DOCSLIB.ORG

62Nd Westminster Seminar on Parliamentary Practice and Procedure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
62Nd Westminster Seminar on Parliamentary Practice and Procedure 62nd Westminster Seminar on Parliamentary Practice and Procedure 17th to 21st of June 2013 Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Western Australia represented by Nathan Morton MLA Member for Forrestfield Introduction As a newly elected member of Parliament, it was a great opportunity to attend the 62nd Westminster Seminar in London in June of this year. Being a new member, it gave me great exposure and insight into the Westminster system and its procedures and practices. It was good to be able to hear from delegates from all around the Commonwealth as well as members of the UK Parliament. The CPA UK were most gracious hosts. This Westminster seminar was held from 17th June – 21st of June in London at Westminster Palace. The aim of this seminar was to give delegates a comprehensive look at the workings of the Westminster System, it was appropriate that this occur at the birth place of the system we use here in Western Australia. There were a record number of delegates at the 62nd Seminar from countries across the world. There were also several of my colleagues from other States in Australia as well. This seminar was also open to Clerks of the Parliaments across the Commonwealth. Some sessions were combined others were tailored to Members of Parliament and to the Clerks. There were several highlights to the programme including Prime Minister’s question time, constituency visits and visiting the Speaker’s Suite in Westminster Palace. Having attended this seminar, I left thinking that Western Australia as a jurisdiction that operates under the Westminster system, has a well‐established and robust democratic system of government. I am grateful to have been afforded this opportunity to represent Western Australia at the seminar. Seminar Programme Monday 17th June Welcome and Introduction Upon arrival at the Houses of Parliament in Westminster we were ushered into Portcullis House, which sits over the road from the Palace of Westminster, however as I was to discover later was linked by a tunnel under the road to the Palace. The security was definitely very tight. We were welcomed to the Seminar by the Rt Hon Sir Alan Haselhurst, who I have since been in contact with. He is the Chiar of the International and CPA UK Executive Committees. We were also welcomed by the Director of the International and Commonwealth Relations and Secretary CPA UK, Mr Andrew Tuggey DL. Both made all the delegates feel very welcomed in the UK. Session 1: Introduction to the UK Parliament This session was designed to introduce delegates to the Westminster system and give an overview of the structure of the Parliament, including its history and some of the current issues that were currently being debated. The history was extremely interesting and the development from the Monarchy, to the House of Lords and also to the House of Commons. Some of the current issues were of particular interest. The UK was experiencing a phenomenon at the moment with a new political party called the UK Independence Party and they had been polling around the 25 percent mark. Locally it was believed that this was due to some sections of the community becoming a little disillusioned with the current government. There was also debate at the time around a timetable for a referendum on whether or not the UK should leave the European Union, I imagine we will see this play out in the years ahead as the UK heads towards its 2015 General Election. Session 2: The legislative Process This session provided some insight into the passage of bills within the UK Parliamentary system. Some of the interesting facts that I discovered in this session were things such as when Members wanted to make amendments to the legislation they were allowed 50 words for explanatory notes to the amendments. I also discovered that in the UK system, only 13 Fridays are allocated to Private Member’s Bills. Apparently this is done on what appeared to be a lucky hat drawer, in that about 440 names go in and only twenty come out. Session 3: Running Parliament The running of the UK Parliament was an interesting session for me, as one could imagine managing the site alone is an arduous task given its sheer size and of course its age. The number of people who are employed at the UK Parliament is also staggering. Sir Robert Rogers KCB, Clerk of the House of Commons and Mr David Beamish, Clerk of the Parliaments, House of Lords gave us some great insight into running one of the oldest establishments in the world. Session 4: Bicameralism – the work of the second Chamber For me, this session was of particular interest. Hearing firsthand about the House of Lords was fascinating. There are currently around 754 members to the House of Lords, in fact not enough space for them all to fit in the Chamber at once. Many do not attend sitting days and appointments are done in several ways. Hereditary membership was done away with in 1999, however there is no upper limit to the numbers that can be appointed. Included in the membership are the Bishops and Archbishops which make up 26 of the House of Lords total numbers. The discussion on Bicameralism was very interesting, hearing how it is done in the UK and then hearing from our very own Speaker in the Queensland Parliament, the Hon Fiona Simpson MP who is Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. She gave an interesting account of how things are done in Queensland, given they are a jurisdiction that had Bicameralism and now operates under a Unicameralism system. Session 5: Parliamentary Questions and Motions This session gave an insight into how Parliamentary Questions were asked. Obviously with the sheer numbers of members to the Chambers, getting the chance to ask a question in the Parliament doesn’t come around very often. There are around 650 Members in the House of Commons. Tuesday 18th June – Split Day – Members and Clerks Session 6: The Role of an MP It was interesting hearing from UK Members of Parliament about what it meant to be an MP. Inevitably it was very similar across the Commonwealth. The strategies and practices used were fairly universal. The panel members talked about door knocking, leaflet dropping, social media and community events. They also talked about the different parts to the role, the Parliamentary role, the Party representation and the Constituency representation. They also said that wherever possible try to translate work from your constituency into the Parliament. Session 7: The Role of the Opposition It was interesting hearing from the Rt Hon Jack Straw who was the Secretary of State under the former Blair Administration. He gave great insight into the joys of being in Government as opposed to opposition, this is a sentiment I have heard echoed many times already. He also said that during their time in Government they had a very effective opposition and that an effective opposition can really set the agenda for the political debate. Obviously he also stated that a good opposition is needed to hold the government of the day to account. Session 8: Party Discipline in the Parliament This session focussed primarily on the role of the Whip. Of course it was interesting to compare Western Australia with the UK Parliament. In WA, we have 59 Lower House members, whereas in the UK there are around 650 members. There are also two pubs which are located just off site, but still screen the sessions on TV’s in the pubs and have bells that ring in the pubs as well so that members can make it back in time for divisions and the like. The Whip and Shadow Whip gave some entertaining commentary on some of the events that have occurred over the years with regards to various members and their antics at times. Session 9: The Role of the Leader of the House The Leader of the House is obviously there to organise Government Business within the Parliament. It is a very important role for a Government as this person is responsible for progressing the Government’s legislative agenda. In the UK, the House of Commons sits for 150 days a year, however for various reasons, only half of these days are available to the Government. So this means in about 75 days a year, the Government of the day needs to be able to progress its legislation. Session 10: The Role of the Media in the Oversight of the Parliament It was interesting to hear from UK Members of Parliament, that “MP‐bashing” had become quite a popular past time within the UK, primarily driven by the tabloid media. They also made the point that quite the opposite existed for local media in constituencies. Often, in the local media, the coverage was far more reasonable about what the Member of Parliament was up to and what issues they were working on within their constituency. It was also noted by presenters that the UK was still recovering from the expenses scandal that had rocked the public faith in MP’s over recent years and re‐establishing trust with the electorate was taking some time and this was hampered by, what appeared to them, to be a desire by tabloid media to report MP’s in a negative light. Reception at Marlborough House At the end of the day we were transported to the ornate Marlborough House for a reception hosted by the very welcoming CPA UK Branch. This was a great opportunity to interact with delegates from other Commonwealth nations and a nice end to the day.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Electoral Reform in Canada: the Shape of Things to Come an Executive Summary March 2016
    Electoral Reform in Canada: The Shape of Things to Come An Executive Summary March 2016 We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first- past- the- post voting system. As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that electoral reform measures—such as ranked ballots, proportional representation, mandatory voting, and online voting—are fully and fairly studied and considered .... Within 18 months of forming government, we will bring forward legislation to enact electoral reform. —Justin Trudeau, Real Change: A Fair and Open Government ABOUT THIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Public Services Foundation of Canada and the National Union of Public and General Employees have prepared a comprehensive discussion paper based on a survey of the literature and polling and focus group results, which will be published at a later date. This executive summary provides an overview of the main points without the inclusion of the research, position paper, or polling results. Electoral Reform in Canada: The Shape of Things to Come Executive Summary The Canadian Debate Justin Trudeau promised during the election that this would be the last federal election to use the unfair first-past-the-post (FPTP) system. Although he has indicated that other voting systems would be considered, Trudeau has indicated that his preferred proposal is a version of the single transferable vote (STV) that uses a ranked ballot. His critics say that when STV is used in single member ridings, it is really just an alternative vote (AV) system, also known as an instant run-off system, and the result would be even more unfair in its outcome than FPTP.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral Reform “Regardless of Electoral System, There Will Always
    Electoral Reform “Regardless of electoral system, there will always be opposing views as to advantages and disadvantages of each” Submitted by SR-F 06 September 2016 Because elections and referenda require a high level of voter awareness and responsibility, civic participation in governance must be encouraged in order that Canada’s Democracy becomes one that protects liberties, particularly communal liberties, rather than simply emphasizing individual Rights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMIbH5D0waA Direct Democracy would be the ideal voting system because it allows citizens to participate in most every aspect of governance through initiatives/voting/referenda... laws and changes to the national constitution being voted on by the citizenry affording them a much greater measure of control over political minutiae. Switzerland is the most prominent modern democracy to use elements of Direct Democracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland with versions of it at State and local levels in the USA. As opposed to direct democracy, some version of Representative Democracy , founded on the principle of elected officials representing a group of people (includes Referendum/Initiatives/Recall that provide limited Direct Democracy), would appear to be more practical for Canada at this point in time. Present System : FPTP - Plurality In “winner-take-all" electoral systems, generally just two parties end up competing in national elections, forcing political discussions into a narrow two-party frame where loyalty and party line assertions can distort political debate, voters left undecided as to where to place their vote. When FPTP Voters realise that their preferred candidate cannot win, knowing that their vote won’t count or will be wasted, they have little incentive to vote.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral Rules and Democratic Electoral Rules, and Governance Democratic Governance Edited by Mala Htun and G
    Report of the Political Science, Task Force on Electoral Rules and Democratic Electoral Rules, and Governance Democratic Governance Edited by Mala Htun and G. Bingham Powell, Jr. AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE AssOCIATION n TasK FORCE REPORT, SEPTEMBER 2013 Political Science, Electoral Rules, and Democratic Governance Report of the Task Force on Electoral Rules and Democratic Governance Edited by Mala Htun and G. Bingham Powell, Jr. SEPTEMBER 2013 AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE AssOCIATION 1527 New Hampshire Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036-1206 Copyright © 2013 by the American Political Science Association. All rights reserved. ISBN: 978-1-878147-41-7 Task Force on Electoral Rules and Democratic Governance Task Force Members Mala Htun, University of New Mexico, Chair G. Bingham Powell, Jr., University of Rochester; President, APSA, 2011–12 John Carey, Dartmouth College Karen E. Ferree, University of California, San Diego Simon Hix, London School of Economics Mona Lena Krook, Rutgers University Robert G. Moser, University of Texas, Austin Shaheen Mozaffar, Bridgewater State University Andrew Rehfeld, Washington University in St. Louis Andrew Reynolds, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Ethan Scheiner, University of California, Davis Melissa Schwartzberg, Columbia University Matthew S. Shugart, University of California, Davis ii American Political Science Assocation Table of Contents TASK FORCE MEMBERS ............................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF
    [Show full text]
  • UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UCLA UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The Party Politics of Political Decentralization Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6jw6f00k Author Wainfan, Kathryn Tanya Publication Date 2018 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles The Party Politics of Political Decentralization A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science by Kathryn Tanya Wainfan 2018 c Copyright by Kathryn Tanya Wainfan 2018 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION The Party Politics of Political Decentralization by Kathryn Tanya Wainfan Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Los Angeles, 2018 Professor Michael F. Thies, Chair In this dissertation, I ask why certain types of parties would agree to support creating or empowering sub-national governments. In particular, I focus on nationalized parties { those that gain support from throughout a country. Political decentralization can negatively impact nationalized parties in at least two ways. First, it reduces the amount of power a party can enjoy should it win control of the national-level government. Second, previous studies show that political decentralization can increase party denationalization, meaning regional parties gain more support, even during national-level elections. I argue that nationalized parties may support decentralization when doing so reduces the ideological conflicts over national-level policy among voters whose support they seek. By altering political institutions, a party may be able to accommodate differing policy prefer- ences in different parts of the country, or limit the damage to the party's electoral fortunes such differences could create.
    [Show full text]
  • ELECTING the FIRST PARLIAMENT Party Competition and Voter Participation in Scotland
    PARTY POLITICS VOL 10. No.2 pp. 213–233 Copyright © 2004 SAGE Publications London Thousand Oaks New Delhi www.sagepublications.com ELECTING THE FIRST PARLIAMENT Party Competition and Voter Participation in Scotland Steven E. Galatas ABSTRACT Theory regarding turnout in elections suggests that voters are more likely to vote when their vote could be decisive. The article provides a generalized test of the relationship between the likelihood of turning out and the closeness of elections. Data are single-member district (first- past-the-post) and regional (party list) constituency-level results from the Scottish Parliament election of 1999. Scotland provides an excellent case because the 1999 Scottish Parliament was elected using a combi- nation of single-member districts, plus an additional member, regional list alternative vote system. In addition, the Scottish Parliament election was characterized by regional, multiparty competition. Controlling for other factors, the article finds that closeness counts and relates to higher levels of voter participation in the Scottish Parliament elections. This finding holds for single-member district (first-past-the-post) constituen- cies and additional member regional lists. KEY WORDS electoral competition Scottish Parliament voter turnout In 1999, Scottish voters went to the polls for the first time to elect a Scottish Parliament. Although Scotland had a legislative body prior to the Treaty of Union of 1707, the new Parliament created in 1999 was the first democrat- ically elected Scottish Parliament. Elections to the Scottish Parliament featured a deviation from the single-member district-plurality system (SMD-P) familiar to Scottish voters from other electoral contests. Instead, voters selected Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) using an additional member system (AMS).
    [Show full text]
  • Faclair Airson Riaghaltas Ionadail Gàidhlig Agus Beurla
    Faclair airson Riaghaltas Ionadail Gàidhlig agus Beurla Dictionary for Local Government Scottish Gaelic and English Air a chur ri chèile le Compiled by The European Language Initiative a bhuineas do mhodh : a thogas meanmna ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ a ghabhas leasachadh a nì bacadh br a rinneadh leis a‟ phrìomhaire remediable, obstructionist, prime-ministerial adj retrievable adj obstructive adj gnìomh a rinneadh leis suidheachadh a ghabhas innleachdan a nì bacadh a‟ phrìomhaire leasachadh obstructionist tactics a prime-ministerial action a retrievable situation à seo suas cgr A a nì mì-rian br adv hence a ghabhas obrachadh disruptive adj a bhuineas do mhodh viable adj giùlan a nì mì-rian procedural adj a sheallas inbhe moladh a ghabhas obrachadh disruptive behaviour prestigious adj a viable proposition a bhuineas don bhuidseat budgetary adj a rèir roi a sheasas na aonar a lìonas beàrn according to, stand-alone adj a bhuineas don phrìomhaire stop-gap adj relative (to) prep buidheann a sheasas na aonar a stand-alone body prime-ministerial adj a rèir an lagha according to law a mhair fada br a bhuineas don tuath luachan a rèir a chèile a tha a‟ tighinn a-steach br prolonged adj provincial adj relative values incoming adj thug am pàrtaidh dùbhlain cha tig na h-argamaidean ionnsaigh air an riaghaltas a mhair a dh‟aindeoin roi le gin a rèir a chèile a thaobh roi le gin fada notwithstanding adv the arguments are
    [Show full text]
  • THE 2017 GENERAL ELECTION Volatile Voting, Random Results
    FAIR FRANCHISE THE 2017 GENERAL ELECTION Volatile voting, random results JESS GARLAND & CHRIS TERRY AUGUST 2017 CONTENTS Introduction 5 1. The third strike for First Past the Post 9 2. No return to two-party politics 15 3. Divisive system, divided country 19 4. Alternatives 29 Conclusion 35 Appendix 36 ELECTORAL REFORM SOCIETY 3 INTRODUCTION The 2017 General Election was the third strike for the First Past the Post voting system. From producing a hung Parliament in 2010 – something not meant to happen under Westminster’s winner-takes-all voting system – to a slim majority in 2015, the way we elect our House of Commons isn’t doing the one thing it was claimed to be good for – delivering decisive results. This June’s election outcome throws up yet more questions about the legitimacy of our voting system. Our report shows how far from being ‘strong and stable’, First Past the Post is failing to deliver for the public. With one in five voters trying to second-guess each other by opting for ‘lesser evils’, we are left with a lottery election where casting a ballot is like casting a die. Not only have the last three elections either produced hung par- liaments or results so unrepresentative they demean the electoral process (2015 was the most disproportionate in British history), the last two have seen the highest ‘voter volatility’ since 1931. Our voting system is failing to keep up and is undermining the faith voters have that seats in Parliament will reflect the votes they cast. This lottery approach to running elections means we have no idea what will happen or how votes will be reflected in our elected Commons.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Mixed-Member Proportional Representation in Scotland and Wales: Lessons from Germany?
