Archives

Is adversarial politics sustainable in a small state? - Part 2

(Continued from April 27)

However, Mr. Perez also pointed out that the protection of basic rights was also necessary for a democratic system.

The media and conflict

Another essential element of democracy was the media, particularly their role in transmitting information about politics, or in generating and abetting conflict. The discussion followed along two lines.

The first was the general view that the media exacerbate conflict by focusing on stories where conflict exists and not focusing on stories where there is consensus.

Two counterpoints were raised. First, as Mr. Galea pointed out, in some countries (like Malta) party-owned media were the generator of stories that incite conflict.

Hon. Denniston Fraser, MLC, (British Virgin Islands) pointed to the complicity of politicians in a different fashion. He also pointed to the public posturing that takes place in highly adversarial televised proceedings. This he said, generated a particular understanding of the nature of politics that is in contrast with the kind of co-operation and agreement that often takes place between Members of different parties in private, informal sessions.

Mr. Faireka acknowledged this as a drawback to parliamentary politics. For good reasons or not Members feel they must demonstrate a form of leadership that emphasizes difference not consensus. This observation returned the discussion to the idea that competition is essential to democracy.

Mr. Perez suggested that the need for professionalism in political journalism meant that subsidies should be given to media outlets if necessary. This was an acknowledgement of the role the media play as a check on government and the Legislature. This discussion revealed one dilemma.

The sustainability of adversarial politics

Ms Huet pointed out that in Jersey the Chief Minister was also the major shareholders of the island's only newspaper. The paper is so dominant that no competitor had been able to establish itself as an alternate outlet. This also raised questions regarding its ability to play a neutral role. The nature of adversarial politics having been explored, the workshop moved to the question of whether it was sustainable.

Hon. Allian Baden, MP (Saint Lucia) expressed his discomfort with the notion of sustainability. He felt it evident that adversarial politics was fully capable of sustaining itself. Its continued existence was proof of that. In Saint Lucia party politics is both adversarial and hostile. It divides families and communities. The last election saw a voter turnout of 28 percent.

Mr. Allian's observations illustrated that low voter turnout is not restricted to states with non-partisan systems. He also raised the issue of whether small states could survive party politics. He pointed out that, even where political parties competed, real decision making could be concentrated in the hands of a few individuals through leadership control over party Members.

This led to the question of whether small legislatures can accommodate party systems. Part of the danger observed is that small Legislatures are susceptible to being dominated by one party. Given the existence of party discipline this meant there would be no effective opposition in the Legislature. There was concern expressed that such a situation would not be democratic.

Discussion also revealed a view that while small states do not need political parties they do need open debate and constant renewal if the political system is to sustain itself as a medium for the genuine expression of what the people want. Continual opened debate, regardless of the system in which it occurs, is inevitably adversarial. Therefore participants concluded that adversarial politics were sustainable in small states.

Workshop report back

These issues were further raised when the workshop's discussions were reported back to the Small Countries Conference plenary. Mrs. Hazel Hannan, MHK, (Isle of Man) chaired the discussion and Dep. Mike Burbridge (Guernsey) presented the report.

Mr. Brendan Smyth, MLA, (Australian Capital Territory) spoke in favour of political parties, arguing they allow Members to specialise and share the political workload. This is especially important for Members in government in small Legislatures where Ministers invariably have many departments to oversee. In this way parties are helpful to democracy.

Arguing against political parties Dep. Mike O'Hara (Guernsey) cited continuity of policy as more likely to occur in a non-party system. This statement engendered considerable discussion as to how much continuity was beneficial.

Dep. Roy Le Herissier (Jersey) argued that what looks like continuity can in fact be stagnation. He also cautioned that continuity can come about because of misplaced loyalty in certain leaders. This leads to lack of needed change.

Mr. Galea noted that, while change of policy is a consequence of a change of government, incoming parties do not change all politics when they take over.

Hon. Benard Linares, MP, (Gibraltar) agreed that politics tends to engender controversy, but this can be a good thing and any difficulty must be overcome.

There is a danger, he said, in reducing government to housekeeping as a means of avoiding conflict. Politicians should adopt positions and set themselves within the broad current of events. Echoing Mr. Smyth he also noted that parties bring collegiality to Legislatures.

Also speaking in favour of parties Hon. Ted Staffen, MLA, (Yukon) expressed the view that a party's electoral platforms provides a measure by which opposition parties and the public can hold government accountable. In his view the competition engendered by parties is healthy for a political system.

Continuing along the same lines the Hon. Dr. Kedrick Pickering, MP (British Virgin Islands) quoted Marx to the effect that conflict is the engine of progress. A healthy, vigorous debate is good for society.

The existence of a parties is not necessarily problematic except where they divide society along racial or ethnic lines. This tends to exacerbate cleavages already present in society.

Leaving the arena of Parliament Hon. Hilford Deterville, MP, (Saint Lucia) noted that groups outside Parliament (such trade unions or churches) can also be effective in opposing government. He said social institutions are needed to maintain democratic principles. A commitment to democracy must transcend the Legislature. Many subsequent speakers echoed the need for a strong, civil society to support democratic politics.

Hon. Kevin O'Brien, MLA (Nunavut) articulated a unique institutional difficulty for his non-partisan Legislature. In a Legislature of independent Members, where the executive is in the minority it will need the support of private Members to pass its legislation.

While some pointed to the need for persuasion as a good thing. Mr. O'Brien pointed out that cabinet can get the votes of Members through spending in their constituencies. A political system based on this practice is bound to break down should the cabinet find itself unable to fulfil the financial demands of private Members.

Hon. Peniamina Aeau, MP (Samoa) pointed to the problem of party dominance of the Legislature that he termed an "intrusion on the integrity of Parliament."

In the case of Samoa this manifested itself where the number of Members appointed by the head of government (Ministers, Undersecretaries, Speaker, Deputy Speaker) exceeded half the Members. This he argued gave the head of government effective control over the Legislature.

There was wide agreement that the size of a Legislature also affected the need for party politics. Hon. Roger Edwards, MLC, (Falkland Islands) pointed out that a system of independent Members would be impossible in a Legislature the size of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom with its 659 Members.

Conversely party politics would be impractical in a Legislature the size of the Falklands Legislative Council (with eight Members). It was unclear, however, what was the minimum threshold for a party system as many Legislatures with fewer than 20 Members (British Virgin Islands, Yukon) have party systems, while others that are larger (Jersey, Guernsey) do not.

(Courtesy: The Parliamentarian 2004/Issue One)

(Concluded)

www.Pathmaconstruction.com

www.ceylincoproperties.com

www.ppilk.com

www.crescat.com

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries

Produced by Lake House
Copyright © 2003 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager