LEC 4 Regime types

parliamentary systems

in parliamentary systems, there is a distinction between the head

of state and the head of government.

• All democracies have a head of state

• This makes them constitutional monarchies.

• And the majority of constitutional monarchies are democratic

parliamentary republics

• In the parliamentary republics, the head of state’s role is ceremonial

and power rests with the parliament (hence the name).

• This is a matter of degree and not kind.

• Germany (indirectly elected) and Ireland (elected): the president has

few formal powers independent of parliament.

• But can intervene in a manner that shapes policy. President

Steinmeier urged the SPD and the CDU/CSU to form a government for

the sake of the country in 2007.

• Mary Robinson promoted social liberalization on human rights,

contraception and divorce and helped turn one of the most Catholic

conservative countries in Europe into one of the most liberal (Spain,

Ireland and Portugal are interesting in this way, France less so and

Italy much less so…or not at all).

hybrid/hybrid authoritarian const monarchies AND absolute monarchies

Hybrid: Thailand, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Monaco, and Morocco.

The monarch is politically powerful but rules with a government,

which can be the military (Thailand since 2014).

• Absolute: Gulf States (Oman, Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia), Eswatini,

Brunei. SA: King usually has absolute power, (Al Saud) but now

executive power is exercised by the Crown Prince (MBS,

Mohammed bin Salman).

democratic const monarchy

The monarch is symbolic and ceremonial (Bagehot’s

distinction between the dignified and efficient elements of

the British constitution) but ever-present (UK).

• The King opens parliament with the King’s speech (‘my

government’).

• The government rules in the name of the King (‘Starmer

administration’ = constitutional nonsense; the UK, Canada,

and Australia have no administrations). Rather, they have:

• His Majesty’s government.

• A.V. Dicey: parliamentary sovereignty: “What the King in

Parliament says is law is law.”

• Canada: Governor General is the King’s representative in

Canada; Lieutenant Governor the same in the provinces.

Opens parliament, signs laws.

• Justice in Canada resides in:

• The Crown (Regina v….Rex v).

• Public land is…Crown land

indigenous ppl and the crown

• Treaties were nation-to-nation with the Crown, but Canada later ignored and reinterpreted them.

• 1927 Indian Act amendment blocked Indigenous land claims (Canada feared the JCPC would be sympathetic).

• The monarchy still matters to many Indigenous peoples.

• Sovereigns meet Indigenous leaders as constitutional ritual; Parliament only by invitation.

• Indigenous nations have treaty-based access to the Crown — Parliament does not.

• This reflects two coexisting constitutional orders.

what makes a parliamentary system

The executive emerges from and has no legitimate function

independent of the legislature. The government depends on

the confidence of parliament, and it falls when that

confidence is withdrawn.

2 models of parl system

1. westminster dem

2. presidential systems

WESTMINSTER DEMOCRACY. defined by 8 things

1. Majority governments that have strong, it seems like absolute, power

2. . Cabinet dominance

3. Two-party systems

4. parl sovereignty

5. const. flexibility

6. liphart: non independent central bakn

7. unicameral/bicameral w lower house dominance

8. unitary

9. weak committees

2. cabinet dominance

• Parliament appears to control Cabinet, but in reality the Cabinet (executive) dominates because it holds a parliamentary majority.

• PM = primus inter pares, but often very powerful due to party and institutional control.

• However, PM power is contingent — even Thatcher was removed by her own Cabinet (1990).

• System = dominance + internal fragility.

• Cabinet dominance depends on: collective solidarity, whipping system, spoils system.

3. two party systems

Parliament is

dominated by two parties:

ex) Labour/Conservatives (UK),

Liberals/Conservatives (Canada),

Labor/Liberal-Nationals (Australia),

National/Labour (New Zealand).

4. parl sov

“means neither more nor less than

this, namely, that Parliament . . .

has, under the English constitution,

the right to make or unmake any law

whatever; and, further, that no

person or body is recognised by the

law of England as having the right to

override or set aside the legislation

of Parliament.”

5. const flexibility and an absence of judicial review

• Parliamentary sovereignty challenged by:

  1. EU membership (1973–2020) — EU law supremacy, ECJ

  2. European Convention on Human Rights

• But not true limits — Parliament could end both without a supermajority.

• The real challenge: referenda, which undermine parliamentary sovereignty.

• UK constitution relies heavily on conventions and few written documents.

• Key texts: Magna Carta (1215); Bill of Rights (1689) — foundation of parliamentary sovereignty.

9. weak committees

• Cabinet committees: set policy, handle cross-department issues, manage crises; appointed and chaired by PM.

• Standing committees: whipped; exist to pass government bills.

• Select (Special) committees: thematic; call witnesses, produce reports; influence policy but rarely block it.

9 contd. the whole system produces…

• Adversarial politics → sharp policy swings (Thatcher, Cameron, Brexit referendum).

• Example: Barbara Castle’s In Place of Strife — moderate union reforms; blocked by unions.

• Heath proposed similar reforms; Labour then opposed them.

• Failure of moderate reform → Thatcher’s harsh union crackdown.

• By 1993, most coal mines closed; unions severely weakened.

• Shows how adversarial politics can produce extreme policy outcomes.Adversarial politics → sharp policy swings (Thatcher, Cameron, Brexit referendum).

germany mines closed, BUT…

• Slower, state-managed industrial decline.

• Long-term state subsidies.

• Worker councils helped oversee closures.

• Generous retraining and early retirement support.

• Heavy investment in affected regions (e.g., North Rhine–Westphalia).

• Broad political consensus (SPD–CDU).

consensus/continental parl systems

• Common in plural societies (e.g., Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany).

• Contrast: Westminster majoritarianism failed in Northern Ireland — FPTP, gerrymandering, and restricted franchise excluded Catholics.

consensus systems features:

1. executive power sharing in broad coalitions

2. multiparty systems

3. interest group corpopratism

4. strong bicameralism

5. federalism

6. judicial review

7. central bank inependence

8. strong committees

2-2-2-1 formula

• Major parties:

  • SP (pro-immigration, pro-EU) (2)

  • FDP (liberal) (2)

  • SVP (right-wing, anti-immigration, Eurosceptic) (2)

  • The Centre (Christian Democrat) (1)

• Permanent grand coalition; rotating presidency.

• Close to ideal consensus democracy.

• No “firewall” between parties.

cons. syst. feat 1 executive power sharing in broad coalitions

ince 1949, the Federal

Cabinet (Council) divides its 7 federal

councilors (ministry heads) on a 2-2-2-1

formula:

cons. syst. feat 2: multiparty systems

PR electoral systems guarantee

multiparty systems, so

government formation is itself a

matter of compromise.

• Switzerland is a four-party

system; Belgium is even more

fragmented.

cons. syst. feat 3: interest group corpporatism

• UK & France: few formal access points → pluralist lobbying; competition for influence (→ protests in France).

• Switzerland: regular consultation between business, unions, and the state.

• Electoral system + party system + coalition rules + consultation → consensus politics (corporatism).

cons. syst. feat 4: strong bicameralism

meaning (a) election of

upper house on a different

basis than the lower and

(b) it must have real power.

• Council of States: 2

  representatives for each of

  20 full cantons plus 1 for 6

  half cantons = 46 for a

  country of 9.5 million!

  Directly elected.

  • Have full equality in

  passing legislation

german contrast from cons system

• Powerful upper house with equal role in legislation.

• Indirectly elected; votes allocated by region (Länder) based on regional election results.

• Result: Federal government often needs support from multiple parties → frequent grand coalitions.

cons syst feat 5: federalism

• Federalism common but not required for consensus systems.

• In Germany, Länder are very powerful (education, police, culture, social policy, infrastructure).

• Federalism is cooperative, not competitive.

• Bavaria = rich, powerful region that strongly defends its interests.

• Bundesrat + reconciliation committee force intergovernmental cooperation

GERMAN federalism

• Canada: politically centralized (key institutions in Ottawa; administration in provinces).

• Germany: federal institutions geographically dispersed across cities.

• Germany’s dispersed institutions → interdependence and cooperation.

• Canada’s centralization → regional separation and alienation.

cons sys feat 6 judicial review

listed by

Liphart, but Germany is the only

pure case, and it’s found in

France, Canada, Australia.

cons sys feat 7 central bank independence

Switzerland, Germany have

powerful central banks; most

German Chancellors found

themselves powerless against

it.

• Euro = German norms

transferred to the EU, creating

much grumbling. Southern

members and France wanted

German interest rates without

German economic orthodoxy.

• But…Federal Reserve, Bank of

Canada.

cons syst feat 8 strong committees

• In Germany, committees do the main legislative work after first reading.

• Standing committees review and amend bills; composition reflects party balance → cross-party cooperation.

• Bills often heavily changed in committee.

• Special crisis and investigative committees are very powerful.

• Unlike Westminster (committees review), German committees make policy.

• Strong at both federal and Länder levels.

presidential systems

• Presidential systems are less common (~9 vs ~30 parliamentary systems).

• Having a president does not make a system presidential.

• Presidential system =

  • President elected by the people

  • Does not depend on parliamentary confidence (except impeachment)

  • Fixed term

france presidential

Non-cohabitation (France):

• This is when the President and Prime Minister are from the same political party and their party also has a majority in Parliament (National Assembly).

• When that happens, the President is the real boss — they dominate the political system and set policy direction.

• The Prime Minister becomes more like a senior administrator who carries out the President’s agenda.

cohabitation france

• Happens when the President and Prime Minister are from different parties, and the PM’s party has the majority in Parliament.

• In this situation, the President loses most domestic power.

• The Prime Minister becomes the main decision-maker, because they control Parliament.

• The President usually keeps foreign affairs and defence, but domestic policy is run by the PM.

• So France starts to function like a Westminster parliamentary system (government led by PM who has majority support).

• But it’s still majoritarian, not consensus — it only works if the PM has a strong majority.

when pm cant command a majority in national assembly…

DEADLOCK!

President Macron lost his majority in 2022.

• Made it worse by calling unnecessary elections in

2024.

• Since 2022, there have been 6 PMs (5 individuals),

two resigned over the budget.

• Took 9 months to get it through, and only then with a

reference to article 49.3 (which Lecornu promised not

to invoke).

judicial review pres system

US

Supreme Court, French

Constitutional Council

(NB: before legislation

passes), Brazilian

Supreme Federal

Tribunal

upper house pres system

either

secondary (French

Senate can be

overridden) or powerful

but separated (US)

committee structure pres system is either weak or strong!

• US: Committees are very powerful — they can propose, change, and effectively control legislation. Key committees control taxes and spending.

• France: Committees are deliberately weak — fewer committees, less power, more control by the executive.

• Brazil: In between — committees can amend laws, and one key committee can even stop a bill.

“coalitional presidentialism” in Brazil

• Brazil’s presidential system: President & legislature elected separately; President by 2-round majoritarian vote, legislature by proportional representation → many parties.

• Designed to prevent legislative dominance (1946–1964).

• Leads to fragmented parties and conflict (e.g., Rousseff impeachment, Bolsonaro vs. Congress).

• Liphart predicted consensus, but it doesn’t happen in practice.

semi presidential

Semi-Presidential? Romania, Lithuania, Portugal, and (de

facto) Serbia, and Poland

• are in practice unitary

poland semi pres

• President of Poland: directly elected, 5-year term

• Appoints PM & ministers (on PM’s recommendation)

• Can veto legislation (3/5 override) and send bills to constitutional court

• Represents Poland internationally

• Power depends on party alignment:

  • Same party: highly powerful (e.g., Kaczyńskis)

  • Different parties: constrained (e.g., Tusk & Duda/Nawrocki)

• Upper House is weak

portugal semi pres

President (de Sousa) appoints the Prime

Minister (Montenegro).

• President is directly elected; acts a

moderating force rather than an

executive.

• Appoints the PM; dissolves the NA; and

calls early elections.

• Decides on referenda.

• Represents Portugal abroad.