    The Impact of Mixed-Member Proportional Representation in Scotland and Wales: Lessons from Germany? Thomas Carl Lundberg Keele European Parties Research Unit (KEPRU) Working Paper 20 © Thomas Carl Lundberg, 2003 ISSN 1475-1569 ISBN 1-899488-18-9 KEPRU Working Papers are published by: School of Politics, International Relations and the Environment (SPIRE) Keele University Staffs ST5 5BG, UK Tel +44 (0)1782 58 4177/3088/3452 Fax +44 (0)1782 58 3592 www.keele.ac.uk/depts/spire/ Editor: Professor Thomas Poguntke ([email protected]) KEPRU Working Papers are available via SPIRE’s website. Launched in September 2000, the Keele European Parties Research Unit (KEPRU) was the first research grouping of its kind in the UK. It brings together the hitherto largely independent work of Keele researchers focusing on European political parties, and aims: • to facilitate its members' engagement in high-quality academic research, individually, collectively in the Unit and in collaboration with cognate research groups and individuals in the UK and abroad; • to hold regular conferences, workshops, seminars and guest lectures on topics related to European political parties; • to publish a series of parties-related research papers by scholars from Keele and elsewhere; • to expand postgraduate training in the study of political parties, principally through Keele's MA in Parties and Elections and the multinational PhD summer school, with which its members are closely involved; • to constitute a source of expertise on European parties and party politics for media and other interests. The Unit shares the broader aims of the Keele European Research Centre, of which it is a part.
    [Show full text]
  • If It's Broken, Fix It! Time to Rethink the AMS Electoral System in Wales
    If it’s broken, fix it! Time to rethink the AMS electoral system in Wales democraticaudit.com /2016/06/09/if-its-broken-fix-it-time-to-rethink-the-ams-electoral-system-in-wales/ By Democratic Audit UK 2016-6-9 Diana Stirbu and Laura McAllister discuss the limitations of the Welsh Additional Member System. They write that it is a mockery to call it a proportional system, and argue that it is in danger of alienating voters. They also indicate that its weaknesses may actually be prohibiting the development of a more mature political system. Credit: National Assembly for Wales CC BY 2.0 With the dust settling on Wales’s fifth elections to its National Assembly, it’s timely to reflect on some of the inherent problems on an electoral system that delivered another ‘hung’ outcome. The Additional Member System (AMS), a hybrid voting system combining the majoritarian First Past the Post (FPTP) with a very limited component of proportional representation (PR), was a fundamental part of the foundations of devolution. The new democratically-elected legislature established in Wales in 1999 was meant to signal the start of a “new politics” (whatever that means). Using an element of PR to elect the Assembly’s 60 members suggested an aspiration to deliver more representative results than FPTP, whilst also retaining the constituency-elected representative link regarded as important. 17 years on, our political experience in Wales can be described as something of a Curate’s egg. There have been the odd glimpses of begrudging pluralism in both voting habits and political operating styles.
    [Show full text]
  • Teacher Read Through of Additional Member System Resource
    Elections and voting The Additional Member System Hi! Let me explain what it is... The Additional Member System is a form of proportional representation which aims to make the results of an election reflect more closely the amount of votes cast for each party or individual. The Additional Member System combines First Past the Post in constituencies and a regional system which elects 56 additional members to the Parliament. Let me explain At a Scottish Parliament election, each voter has two votes One is your Constituency Vote the other is your Regional vote. This vote (illustration of a constituency ballot paper) is used to elect the local constituency MSP. The constituency vote is counted and the person with the most votes wins. This is known as First Past the Post. You use your second vote (illustration of a regional ballot paper) to choose a political party, or a candidate standing as an individual, within a larger electoral area known as a region. The region is made up of several constituencies. The regional votes are counted. Regional seats are decided using the D’Hondt Formula The D’Hondt Formula - how does it work? Regional seats are decided using the D’Hondt Formula (Victor D’Hondt was a Belgian mathematician) Regional Votes ÷ Number of MSPs already won in region + 1 The Party or person with the largest number after this formula is applied wins the round and wins one regional MSP. This formula will be used 7 times in 7 rounds to elect 7 regional MSPs. With me so far...let’s go to round 1 Let’s take an example of a region Our region is called “Anywhere”.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix: Notes and Sources for Summary Tables
    Appendix: Notes and Sources for Summary Tables Notes Electoral systems are distinguished for having changed at least one of these elements: single- or multi-member districts, ballot, rule or formula. In contrast, changes are recorded within a single system for term, number of seats, number of districts, magnitudes and thresholds, which are given as ranges within each period (or as an average*). Public ballot and indirect elections are indicated when they exist; otherwise assume secret ballot and direct elections. The following abbreviations have been used: Maj. = Majority; Plu. = Plurality; Prop. = Proportional. ‘Universal MS’ indicates the introduction of universal male suffrage. The sign // indicates a period without elections or with authoritarian fake elections. See Glossary for definitions. Sources General Blais, André and Louis Massicotte (1997) ‘Electoral Formulas: A Macroscopic Perspective’, European Journal of Political Research, 32: 107–29. Cox, Gary W. (1997) Making Votes Count. Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems. New York: Cambridge University Press. Freedom House (R. D. Gastil and Adrian Karatnycky eds) (1972–2002) Freedom in the World. The Annual Survey of Political Rights and Civil Liberties. New Brunswick: Transaction <www.freedomhouse.org>. Katz, Richard S. (1997) Democracy and Elections. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lijphart, Arend (1994) Electoral Systems and Party Systems. A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945–1990. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mackie, Thomas T. and Richard Rose (1991) The International Almanac of Electoral History, 3rd edn. London and Washington, DC: Macmillan-Congressional Quarterly. Massicotte, Louis, and André Blais (1999) ‘Mixed Electoral Systems: A Conceptual and Empirical Survey’, Electoral Studies, 18, 3: 341–66.
    [Show full text]
  • Support for Third Parties Under Plurality Rule Electoral Systems : a Public Choice Analysis of Britain, Canada, New Zealand and South Korea
    SUPPORT FOR THIRD PARTIES UNDER PLURALITY RULE ELECTORAL SYSTEMS : A PUBLIC CHOICE ANALYSIS OF BRITAIN, CANADA, NEW ZEALAND AND SOUTH KOREA WON-TAEK KANG Thesis presented for Ph.D. at London School of Economics and Political Science UMI Number: U105556 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U105556 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Ti-w^s& S F 7 ^ 2 7 ABSTRACT Why do parties other than major parties survive or even flourish under plurality rule electoral systems, when according to Du verger’s law we should expect them to disappear? Why should rational voters support third parties, even though their chances of being successful are often low ? Using an institutional public choice approach, this study analyses third party voting as one amongst a continuum of choices faced by electors who pay attention both to the ideological proximity of parties, and to their perceived efficacy measured against a community-wide level of minimum efficacy. The approach is applied in detailed case study chapters examining four different third parties.
    [Show full text]