A parliamentary system is a system of government in which the ministers of the executive branch are drawn from the legislature

and are accountable to that body, such that the executive and legislative branches are intertwined. In such a system, the head of government is both de facto chief executive and chief legislator.[citation needed] Parliamentary systems are characterized by no clear-cut separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches, leading to a different set of checks and balances compared to those found in presidential systems. Parliamentary systems usually have a clear differentiation between the head of government and thehead of state, with the head of government being the prime minister or premier, and the head of state often being a figurehead, often either a president (elected either popularly or by the parliament) or a hereditary monarch (often in a constitutional monarchy).[ Parliamentarianism may also be for governance in local governments. An example is the city of Oslo, which has an executive council as a part of the parliamentary system. Thecouncilmanager system of municipal government used in some African towns bears many similarities to a parliamentary system.[citation needed] Students of democracy such as Arend Lijphart divide parliamentary democracies into two different systems, the Westminster and Consensus systems (See Lijphart 1999 for this section).[citation needed]

The Palace of Westminster in London, United Kingdom. The Westminster system originates from the British Houses of Parliament.

The Westminster system is usually found in Commonwealth of Nations countries, although it is not universal within nor exclusive to Commonwealth countries. These parliaments tend to have a more adversarial style of debate and the plenary sessio of n parliament is more important than committees. Some parliaments in this model are elected using a plurality voting system (first past the post), such as the United Kingdom, Canada, and India, while others use proportional representation, such as Ireland and New Zealand. The Australian House of Representatives is elected using instant-runoff voting while the Senate is elected using proportional representation through single transferable vote. Even when proportional representation systems are used, the voting systems tend to allow the voter to vote for a named can didate rather than a party list. This model does allow for a greater separation of powers than the Western European model, since the governing party will often not have a majority in the upper house. However, parliamentary systems still feature a lesser separation of powers than is found in democratic presidential systems.[citation needed]

The committees of these Parliaments tend to be more important than the plenary chamber. with a collegial executive. This model is sometimes called the West German Model since its earliest exemplar in its final form was in the Bundestag of West Germany (which became the Bundestag of Germany upon the absorption of the GDR by the FRG).[cit ti Implementations of the parliamentary system can also differ on whether the government needs the explicit approval of the parliament to form. an executive in any system (be it parliamentary. In countries using this system. Swit erland) implement the principle of dualism as a form of separation of powers. this would amount to the executive (as the majority party or coalition of parties in the legislature) possessing more votes in order to pass legislation.. since the Republicans controlled Congress for much of his tenure. all executive power is concentrated in the president. In a unipersonal presidential system. the executive within a presidential system might not be able to properly implement his or her platform/manifesto. Accordingly. and an upper house or Senate which may be appointed or elected by a different mechanism from the lower house. some West European countries' parliaments (e. where there is more of a tendency to use party list systems than the Westminster Model legislatures. racially.[cit ti In addition to quicker legislative action. the executive is often chosen independently from the legislature.the main difference being their inability to vote. in order to give £ ££¢ ¢¡   ¤ ¤ £ ££¢ ¢¡   ¤ ¤ £ ££¢ ¢¡   ¤ ¤ £ ££¢ ¢¡   ¤ ¤ . However.[cit ti One of the commonly attributed advantages to parliamentary systems is that it's faster and easier to pass legislation[1]. Much of Eastern ] Europe has adopted this model since the early 1990s. In the 1989 Lebanese Taif Agreement. If the executive and legislature in such a system include members entirely or predominantly from different political parties. Spain. Legislatures with only one house are known as unicameral ] system. and usually have semi cyclical debating chambers.y Western European parliamentary model (e. In a parliamentary system. Unli e in Germany however. the Netherlands. This style of two houses is called bicameral 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. power is more divided. Former US President Bill Clinton often faced problems in this regard.[cit ti £ ££¢ ¢¡   ¤ ¤ There also exists a Hybrid Model. presidential or semi-presidential) is chiefly voted into office on the basis of his or her party's platform/manifesto. ministers in those countries usually actively participate in parliamentary debates .[cit ti A Parliamentary system may consist of two styles of Chambers of Parliament one with two chambers (or houses): an elected lower house. drawing on both presidential systems and parliamentary systems. It could be said then that the will of the people is more easily instituted ] within a parliamentary system. and under what conditions (if any) the government has the right to dissolve the ] parliament. Swit erland is considered one the purest examples of a ] consensus system. for example the French Fifth Republic. the semi-presidential system.g. Consensus systems are identi ied by proportional representation. Evidently. rather than just the absence of its disapproval. or ideologically divided. Germany) tend to have a more consensual debating system. li e Jamaica and many others. Parliamentarianism has attractive features for nations that are ethnically. Members of Parliament have to resign their place in Parliament upon being appointed (or elected) minister.g. Thus. In a presidential system. Sweden. then stalemate can occur..

