How Parliament Hold Government Cabinets Responsible - Essay Example

How parliaments hold government cabinets responsible Lecturer: Introduction There exist many varied forms of government and political systems that govern the countries of the world we live in today. The choice of the political system that a country adopts depends largely on the perception as well as the affiliation these people feel towards the system (Floyd, 2008, p.340). Each form of political set up and system of government has its own mixture of benefits as well as shortcomings. The major policy makers, that is the cabinet of the various nations need to follow certain rules in the conduct of their duties lest they misuse the power vested upon them for their own selfish gains (Herbolzheimer, 2009, p. 40). It becomes important therefore that a mechanism should be devised within the government system to ensure that measures are put to prevent abuse of power by these high ranking government officials. The cabinet is the most powerful committee of the government. The parliament then devises a way to ensure that this committee does not misuse the powers it has. Different nations use different methods of holding this committee responsible for their actions. To this regard, this paper aims at investigating how parliaments can hold the cabinet in their nation responsible for the decisions that they make and the actions they take within the government structure. To effectively do so, the paper will narrow the discussion to the political systems of Western Europe. The paper will examine the different measures that political and parliamentary systems in Western Europe use to hold the government cabinets responsible. The main angles of approach on this subject will be Financial accountability, Administrative matters, Legislative accountability, Collective and individual responsibility as well as the parliament’s representative mandate Political systems in Western Europe The part of the world that is known as Western Europe marks the region that is comprised, as the word suggests, of the westerly countries in Europe. Western Europe is characterized by 20 countries namely Andorra, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. These are the countries that were associated with the Western Europe Union during the Cold War period (1945-1991). The countries later join the others from the Eastern Europe bloc to form what is now known as the European Union. These are countries that are ranked among the developed countries in the world on an economic spectrum. The countries of Western Europe are high income countries, with strong economies according to the World Bank statistical report (World Bank website, 2013). The countries of the Western Europe are characterized by a democratic system of government (John, 1999, p. 40). A democratic system of government is a system that allows for the full participation of the citizens of the country in the governance of the country. The citizens have full rights to express their opinions without fear and without being repressed or oppressed by the government of these nations (Robinson, 2010, p. 453). They have an equal say in the decisions that affect their livelihood and survival in the countries. To express these opinions, the citizens exercise their democratic rights to vote in representatives to the parliamentary assembly. These representatives act as the voice of the people, connecting them to the government. They serve as the emissaries of the people to the government. Through this democratic right that is spelt out in the constitution of the different countries of the Western Europe, legislative houses have been formed to house these representatives. In United Kingdom for instance, there are two houses; the House of Lords and the House of Commons. Despite having a monarch and the loyal crown, the country is largely governed by these parliamentary systems. Each government of the region has a cabinet body and a ministerial body. Each ministry is governed by a minister. These ministers are then appointed to the cabinet by the president or the highest ranking authority in the land. The cabinet acts as the final line of authority, being superseded by the President only. This is the body or organ of the government that is responsible for coming up with policy issues and offer advice to the President on matters concerning the nation. It is worth noting that, being that highly ranking, the cabinet wields much power. Sometimes, they may use their position and influence to come up with policies that are not all-rounded and that are not aimed for the development of the nations in which they are found in. this is where the other members of the parliament come in. bearing in mind that the decisions and the policies that these members pass affects the whole nation, it important to have a monitoring system put in place. One of the main duties of the members of parliament is to make sure that the cabinet is kept onto their toes. They closely scrutinize the behavior of the cabinet in the various nations and monitor how the cabinet operates and makes these policies and ensure that they are held wholly accountable for their actions. This monitoring is done in a number of varied ways as shall be highlighted in the following discourse. Financial accountability The financial aspect of every country is one of the most sensitive and important aspect in the economy of the country. The growth of a country’s economy depends largely upon how the persons in power utilize the resources they have at their disposal. Poor planning and wastage of the resources culminates into a recession. Due to this, the parliament must ensure that the resources they have are well utilized. Since it is the duty of the cabinet to come up with various policies, projects and the budgets, the parliament’s role is to ensure that there is full accountability, transparency and efficiency in the conduct of these projects and utilization of the resources at disposal. The members of parliament may exercise some control over the cabinet on the financial issue as shall be outlined in the forthcoming discourse. The cabinet, through the head of the cabinet is required to pass the budget and financial bills in both houses. This is done so as to give the house members the chance to have a look at those financial bills and the budget. The house members are the required to vote the bills in or out. If the majority of the members of the houses are not comfortable with the projections of these bills and budget, they vote to the contrary. This forces the cabinet to go back to the drawing board and draft new financial