Dunleavy Prelims

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Dunleavy Prelims Contents List of Boxes, Figures and Tables x Acknowledgements xiii Notes on the Contributors xiv 1 Introduction: A Landscape Without a Map? British Politics after 2010 1 Philip Cowley, Colin Hay and Richard Heffernan 2Constitutional Politics 7 Meg Russell Blair: the reluctant radical 8 Brown 2007–10: the frustrated radical 10 Critiques of the Labour legacy 12 A step-by-step assessment 14 A surprisingly new constitution? 21 The constitution under Cameron and Clegg 25 3 Changing Patterns of Executive Governance 29 David Richards The core executive and the comfort blanket of the Westminster model 29 New Labour’s pattern of executive government: from Blair to Brown 32 The Brown administration and executive government 36 The coalition government: establishing new patterns of governance? 44 Conclusion: the Westminster model under Cameron’s coalition 48 4Changing Parliamentary Landscapes 51 Alexandra Kelso The expenses crisis and its consequences 53 What is parliament for? 58 New legislative mechanisms 60 Scrutiny and oversight 62 v vi Contents Facilitating public engagement 64 House of Lords reform 67 Conclusion 68 5 Elections and Voting 70 David Denver Turnout and turning out 71 Variations in turnout 72 Variations in ‘turning out’ 75 Party support 78 Party performance 79 Variations in party performance across constituencies 82 Explaining party choice 85 Valence voting 86 Is that it? 89 6Political Parties and the British Party System Philip Cowley 91 The fragmentation of the party system 92 Coalition politics at Westminster 96 The Conservative party 100 The Labour party 103 The Liberal Democrats 107 Conclusion 111 7 Territorial Politics in Post-Devolution Britain 113 Roger Scully and Richard Wyn Jones Why devolution matters 113 Parties and elections under devolution 115 Institutional and constitutional politics 118 Devolution and government policy 120 Public attitudes to devolution 123 The future of devolution 126 Conclusion 128 8Power Sharing in Northern Ireland 130 Cathy Gormley-Heenan Power-sharing opportunities and difficulties 1998–2007 132 Restoration of power sharing in 2007: a sign of success? 134 Power sharing, power splitting and power snaring 135 Contents vii Power sharing and snaring in practice: policies and problems 139 Opposition, protest and dissent 142 Has power sharing worked? 145 The future political landscape in Northern Ireland 147 9 Anti-Politics in Britain 152 Gerry Stoker Exploring the rise of anti-politics 153 Explaining disengagement 161 Some proposed solutions 167 What to do? Are reforms possible? 170 Conclusion 173 10 Pressure Group Politics 174 Richard Heffernan Group form and function: associational and promotional groups 175 The representative claim and its limits 182 How Britain’s political system structures the way associational and promotional groups operate 187 Groups and government 192 Conclusion 194 11 The Politics of Diversity 196 Rosie Campbell Gay rights 197 Gender politics 199 Race, immigration and Islam 204 Governing diversity 210 Conclusion 214 12 The Changing News Media Environment 215 Andrew Chadwick and James Stanyer Old, new and renewed media 215 New media use in Britain 217 Old news and the new media environment: quality under pressure? 222 Transforming media management 227 The media and the 2010 general election campaign: the impact of the televised leaders’ debates 232 Conclusion 236 viii Contents 13 Britain and the Global Financial Crisis: The Return of Boom and Bust 238 Colin Hay From boom to bust 239 The great moderation and the emergence of the Anglo-liberal growth model 241 ‘Privatised Keynesianism’ – the new growth model 243 The bursting of the bubble: the re-nationalisation of ‘Privatised Keynesianism’? 244 The political fallout and the prospects for the return to growth 252 Conclusion 254 14 Britain’s Place in the European Union 257 Lori Thorlakson The EU and domestic party politics 258 The UK and the Lisbon Treaty 264 Economic crisis, EU budgetary and the Lisbon Strategy for growth 268 EU enlargement 274 Conclusion 278 15 Security and Surveillance in Britain 280 Richard J. Aldrich and Antony Field Terrorism and international security 281 UK counter-terrorism strategy 283 In the field: UK counter-terrorism operations 287 Surveillance and the Intercept Modernisation Programme 292 Security and the Cameron government in 2010 297 Conclusion 300 16 Britain in the World 302 Andrew Gamble From liberal peace to liberal war 303 Blair’s legacy: foreign and external policy to 2007 306 From Blair to Gordon Brown: foreign and external policy from 2007 311 Conservative policy under Cameron 315 Conclusion: foreign policy and the Conservative Liberal–Democrat coalition 317 Contents ix Further Reading 321 Bibliography 328 Index 351 ix Chapter 1 Introduction: A Landscape without a Map? British Politics after 2010 PHILIP COWLEY, COLIN HAY AND RICHARD HEFFERNAN It is far too early to tell if the general election of 2010 will prove a defin- ing moment in British politics. Few elections by themselves herald a radi- cal or abrupt change of direction. The roads both to and from the watershed election of 1945 were as important as the election itself. The same could be said of another election, 1979, which saw the election of the first Thatcher government and from which a different form of politics eventually emerged. Yet the election of 2010 is likely to earn its place in the history books, regardless of what follows. It resulted in only the second hung parliament in 80 years, and the first since 1974 in which no one party could command a majority or form a single-party government. The resulting Conservative–Liberal Democrat government is Britain’s first peacetime coalition since 1931. Given the electoral arithmetic, many commentators had expected a hung parliament but one from which a Conservative minority government would eventually emerge, with a second election, held within a year, to decide matters, similar to what occurred in 1974. Few predicted a full coalition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, not least because it was thought unlikely it would seem desir- able to the parties themselves. The majority of European countries have a multiparty system and are governed by some kind of coalition. Such coalitions presently comprise at least a centre-right conservative party and a centrist liberal party. The British Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition is, for some, an indication that Britain, so long the exception, might be in the process of entering the European ‘mainstream’, and that 2010 marks another yet nail in the coffin of the ‘Westminster model’. Moreover, if the coalition is able to deliver on its promise of widespread political reform, it may well come to have a significant impact on both the way our politics is conducted and the means by which it is enacted. 1 2 Developments in British Politics 9 The coalition agreement specified a five-year term. If it is to last that long, however, the coalition has to overcome some significant hurdles. The most obvious is the economic. Having claimed early in the 2005 parliament that they would seek to ‘share the proceeds of growth’, the Conservatives moved fully behind fiscal retrenchment as the extent of Britain’s budget deficit became clear. Indeed, in the long pre-election campaign the Conservatives went so far as to project themselves as the guardians of Britain’s (in their view) much needed return to austerity after a decade of excess. Their own polling data, however, suggested that this did not play well with broad swathes of the public. Voters, it seemed, were happy to accept that some fiscal rebalancing was required but one that affected others, not them personally. Thus, when it came to the campaign itself, the deficit was rather downplayed, becoming something of the elephant in the room. The Liberal Democrats undoubtedly scored many points in the coali- tion negotiations despite bringing only a relatively small number of seats to the table. But the tenor of the new government’s economic agenda was set by the Conservatives. True to their manifesto commitment, George Osborne’s first ‘emergency’ budget took place scarcely a month after the election itself. It was very much an austerity budget – with substantial increases in taxation and the promise of drastic reductions in public spending to come – but it was also very short of substantive detail about where the axe would ultimately fall and the single greatest tax-raising measure (the increase in VAT from 17.5 to 20 per cent) was deferred until January 2011. The emergency budget was as much as anything a signal – to both the financial markets and the electorate – of the painful fiscal rebalancing to come. More detail came in the Comprehensive Spending Review in October 2010 when it was announced that unprotected departments (those other than health and international development) would face an average real cut of around 25 per cent over four years. Welfare reform, which many consider likely to put the coalition under strain, is at the centre of the government’s approach to fiscal retrench- ment. The welfare shakeup announced in the budget will save the coun- try only a minimum of £11 billion by 2014/15, but additional, significant savings are being canvassed. Ministers have made it clear that the greater the size of the cut in the welfare budget, the lower the cuts will be else- where. Labour allege that this policy is a ‘gamble’. It is certainly risky. If it takes Britain back into recession – a so-called double-dip recession – as Labour charged, then it will be seen to have failed even by its own stan- dards. Were this to arise, it would almost certainly serve to discredit the government’s economic policy at a time of mounting political opposition and unrest. It is not difficult to see how that in turn might lead to a slide Introduction: British Politics after 2010 3 in the opinion polls, exacerbating differences within and between the coalition partners and perhaps even prompting a vote of no confidence and an early election.
Recommended publications
  • THE SINGLE-MEMBER PLURALITY and MIXED-MEMBER PROPORTIONAL ELECTORAL SYSTEMS : Different Concepts of an Election
    THE SINGLE-MEMBER PLURALITY AND MIXED-MEMBER PROPORTIONAL ELECTORAL SYSTEMS : Different Concepts of an Election by James C. Anderson A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, 2006 © James C. Anderson 2006 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Library and Bibliotheque et Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-23700-7 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-23700-7 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce,Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve,sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet,distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform,et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting It in Proportion?
    Getting it in Proportion? Trade unions and electoral reform Contents Foreword 4 1 Introduction and background 6 2 Is there a case for change? 9 3 Different electoral systems 17 4 The practicalities of change 23 5 Conclusion 25 6 Voices on electoral reform 27 References 29 2 TOUCHSTONE EXTRAS Getting it in Proportion? This report has been prepared by the TUC as a discussion paper for the trade union movement. Getting it in Proportion? This Touchstone Extra pamphlet sets out the arguments for and against changing Britain’s electoral system. It puts the debate in context by summarising the political and historical background against which our democracy has developed, examines how well the existing system works and looks at possible reasons for change. It describes the various alternative electoral systems, discusses the practicalities of change and concludes with a useful comparison of different systems and their advantages and disadvantages. It is not intended to draw any final conclusion about whether or not electoral reform is needed, but rather to be used as a starting point for further debate. Touchstone Extra These new online pamphlets are designed to complement the TUC’s influential Touchstone Pamphlets by looking in more detail at specific areas of policy debate raised in the series. Touchstone Extra publications are not statements of TUC policy but instead are designed, like the wider Touchstone Pamphlets series, to inform and stimulate debate. The full series can be downloaded at www.tuc.org.uk/touchstonepamphlets TOUCHSTONE EXTRAS Getting it in Proportion? 3 Foreword Brendan Barber At our 2009 Congress, delegates voted in support of a motion calling on the TUC to stimulate debate about electoral reform for Westminster elections.
    [Show full text]
  • The Politico's Guide to Electoral Reform in Britain
    Patrick Dunleavy, Helen Margetts and Stuart Weir The Politico's guide to electoral reform in Britain Book section Original citation: Originally published in Dunleavy, Patrick, Margetts, Helen and Weir, Stuart (1998) The Politico's guide to electoral reform in Britain. Politico's Publishing, London, UK. ISBN 190230120X © Democratic Audit This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/62253/ Available in LSE Research Online: June 2015 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. the Guide to ELECTORAL REFORM in Britain Patrick Dunleavy, Helen Margetts and Stuart Weir First published in Great Britain 1998 by Politico’s Publishing 8 Artillery Row London SW1P 1RZ England Telephone 0171 931 0090 Email [email protected] Website http://www.politicos.co.uk Copyright Patrick Dunleavy, Helen Margetts and Stuart Weir 1998 The right of Patrick Dunleavy, Helen Margetts and Stuart Weir to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British library ISBN 190230120X Printed and bound in Great Britain by Colourworks Typesetting and cover design by Tony Garrett All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition Government and Constitutional Reform in the United Kingdom
    This is a repository copy of Inaction and Reaction – Coalition Government and Constitutional Reform in the United Kingdom. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/87072/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Matthews, F. (2015) Inaction and Reaction – Coalition Government and Constitutional Reform in the United Kingdom. British Politics. ISSN 1746-9198 https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2015.34 “This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in British Politics. The definitive publisher-authenticated version Matthews, F. (2015) Inaction and Reaction – Coalition Government and Constitutional Reform in the United Kingdom. British Politics is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/bp.2015.34 Reuse Unless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version - refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher’s website. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Inaction and Reaction – Coalition Government and Constitutional Reform in the United Kingdom Felicity Matthews Department of Politics University of Sheffield Sheffield, S10 2TU [email protected] Abstract Constitutional reform in the United Kingdom is a story frequently framed around the narratives of missed opportunities, executive intransigence and institutional stickiness.
    [Show full text]
  • The British General Election of 2010 and the Advent of Coalition Government
    Patrick Dunleavy The British general election of 2010 and the advent of coalition government Book section (accepted version) Original citation: Originally published in Baldini, G. and Hopkin, J., (eds.) Coalition Britain: the UK Election of 2010. (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2012). ISBN 9780719083693 © 2012 Manchester University Press This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/49607/ Available in LSE Research Online: February 2014 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s submitted version of the book section. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. The British general election of 2010 and the advent of coalition government * Patrick Dunleavy In many respects the May 2010 general election in Britain seems to be one of those cases where an election is lost, yet without any clear winner emerging. Yet it was also a contest that led to a historic outcome, a further decline in support for the top two parties and the advent of the first peacetime coalition government in the UK since the 1920s.