Mixed member proportional ] representation (where voters cast two ballots) can make this choice easier. by wise timing of elections. By contrast. Thus. often under the strong influence of the party leadership. In some systems. The prime minister seldom tends to have as high importance as a ruling president. Lebanon moved from a semi-presidential system with a strong president to a system more structurally similar to classical parliamentarianism. such as the British. Fred Riggs. in a parliamentary system a party can extend its rule for longer than is feasible in a functioning presidential system. forcing a difficult choice on the electorate. In a presidential system. In other systems.[cit ti It can also be argued that power is more evenly spread out in the power structure of parliamentarianism.Muslims greater political power. two-thirds of Third World countries establishing parliamentary governments successfully made the transition to democracy.[cit ti Although Walter Bagehot praised parliamentarianism for allowing an election to take place at any time. no Third World presidential system successfully made the transition to democracy ] without experiencing coups and other constitutional breakdowns. flexibility in the timing of parliamentary elections avoids       . Thus. possibly ] making the election as much about the person as the party behind him or her. the ruling party or coalition has some flexibility in determining the election date. a ruling party can schedule elections when it feels that it is likely to do well. These scholars point out that since World War II. and Robert Dahl that claims that parliamentarianism is less prone to authoritarian collapse. and for allowing elections at any time. in a parliamentary system the prime minister is elected by the legislature. Bruce Ackerman. a party's candidate for the head of government is usually known before the election. Bagehot considered the four-year election rule of the United States to ] be unnatural. or by a set of electors directly chosen by the people. associated with Juan Linz. and there tends to be a higher focus on voting for a party and its political ideas than ] voting for an actual person. as is the case in several of Australia's state parliaments. Walter Bagehot praised parliamentarianism for producing serious debates. separate from the legislature.[cit ti There is also a body of scholarship. This problem can be alleviated somewhat by setting fixed dates for parliamentary elections. Conversely.[2] ©¨©¨¨§ §¦ ¥  ©¨©¨¨§ §¦ ¥    ©¨©¨¨§ §¦ ¥ ©¨©¨¨§ §¦ ¥ [edi ] C i ici of li entariani One of the main criticisms of many parliamentary systems is that the head of government is in almost all cases not directly elected. the lack of a definite election calendar can be abused. and so avoid elections at times of unpopularity.[cit ti In Th E glish C stituti . However. Afghanistan's minorities refused to go along with a presidency as strong ] as the Pashtuns desired. Iraq similarly disdained a presidential system out of fears that such a system would be tantamount to Shiite domination. such as the Dutch and the Belgian. the president is usually chosen directly by the electorate. for allowing the change in power without an election.[cit ti A recent World Bank study found that parliamentary systems are associated with lower corruption.[cit ti Some constituencies may have a popular local candidate under an unpopular leader (or the reverse).

which allows them to focus ] instead on their political career. Additionally. Promising politicians in parliamentary systems likewise are normally preselected for safe seats .ones that are unlikely to be lost at the next election . the role of the statesman who represents the country as a whole goes to the separate position of head of state.[cit ti "!"!!   [edit] Countries with a parliamentary system of government [edit] Unicameral system This table shows countries with parliament consisting of a single house.[cit ti Critics of parliamentary systems point out that people with significant popular support in the community are prevented from becoming prime minister if they cannot get elected to parliament since there is no option to "run for prime minister" like one can run for president under a presidential system. prime ministers may lose their positions solely because they lose their seats in parliament.having periods of legislative gridlock that can occur in a fixed period presidential ] system. prime ministers are elected firstly to represent their electoral constituents and if they lose their support then consequently they are no longer entitled to be prime minister. which is generally non-executive and non-partisan. even though they may still be popular nationally. Country Albania Bangladesh Bulgaria Botswana Burkina Faso Croatia Denmark Dominica Estonia Finland Greece Hungary Iceland Israel Kosovo Kuwait Latvia Lebanon Lithuania Parliament Kuvendi Jatiyo Sangshad National Assembly Parliament National Assembly Sabor Folketing House of Assembly Riigikogu Eduskunta/Riksdag Hellenic Parliament National Assembly Althing Knesset Kuvendi National Assembly of Kuwait Saeima Assembly of Deputies Seimas "!"!!   . In parliamentary systems. Supporters of parliamentarianism can respond by saying that as members of parliament.

Luxembourg Republic of Macedonia Malta Mauritius Moldova Chamber of Deputies Sobranie House of Representatives National Assembly Parliament .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful