In presidential systems, the President is directly elected with the support of their political party, with the legislative being separately elected and, in the case of the United States, being made up of representatives from different states (BIIP, 2004). This essay will provide examples to suggest that Presidents are generally more powerful than Prime Ministers. As two of the oldest forms of parliamentary and presidential governments (Mainwaring and Shugart, 1997), the United Kingdom and the United States will be the main focus of this essay, but other parliamentary and presidential countries will be mentioned.
Whilst there are many arguments that suggest Cameron has always displayed Thatcherite tendencies, this section will focus on Cameron’s policy after the financial crash. The last section of the essay will put forward the argument that Cameron’s approach to reforming the state clearly differs to that of previous Governments (Alderwick, 2012). This argument will focus on how Cameron’s reforming agenda draws upon anti-statist ideas that conflict significantly with those of
Ministerial Accountability Under the UK Constitution “The prerogative has allowed powers to move from Monarch to Ministers without Parliament having a say in how they are exercised. This should no longer be acceptable to Parliament or the people.” Discuss whether ministerial accountability is adequately addressed under the UK constitution The Royal Prerogative has allowed a wide array of discretionary powers to be delegated from the Monarch to ministers without a need to seek parliamentary approval. This system is both unjust and undemocratic as it leaves a number of largely unchecked powers in the hands of a privileged few. These powers, including the ability to ratify treaties, declare war, regulate the civil service and appoint ministers, have a profound effect on the lives of the citizens of the United Kingdom and therefore it is necessary for them to be regulated by Parliament, the democratically elected body of the British people.
Since media sole purpose is to collect information and broadcast to the public, incorrect information may be collected which may in a way completely change the meaning to a public policy causing a derailment. In real sense under the law, media attention is not needed for implementation of the public policies. Although in
In fact, a moderate attitude and willingness to compromise are prerequisite for the formation of a grand coalition. On the one hand, the prospect of participating in the government is a powerful stimulus to moderation and compromise, because it minimizes the risk of being deceived by the other parties or by one’s own undue optimism concerning their willingness to be accommodating. By being in the government together, parties that do not quite trust each other have an important guarantee of political security. For this it is necessary to be in the coalition at the same time rather than in diachronic grand
be necessary to take a brief look at the history of the office of the
The Chancellor or Prime Minister is the head of government. However, the monarch is only head of state. The monarch tends to do little or no political decision-making. The voters of a parliamentary system elect parliament who then elect the prime minister and the cabinet. In a parliamentary system, there is not a separation of powers, but there is a separation of functions. Each part of the government has its function. In a parliamentary system, a vote of confidence is proposed by a party, which needs to be backed by the other part of the government. For the most part, there is not as much stability in a parliamentary system as there is in a presidential
There are numbered of news channels that have maximum coverage throughout the country. Media contribute a lot to develop public knowledge but even after years of success, media could not alter public’s attitude towards issues. Media should discourage smoothly such attitude of public. Demonstrations and protests are good to increase pressure towards the solution of any problem, but there should be a proper way to express which should result oriented.