bills. This happens until the members of the house feel comfortable with passing a certain financial bill floated into the house by the cabinet. The importance of this kind of parliamentary power is that it prevents the cabinet from passing some financial bills that would advocate for overspending at the cost of the taxpayer. The cabinet has to make sure that every shilling spent and budgeted for in the financial bill and budget is spent in a wise manner. The constitution of the Western Europe nations prevents the cabinet and the government from removing any money from the consolidated coffers without the full assent of both Houses. Without the support of the parliament, the cabinet is powerless to execute any project that involves money. This makes the cabinet develop very systematic and well-cut out financial bills in a bid to woo the members of parliament into voting for it. Once the parliament has approved a certain project or has passed a certain financial bill, the cabinet must report back to the parliament about how the money was spent. This follow up makes sure that no room for corruption and wastage is made available. Everything has to be laid bare. As such, the cabinet becomes more carefully on how it spends the taxpayers’ money knowing it would be held wholly accountable in case of wastage of the resources. Administrative matters This is another level where the parliament holds the government and the cabinet responsible and accountable. The cabinet is the one that is largely involved in matters of administration of the nation. The president himself is responsible for appointing these members of the cabinet to their posts. Most of the time, the parliament does not interfere with this administration directly, opting to receive reports on governance from the cabinet. However, in some instances, the direct involvement of the parliament in the administrative affairs of the cabinet is warranted. This occurs especially in situations where the government through the cabinet forms and implements policies that are wrong. The parliament holds the government hostage and demands an explanation of the why wrong policies were implemented. This puts the cabinet in the spotlight at all times for they know that if they make a wrong policy they would have to be answerable to the parliament. And since the parliament has the capacity to vote these people out of office through a vote of no confidence, the cabinet takes all necessary caution to ensure that wrong policies are not designed or implemented. Legislative accountability The governments of the various nations in Western Europe are responsible for coming up with laws and enacting them. However, before the government enacts any law, it must first explain all the provisions of the specific enactment to the members of parliament. The members of parliament of the various governments in Western Europe are given the chance to go through these provisions and ask questions in areas where they need clarification. If the members feel comfortable that the law is well enacted and all the provisions within this law thoroughly exhausted, then they are in a position to vote in the bill into law. This level of control prevents the cabinet from coming up with laws and acts that are arbitrary or misguiding in nature. The bill has to pass through a number of stages before being enacted into law. For instance, in Norway, a member of the Western Europe Union, legislation has to pass through six stages to be enacted into law. First, the bill has to be floated into parliament. Any member of the House can introduce the piece of legislation. The bill is handed to the two houses for processing. After this stage, the committee action stage follows. The bill is referred to the rightful committee by the speaker of the House or presiding officer in the Senate house. After this stage, the bill passes through the floor action where the legislation is scheduled. Debate on the same is then carried out and voting occurs. If the bill is not passed, it dies out. If it is passed, it moves into the next level, the conference committee. After the committee is done with going through this bill, the bill is then taken to the President for review. Once the president reviews the bill and signs it, the bill becomes law and an official number is assigned to it. Most of the democratic countries in the westerly part of Europe follow such a strict protocol before signing a specific bill into law. This is done so as to ensure that the laws that are passed are not arbitrary and every consideration and angle of the law has been looked into keenly. Collective and individual responsibility Collective responsibility is a situation whereby all the parties involved in a certain pact act towards the fulfillment of a common goal together. Each party in the pact plays a predetermined role all aiming at the successful completion of a certain goal. If one party fails to play its part, the overall accomplishment of the goal is jeopardized irrespective of the other parties playing their role. Individual responsibility is a situation whereby a single entity to a pact is held responsible for the actions that the entity commits as an individual. In the Western Europe political system, collective as well as individual responsibility of cabinet members as a whole and the different ministries in which they run is emphasized (Baines et al 2001, p. 2000). The whole cabinet becomes responsible to the members of parliament for any action taken by any of the member of the cabinet. In the same capacity, each minister is held responsible on an individual basis for any action taken by the officials working under him or her in his or her ministry. On a collective accountability basis, if by any instance that the parliament does not approve the action of one of the members, acting on the capacity of the cabinet, the whole cabinet is placed in a position where they face the threat of being sacked or forced to resign. Similarly, on an individual responsibility basis, if the cabinet disapproves the actions of an official in one of the ministry, the minister in charge of this ministry is the one who is held personally in charge of the actions of the official. Due to this reason, every member of the cabinet makes sure that he acts in the best interests of the ministry in which he or she coordinates. The minister is also responsible for ensuring that the officials working under him in the ministry are well versed with their job description for he or she is held responsible by the parliament for every action taken by each official. The minister has to disclose to the parliament the projects that his