They however have very different forms of governance, US using the presidential system while Britain uses parliamentary system of governance. The government of Britain which is parliamentary has ministers that are part of the executive branch, they are obtained from legislature and they are hence accountable to it. This therefore means that both the legislative and the executive branches are intertwined. In the parliamentary system of Britain, the government head is both the chief legislator and the chief executive. On the other hand, under the US presidential system of governance, the government has an executive branch exists which is completely separate from the legislative branch. A presidential system is characterized by an executive president who is the head of state and government.
Comparison between the US presidential and the Britain parliamentary systems of governance
The most basic difference between the USA and Britain is that while the later is a federal state, the former is a unitary state. A significant difference between the British parliamentary system and the US presidential system is related to the process of elections. Under the presidential system, the president together with the congress members is not elected in the same elections while in the parliamentary system like that of Britain they are all elected in the same election. In the presidential system chief executive officer is elected directly through the ballot but in a parliamentary system the chief executive officer or prime minister who is essentially the head of government is elected by parliament from the party with majority seats. In the real sense, the head of government is picked from the party with the majority seats. Also under the parliamentary system of governance, parliament has the authority of voting out a governing body and thus constitutionally throws it out of office, while under the presidential system such as the one used in US the same is not possible apart from very extreme circumstances such as impeachment. In an indirect sense, this implies that under the presidential system, the chief executive is weak. The president cannot dissolve government and thus order for new elections to be held, while in Britain the prime minister has the authority of exercising such powers. In a parliamentary system the office of the head of state is separate from that of the head of government. In most cases the head of state plays a ceremonial role and in the case of Britain the function is exercised by the monarch. (Munroe, p 60).
Under the presidential system, the administrative and political powers are shared between the judicial, legislative, and the executive branches. The government officials in either in any of these branches serve terms of office that are different, they also serve different constituencies. On the other hand, under the British parliamentary system, the parliament is the executive and the sovereign authority, this authority is exercised by the legislature through the cabinet and the prime minister. In the US presidential system of governance, the president is not only the chief executive of the country but is also the government leader. Once the president is elected into office under the presidential system he then appoints his cabinet that is secretaries or ministers in the US parlance. The ministers or the secretaries are not usually legislature members too, but their appointment might need the consent and advice of the legislature. Due to the fact that the executive branch senior officials are appointed or elected separately, the political system under the US presidential system is largely characterized by powers separation, wherein the legislative and the executive branches are completely independent of each other (Mark., p 66).
The management of parliamentary affairs in the two systems is quite different. The integration of the legislature and the executive arms in the parliamentary system creates a sense of discipline in political parties unlike the presidential system. The party members generally vote along party lines but in a presidential system the party members mainly vote as they wish. The conduct of debates are also different as in the case of the USA legislatures use the right to prolong speeches to delay legislative action but in the parliamentary system the members will call for a cloture to initiate the voting. The legislative chambers in the British parliament are different from those in the USA. In the USA senators and representatives sit in a semicircular format to face the chair and the parties are separated by the central passageway. In Britain the members sit with the different sides of government facing each other. In the British parliament, there is a question session for the prime minister but in the USA congress cannot summon the president to answer question except through congressional committees that can summon secretaries. In the USA the president and his cabinet (except the vice president) are not members of the legislature but in Britain the prime minister and his cabinet must be members of parliament (Mark, p 66).
The USA is governed by a written constitution but the British constitution is derived from different sources including parliamentary legislation, conventions, historical documents and the common law. In the USA the president can only serve a maximum of two four year terms but in Britain the prime minister can serve for as long as he nominated by his party for any number of years. On the other hand a prime minister in Britain can be replaced by his or her party without calling for fresh election but in the USA the party does not have the power to replace a sitting president (Munroe, p 58).
Both the United States and Britain have a bicameral legislature. In the USA congress comprises the senate (upper house) and the House of Representatives (lower house) while in the UK parliament consists of the House of Lords (upper house) and House of Commons (lower house). In past the members of the House of Lords were not elected as some of them could get the position through inheritance, religious leaders or when they became judicial officers. Currently most of them are now elected members after the institution of a series of members (Mark., p 74).
The two system of government described above both offer some advantages and disadvantages. A parliamentary system is said to offer a quick legislative process and effective leadership under majority rule. The turn over of governments in parliamentary system is generally high especially where no one party commands a clear majority. In presidential system the separation of powers prevents development of absolute power though checks and balances although is believed to be less efficient. All in all both of them are suitable in light of the historical backgrounds of the two countries and the weaknesses in each system are essentially balanced by the prevailing strengths.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment