The mortality of parliaments; the emergence of 'presidentialism'

Ralf Dahrendorf, Former Rector, London School of Economics, Project Syndicate

August is the traditional month when parliaments recess for the summer. It offers a moment to examine why they are so enfeebled.

Across Europe, it is not only British Prime Minister Tony Blair who is accused of "presidentialism" nowadays. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder faces the same charge in the current German election campaign. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, indeed, does not even like being called Prime Minister. Because he is technically President of the Council (of ministers), he insists on using the title of President. France, of course, is a presidential democracy.

To many, "presidentialism" sounds like the American constitution; but those who suspect in today's trend another facet of the Americanization of Europe are wrong. American presidents have powers which are severely restricted by Congress via the U.S. constitution; they are but one in a triad of separate powers. Europe's "presidential" prime ministers, on the contrary, are what a British Lord Chancellor once called, "elective dictators."

This means, above all, that they have ceased to take parliaments seriously. Some Prime Ministers rarely attend their parliaments. When they graciously consent to appear, they are treated with deference.

Parliaments are in some cases handmaidens of the executive rather than the source of sovereignty. Prime Minister Berlusconi has persuaded the Italian Parliament to pass legislation which primarily benefits him and his business interests.

The mother of parliaments itself, the British parliament at Westminster, frequently cuts short debates by a procedural device known as the "guillotine," so that important legislation, like the current Asylum Bill, remains largely undebated in the House of Commons. (The absurd consequence is that the unelected House of Lords becomes the real legislature of the country.) All governments have acquired the habit of using secondary legislation by orders and regulations without parliamentary control.

The European Union sets a particularly bad example in all this. Its legislature is the Council of Ministers which sometimes allows the elected Parliament to engage in a little "co-decision- making." The Council of course meets in camera, that is without public scrutiny.

How could this happen? What is the reason for the apparent demise of the central institution of democracy, parliament? Why is it no longer the place in which the representatives of the people debate great issues and hold the executive to account? Is democracy itself at risk?

One can think of a number of reasons for the evisceration of parliaments. One is globalization. Decisions have emigrated from the spaces for which parliaments are elected. They take place in remote and often unknown places.

These can be the boardrooms of companies, or private international meetings of leaders, or just a course of events which escapes all controls. The collapse of the "new economy" is an example, but in a curious way also the probable attack on Iraq will also be arrived at in such a way. Even if national parliaments tried to come to grips with such developments, they would fail.

Another reason is the separation of the political game from the lives and concerns of most people. Parties have become machines for allocating power rather than for gathering and representing the interests of citizens. The party game has lost its representative quality.

As a result, leaders have developed a tendency to turn directly to the people without allowing much debate. This can be done by opinion polls and the use of focus groups; it can also be achieved by referenda and plebiscites. In both cases, parliaments become dispensable.

The danger of such developments is that they strengthen an already strong trend towards a new authoritarianism. The political class becomes a kind of nomenklatura of leaders who prefer popularity to debate.

They find it awkward to give reasons for their policies and regard parliaments as no more than a reservoir for those with whom they are prepared to share power.

As reasoned debate falls by the wayside, citizens lose interest in politics. They pursue their affairs and let those in power govern. Along with parties and parliaments, elections have lost their charm. Declining voter turnout tells the story.

The demise of parliaments is above all a decline in democratic debate and scrutiny. It is not a development which defenders of the constitution of liberty can accept. The time has come for a revolt of parliaments against both the arrogance of those in power and voter apathy.

In a sense, we need more rather than less presidentialism in Europe, at least if this is understood in the proper American way, in which legislative and executive powers are separately legitimated and equally strong.