Friday, October 12, 2007
Is it uniquely the British who allow the government a free reign in deciding when to call an election or is this common practice elsewhere? In France, although dissolution is the President's prerogative (but not more than once a year), it has only been used once in this 'British' spirit: this was in 1997 when Chirac called an early election (due in 1998) in anticipation of economic difficulties in the run-up to the euro, and he ended up with socialist Jospin as PM for five years! A ploy not likely to be repeated...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I think it's pretty common for PM's in parliamentary systems to have the right to dissolve parliament within a specified maximum term limit, as in Britain. It was interesting to hear some commentators call for fixed terms in Britain during Brown's 'will he, won't he?' moment recenty. Personally, I think this misses the point that there is a difference between parliamentary and presidential systems. In the latter, the executive can't be brought down by losing the support of the legislature, because of separation of powers and the president's independent electoral mandate. In parliamentary systems, however, governements can and do lose the support of parliaments half-way through a maximum term; it isn't impossible for minority governments to survive and even be quite effective for a while, but there are times when political immobilism and gridlock can ensue - on such occasions it is important to have recourse to 'early' dissolution and fresh elections.
I take your point, though the prospect of gridlock in the British system seems improbable doesn't it? In the case of France, being a semi-presidential system, its a subtle balance between executive and legislature, and it will be interesting to see how things work in the longer term under the five year presidential mandate which in theory should put a stop to 'cohabitation' and the sense of instability that this caused.
I think it's probably the case that the discretion that govts have in other European states derives from having coalition governments - its easier to manufacture a lost vote of confidence if your party doesnt have a majority.
Canada, Australia and New Zealand have the same system as the UK dont they?
While the ability to call an election when you like would seem like a powerful tool for the PM its not clear that it gives an advantage. Of the 16 elections since 1950, only 9 have resulted in clear wins for the govt (admittedly it is 5 out of 6 since 1983).
I agree that these situations don't arise often in British politics, but they can be significant when they do. The last time was 1974, when Labour emerged as a minority administration, and Harold Wilson called fresh elections 8 months later in order to gain an overal majority. He made it, but only by the skim of his teeth. 18 months later, he quit and left Callaghan nursing a rasor-thin majority, which in fact soon became a minority; that eventually led to the Lib-Lab Pact of 1977-78.
People are beginning to speculate that the next election could result in a hung parliament again...
Interestingly fixed term parliaments briefly came up as an election issue in Australia, a few weeks ago. Australia has 3 year terms, such a short term gives PMs little chance to call a snap election. In fact he has just called the election for 24 november only 8 weeks or so before the last possible date he could have called it. On average though parliaments have tended to run for about 2 1/2 years, rarely running a full 3 year term. The opposition leader Kevin Rudd has floated the idea of a referendum on 4 yr fixed terms. This would cause some difficulty with the upper house senate which elects half its members at the same time as the lower house for 6 year terms. 8 year senator terms would not be popular. As with similar systems though a PM is of course unlikely to give up a key prerogative, namely the ability to chose the timing of the general election. Howard, massively behind in the polls called the election, then having used the Treasury to gain as much information on the economy before the government went into 'caretaker mode' announced his tax plans on day one of the campaign. The PM still holds all the incumbency cards and is unlikely to give them up!
Post a Comment