Parliament stronger with minority governments – UK think–tank

A United Kingdom-based think-tank believes that without a majority government in office, Parliament becomes more important and more powerful and this forces the opposition to act more responsibly.

Pointing out that the Westminster system here preserves for the executive a range of important resources that would help to ensure an effective government, the think tank – UK’s Institute of Government Constitution Unit warned that where the government does not offer enough in the way of concessions, it risks losing bills altogether and when minority presidents seek to govern as if they had a majority, the result is instability, partisanship, persistent electioneering, and likely failure. “By contrast, minority administrations which adopt a more consensual approach, negotiating and making concessions with opponents inside and outside Parliament, are more likely to remain in office and to make headway with their policy agenda.”

For the first time in its history, Guyana is being run by a minority government, which many hailed as a good step towards a more consensual approach to governance. The Donald Ramotar government despite losing the majority in parliament will still control the parliamentary agenda, the budget process, delegated legislation, and prerogative powers including the right to seek an early election.

Uncertain, but inclusive

On the issue of the functioning of Parliament, the think-tank said the legislative process becomes more uncertain, but also more inclusive, as opposition and backbench amendments have more chance of being carried. But Parliament cannot make policy, or force the government to take executive action against its will.

Nor is parliamentary reform any more likely in a minority Parliament: it needs champions and a clear agenda to make it happen. “Additionally, the think-tank said the media’s instinct will be to portray ministerial concessions or defeats in Parliament as failures and signs of ineffective government. But such events could alternatively be portrayed as a more consensual and inclusive form of decision-making that holds advantages over the executive domination that currently characterises the Westminster system.

According to the think-tank, a minority government would also control the civil service machine, enabling it to develop policy and plan the allocation of resources with a far higher level of expertise than the opposition parties. “Simply by virtue of being the government, it also enjoys political resources in the ability to set the wider political agenda and tone of public debate. Government must be more consensual,” the think-tank said.

Opposition parties must act responsibly

Meanwhile, according to the think-tank, opposition parties also face a challenge of adaptation. It said unlike under ‘normal’ Westminster conditions, in a Parliament of minorities the opposition can block or significantly amend government proposals and even introduce alternative policies of their own.

This unaccustomed power requires opposition leaders to act responsibly, not to oppose for opposition sake. “The absence of a government majority does not imply the existence of an opposition majority. Opposition parties may find it surprisingly difficult to unite against the government, or bring the government down. They will have policy and other differences, and they may themselves be fearful of triggering an early election. So they are more likely to strike bilateral deals.”

The think-tank concluded that ultimately whether a minority government can be made to work in the Westminster system will depend on the politicians: in particular the president and the governing party. But other actors have important roles too: the civil service, the opposition parties, the parliamentary authorities, and the media. All have important parts to play, and all can learn from experience elsewhere in helping to ensure that a minority Parliament and a minority government work as effectively as possible.

The Constitution Unit specialises in constitutional affairs and comparative constitutional studies. It is now based within the Department of Political Science at University College London. It has done research on every aspect of the UK government’s constitutional reform programme. The think-tank is an independent organisation that aims to improve government effectiveness which was created in 2008. The institute’s stated aims are to engage with Members of Parliament and top UK civil servants by: supporting the development and skills of senior public servants, politicians and political advisors; conducting and funding research on public administration and government; providing ‘thought leadership’ on effective government through publications, seminars and events.