    [Show full text]
  • Debating Electoral Reform in Canada Discussion Paper
    Renewing Democracy: Debating Electoral Reform in Canada Discussion Paper LAW COMMISSION OF CANADA COMMISSION DU DROIT DU CANADA Law Commission of Canada www.lcc.gc.ca Catalogue Number: JL2-20/2002 ISBN: 0-662-66769-7 © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2002 Preface Canada prides itself on being a healthy and vibrant democracy. But we cannot be complacent: democracy requires constant tending. As society changes, Canadians must reflect on the quality of their democratic institutions and ask whether they continue to serve them well. Do we live in the democracy we want? Does it reflect our contemporary needs and values? Can we improve upon the practices of our democratic institutions? An important barometer of the health of governance relationships is the nature and quality of citizens’ participation in their democratic institutions. Several commentators have noted a decrease in voter turnout and a general disengagement of the citizenry from traditional political institutions. This has led some Canadians to raise questions about the electoral system. Does the act of voting continue to have the same significance for Canadians? Is it possible to remedy the democratic malaise that has come to characterize the Canadian political landscape? Should we take a critical look at some of our traditional democratic institutions? Does our voting system continue to respond to our needs and our values? The Law Commission of Canada is an independent, federal agency whose mandate is to systematically study law and legal institutions and to propose changes. This discussion paper on Electoral Reform is part of a project on Reform of Democratic Institutions, under the Law Commission’s larger program aimed at examining Governance Relationships.
    [Show full text]
  • Voting Systems: the Jenkins Report
    RESEARCH PAPER 98/112 Voting Systems: The 10 DECEMBER 1998 Jenkins Report Following its manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on an alternative to the current First Past the Post voting system, the Labour Government is now studying the recommendations of the Indepednent Commission on the Voting System (The Jenkins Commission). Jenkins has recommended a mixed system of Alternative Vote, combined with Top-up seats. This Paper examines the background, and looks at the arguments for and against electoral reform, as well as describing the main voting systems in use around the world. This replaces Research Paper 97/26. Oonagh Gay HOME AFFAIRS SECTION HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY Recent Library Research Papers include: List of 15 most recent RPs 98/97 Unemployment by Constituency - October 1998 11.11.98 98/98 Lottery awards: regional and constituency analysis (to October 1998) 12.11.98 98/99 Fairness at Work Cm 3968 17.11.98 99/100 Widows' Benefits (revised edition) 23.11.98 98/101 Economic Indicators 01.12.98 98/102 The European Parliamentary Elections Bill [Bill No 4 of 1998-9] 01.12.98 98/103 Lords Reform: The Legislative Role of the House of Lords 01.12.98 98/104 Lords Reform: background statistics (forthcoming) 98/105 Lords Reform: Recent Developments 07.12.98 98/106 Local Government Finance in England 01.12.98 98/107 Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/ME 01.12.98 98/108 The Road Traffic (NHS Charges) Bill Bill 3 1998-9 03.12.98 98/109 Protocol 11 and the New European Court of Human Rights 03.12.98 98/110 Water Industry Bill Bill 1 [1998/99] 03.12.98 98/111 Employment and Training Programmes for the Unemployed 07.12.98 Research Papers are available as PDF files: • to members of the general public on the Parliamentary web site, URL: http://www.parliament.uk • within Parliament to users of the Parliamentary Intranet, URL: http://hcl1.hclibrary.parliament.uk Library Research Papers are compiled for the benefit of Members of Parliament and their personal staff.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill [Bill No 63 of 2010-11] RESEARCH PAPER 10/55 01 September 2010
    The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill [Bill No 63 of 2010-11] RESEARCH PAPER 10/55 01 September 2010 This Bill seeks to enable the next general election to be fought under the Alternative Vote, provided this change is endorsed in a referendum on 5 May 2011 and boundary changes have been made to reduce the size of the House of Commons to 600. New Rules for the Redistribution of Seats are designed to give primacy to numerical equality in constituencies and regular redistributions would take place every five years. The Bill is due for Second Reading on 6 September 2010; this Paper has been prepared to give background to that debate. Oonagh Gay Isobel White Recent Research Papers 10/45 The ‘AfPak policy’ and the Pashtuns 22.06.10 10/46 Economic Indicators, July 2010 06.07.10 10/47 Unemployment by Constituency, July 2010 14.07.10 10/48 Academies Bill [HL] [Bill 57 of 2010-11] 15.07.10 10/49 Economic Indicators, August 2010 03.08.10 10/50 By-elections 2005–2010 04.08.10 10/51 Unemployment by Constituency, August 2010 12.08.10 10/52 Identity Documents Bill: Committee Stage Report 18.08.10 10/53 Equitable Life (Payments) Bill [Bill 62 of 2010-11] 18.08.10 10/54 Fixed-term Parliaments Bill [Bill 64 of 2010-11] 26.08.10 Research Paper 10/55 Contributing Authors: Oonagh Gay, Referendums and Alternative Vote Isobel White, Parliamentary boundaries and electoral registration Feargal McGuinness, Statistics This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Electoral Mechanics: the Purview of Preferential Voting for Democratic Regeneration in Puerto Rico
    THE EFFECTS OF ELECTORAL MECHANICS: THE PURVIEW OF PREFERENTIAL VOTING FOR DEMOCRATIC REGENERATION IN PUERTO RICO ARTICLE AMAURY A. BOSCIO* Introduction ........................................................................................................... 897 I. Electoral Systems: When Form Equals Substance ............................................ 898 II. Major Electoral Systems .................................................................................... 903 A. The Majoritarian System ............................................................................ 903 B. Proportional Representation ...................................................................... 906 C. Preferential Voting...................................................................................... 908 i. The Promise of a More Democratic Majoritarian Model.................... 908 ii. Preferential Vote is More Effective than the Two-Round and Plurality Systems ............................................................................. 911 III. Puerto Rico ........................................................................................................ 914 A. The Two-Party System Conundrum ........................................................... 914 B. Are New Political Options Electorally Viable? ........................................... 917 C. The Plurality Vote Regime .......................................................................... 919 D. Preferential Vote as the Key to Viable Reform .........................................