or her ministry is running upon request by a member of parliament. This random checks upon the performance of these ministries by the members of parliament ensure that the ministers are always kept to their toes and performance is guaranteed. A good example of the resignations by the ministers in the cabinet was observed during the Labour party crisis in the United Kingdom in the year 2009 (The Telegraph, 2013). As many as six ministers resigned as fast as the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown could replace them. These resignations were as a result of ripples of inefficiencies emanating from one ministry but sweeping into other ministries in a wave. The parliament’s representative mandate The members of parliament in the different parliaments in the region act in full capacity as representatives of the people from their regions. In this context, the people deserve to know what is going on in the government. They deserve to know what laws the government is passing, how the government is implementing these laws and about administrative matters at large. Since the people might not have the capacity to get this information on their own, they involve the assistance of the members of parliament. These members of parliament are elected as representatives of the people. They are the voice and the years of the people. As such, they are given the mandate to ask questions in parliament pertaining to the way the cabinet administers these people. The people voice their grievances to these representatives and the representatives act on their behalf. Through this exercise or the right to represent their electorates, the members of parliament hold the cabinet accountable for every action that they take. Neutral check The tug of war between the cabinet and the parliament involves two organs of the government; the executive and the legislative organ. The executive runs the government and the legislative is responsible for passing of laws. The other organ that retains a neutrality stance amidst all this is the judiciary. The judiciary is the organ that resolves the conflicts that may arise between the other two organs (Laratta, 2010, p.86). The judiciary makes sure that the laws passed collectively by the executive and the legislative organs are implemented unconditionally. Conclusion From the above discussion, it has been clearly observed that the cabinet members of any nation have a very high level of power and influence in the government. This is particularly so among the nations of the Western Europe as the above discussion formulates. It has also been shown here that there is a tendency of the cabinet members to act in manners that do not address the general needs of the economy. This tendency is propelled by this power and influence. If left alone to govern the country without measures, they would most likely act in their own personal interests. That is why there is a need for a governing body and in this case, the parliamentary systems of these countries are the governing bodies. The members of parliament are the representatives of the people as has been observed from the above discussion. It is therefore the duty of the members of parliament to make sure that they represent the people effectively. From the discussion above, there are a number of platforms through which this representation should be done. These platforms are Financial accountability, Administrative matters, Legislative accountability, Collective and individual responsibility and the parliament’s representative mandate. In every step of the way and action undertaken by the cabinet, there should be evidence of absolute openness, transparency and accountability. However, such measures are only possible in a system of government where the rule of democracy is recognized and upheld. The Western European governments that have formed the core of this study are governments that are governed using this system of democracy. The system allows for outright and full rights to expression of ideas, opinions and representation. In other systems such as a dictatorship, the citizens do not have the right to voice their opinions concerning how their country is being governed. Neither are they allowed the right to representation by electing their own members of parliament. In countries like that, the cabinet, if present at all has the full power over the people. They are characterized by acute abuse of power, high levels of corruption and lack of efficiency in service delivery to the people. In conclusion, it has been observed that the cabinet has a role to play in ensuring that all the actions that the cabinet undertakes are transparent and accountable. The members of parliament have a role to play too. Their role is to act as guardian of the electorates. They are supposed to ensure that the cabinet members act in the interest of the general public as opposed to their own selfish interests. As such, the members of parliament must have some balances and checks to ensure that they hold these cabinet members responsible and fully accountable for every action they undertake. References Baines et al 2001. ‘The “Americanisation” myth in European political markets - A focus on the United Kingdom’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, No. 9, pp.1099 – 1117. European parliament website 2013. ‘Relations with national parliaments’, Retrieved February 24, 2013 from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/webnp/cms/pid/8 Floyd, D 2008. ‘Have “European politics” and EU policy making replaced the politics of member state countries?’, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 35, No. 5, pp.338 – 343. Herbolzheimer, K 2009. ‘Challenging political violence’, Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research, Vol. 1, No.3, pp.37 – 47. John, K 1999. ‘Confederal Federalism and Citizen Representation in the European Union’, West Europe journals, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 34-58. Laratta, R 2010. ‘Political advocacy or electronic advocacy? The use of electronic techniques by Japanese NPOs for political advocacy purposes’, Journal of Global Responsibility, Vol. 1, No.1, pp.85 – 97. Robinson, C 2010. ‘Political advertising and the demonstration of market orientation’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp.451 – 460. The Telegraph 2013. ‘Labour in crisis – cabinet resignations’, Retrieved February 24, 2013 from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/gordon-brown/5454657/Gordon-Brown-vows-to-fight-on.html World Bank website 2013. ‘World Economies- statistics’, Retrieved February 24, 2013 from www.worldbank.com Read More