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. Westminster Parliament has the ability to hold the executive to account through a variety of methods, such as through the House of Lords. Though it is unelected, the Lords fulfill a fundamental democratic requirement; as the upper chamber within a bicameral legislature, it acts as a constitutional check and balance on executive power.
In today 's government political parties are a large part of government operations and how decisions are made in the government. In Madison 's The Federalist, No.10 Madison talked about how factions can control and cause harm to the government. A solution to this control was the use of a republic in order to limit the power of factions and keep them from having complete control. In our government however, factions have become a major part of the government system with political parties having complete control over the different branches of government. The use of this two political party system creates many problems within our government as the two parties fight for control over legislature and control over the government.
On the other hand, in a presidential system the head of government, (who is also the head of state) can only be removed from office by impeachment, a rather large ordeal compared to the forced resignation of a Prime Minister. This allows for a much more effective government, as when a particular government is no longer able to pass legislation in a reasonable and timely manner, an election must then be called. A new and effective leadership can then be put in place, with the overall and long term result being a generally more stable government. In both systems, as they are both democratic, the members of government are elected by the people, but in very different ways. One elects the president in one election and their representatives in another, while on the other... ... middle of paper ... ...Coproration.
So for the purpose of this essay, the arguments put forward will elucidate using the strictest understanding of what the democratic systems of Parliamentarism and Presidentialism pertain to. As outlined, the main focus of this paper will endeavour to show the advantages of Parliamentarism pitched against Presidentialism. In orde... ... middle of paper ... ...uaranteed to create democratic stability, or even make better and more insightful decisions than their Presidential counterparts, but he does state the “vast majority of stable democracies in the world today are Parliamentary regimes” (Linz 1989, p.52). Using this hypostasis, I have constructed the essay in a way that hopefully shows the advantages of the imperfect systems’ of Parliamentarism over Presidentialism. Admittedly, mainly because of word count restrictions, the paper is not a comprehensive examination of the different democratic environments, and is very much open to debate, but by taking this approach of loosely contrasting Parliamentarism and Presidentialism, I have attempted to show the flexibility and inherent benefits of Parliamentarism.
Additionally, with the fusion of powers, the party that controls the legislature also directs the executive branch. “This combination of legislative and executive power in the hands of the government party is the basic feature of the Westminster model.” (Wilson 1994, p.193, as quoted in Lamprinakou 2014) With that being said, this essay will discuss and compare the strengths and weaknesses of the Westminster model, and argue the accuracy of this type of government for the present-day United Kingdom. As discussed in lecture, there are six main features of the British political system that distinguish the U... ... middle of paper ... ... advantage, that may seem disadvantageous to some, is the ability to easily get rid of the Prime Minister, as seen in Chamberlain’s and Thatcher’s reign. Chamberlain became Prime Minister in 1937 and was very popular for his aggressive actions in Munich. In 1939, Chamberlain promised that Britain would defend Poland’s independence in an attack, and therefore Britain joined the war.
This paper highlights the functions that political parties serve in the House of Commons, and also argues that they diminish the democratic characteristics and responsibilities of the House of Commons. Political parties are the link between general society and the representative machinery of our government. In order for an effective democracy to be in place, these political parties must be continually operative in the functions that they carry out. They are vehicles in which groups of people as well as individuals work together to secure political power, and to exercise that... ... middle of paper ... ...s party generally has the second most seats in the House of Commons. The leader of the Official Opposition party is in charge of leading the debates against the majority government’s policies, and proposes alternative legislature that reflects their party’s ideals.
This study is concerned with understanding the efficiency and effectiveness of the parliament in producing legislation. It should be noted that the United Kingdom operates an unwritten constitution which implies that its laws are contained in Acts, conventions and legislation; this made the parliament the supreme
Canada’s system of government originated largely from the British model, with varied franchise, political parties, and responsible government as a constitutional monarchy. Early on there was a conservative approach to government and politics, although democracy was clearly lacking. Fast forward to modern Canada, where franchise has been opened to all citizens regardless of race, gender and sex and yet a true picture of democracy is often lacking amongst society. This paper will argue that Canada is a democracy, though it is often compromised in practice by exploring its parameters and problematic elements. Democracy in practice is a hybridized system that combines elements of democratizing reform with anti-democratic ideals (Nurse 02/17/2014) by our standards today, as it was not operative at the time of confederation (Nurse 03/03/2014).
The Change in the Role of the British Prime Minister There are numerous pieces of evidence that suggest the rational role of the British Prime Minister is becoming more presidential Power can only be quantified or measured in relation to something. In terms of domestic power it is perhaps appropriate to define it in terms of ability to make more autonomous decisions. It has historically been believed that the UK Prime minister has more domestic power than the US president based on documented rights due to his ability to dominate his part, legislature and to an extent, the executive branch. He has substantial power over his party with no clear separation of power. Something based on this belief may well be valid but with numerous pieces of evidence that suggest the traditional role of the British Prime Minister is becoming more presidential and modern society adhering less to written convention, it has become far less clear who wields the most domestic power outside of conventional parameters.
Word Count: 2,184 The core component of modern liberal democracies is the legislature and political institutions it is comprised of. Different factors are involved towards the evolution of political institutions in each of these countries. For instance, The United States and The United Kingdom are known to be powerful liberal democracies, though both nations differ politically. The key difference between the two nations is their system of government and looking at how each system works is particularly important while determining how democratic the nation really is. In this paper I will demonstrate how both nations evolved constitutionally and illustrate the factors resulting in the United States developing a presidential system and the United Kingdom developing a parliamentary system.