    [Show full text]
  • THE POLITICS of ELECTORAL SYSTEMS This Page Intentionally Left Blank the Politics of Electoral Systems
    THE POLITICS OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS This page intentionally left blank The Politics of Electoral Systems Edited by MICHAEL GALLAGHER and PAUL MITCHELL 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford ox26dp Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York ß The Several Contributors 2005 The moral rights of the authors have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published 2005 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this book in any other
    [Show full text]
  • Prepared for the Canadian Political Science Association 2013 Annual Conference 4-6 June 2013, Victoria, BC Nicholas J. Caruana
    WHAT HAVE CITIZENS’ ASSEMBLIES DONE FOR ME LATELY? EVALUATING WHETHER DELIBERATIVE DEMOCRACY IS VALUE-ADDED Nicholas J. Caruana, The University of Western Ontario What added value do Citizens' Assemblies bring to the process of electoral reform? Governments may consider creating such assemblies because they are frequently praised for the transparency and remarkable citizen participation they bring to an electoral reform process. Little is known, however, about whether those qualities—typically absent in élite-driven reforms—actually have independent effects on the quality of democracy and the democratic deficit after the reform process is complete and regardless of its success. Given that many reform attempts have been unsuccessful in recent years, this could be an important consideration in deciding whether to keep using this format. If the democratic legitimacy of citizen-driven reforms helps to reduce distrust in democratic institutions independently of implementation, then such processes have a distinct benefit that élite-driven reforms do not. In this paper, I develop a theoretical framework for evaluating whether an unsuccessful electoral reform process can still have an effect on the quality of democracy, and go on to compare élite-centric and citizen-centric reform processes to determine whether the latter in fact has a democratic advantage over the former. Italy's electoral reforms in 1993, Britain's attempts at reform within the last decade, and British Columbia's 2003 Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform will all be examined
    [Show full text]
  • A Theoretical Account of Electoral Reform in the UK
    A Theoretical Account of Electoral Reform in the UK A Theoretical Account of Electoral Reform in the UK Natalie Peelish Abstract The United Kingdom, a nation that utilizes the plurality electoral system of First Past the Post (FPTP), has proposed electoral reform twice over the past twenty years, in 1997 and 2011 respectively, under two different governments. Despite reaching a referendum in 2011, electoral reform was an utter failure on both occasions and FPTP prevails in the UK today. This article utilizes salient theories of electoral reform to provide an in-depth analysis of both occasions of reform proposition. The article ultimately concludes that given the complex circumstances under which reform initiation has occurred in the UK, electoral reform theories accounting for both the institutional conditions and the interests of relevant political actors are necessary in explaining why parties proposed electoral reform in both 1997 and 2011. Introduction First Past the Post (FPTP), the electoral system utilized by four of the eight largest democracies, has come under scrutiny in recent decades. FPTP was one the earliest mechanisms for electing legislative representatives and uses relatively straightforward logic (the first person to a plurality wins); nonetheless, academic specialists in electoral systems rate it as one of the least desirable electoral systems and many voters have come to agree. Of the many new democracies that emerged during the “Third Wave of Democracy1,” virtually none of them adopted FPTP as their electoral system. Furthermore, in the small wave of electoral system reform movements over the past quarter-century, none have moved to a FPTP system, instead either transitioning from FPTP to a PR system or from a PR system to a Mixed-Member System.
    [Show full text]