Democratic Election
Proportional representation system Regional system
• The country is one large electoral • Parliament or President is chosen
constituency through geographical constituencies:
• The proportion of votes a party wins the majority of votes in a particular
decides how many members of constituency (=electoral region) will
parliament the party has in parliament deliver that seat for the winning
• Pros candidate or party in parliament or
− Every vote counts equally → fairer Congress or Assembly
− Relatively easy for small parties to • Candidates represent a specific area
enter parliament in a parliament or congress
• Con: representatives are more distant • Pros
+ disconnected from the people they − National politics closer to the local
represent issues of the people
• Governments are made up of − Representatives closer to people
coalitions of parties with conflicting • Con: Unequal voting weight
interests: no one single party can win • 1 party wins an outright majority
an election outright
• Some countries (I.e. Germany) use a combination of both systems: some members elected
via proportional + others via regional representation
• Concessions to regionalism in Dutch system
− Voters can vote for parties + individual politicians (‘list-puller’ or other)
Dutch proportionalism
• Dutch system is one of the most extreme proportional systems in Europe
• Complications
1. Country officially divided into constituencies
2. Since 1970 compulsory voting abolished → system where the weight of each vote cast is
proportional to the number of votes cast (ipv number eligible voters)
Central government
• Before 20th century
− Governments not highly political
− Only privileged men could hold office or vote
− Made up of people not from party political backgrounds: selected to hold office on basis
of their expertise
e.g. people from business background, university background etc…
• From beginning 20th century
− Power in most democracies shifts to an increasingly powerful government + weakened
parliament
− Government becomes politicised with cabinet posts filled by people from political parties
• Contributing factors (power shift)
1. Introduction universal suffrage: ends age of privileged men controlling parliament
2. Increasing complexity of society → government needed effective + decisive power to
carry out expanded tasks
, E.g. post, transport, communications, health etc…
3. Parliament lacks expertise + knowledge that government were developing (complex
societies)
4. Parliament = old-fashioned institution based on debate + discussion: slow form of
decision making (compared to gov: faster)
5. Rise of political + universal suffrage → ends age of strong willed + privileged
parliamentarians acting alone
6. Parties have to appeal to voters to be elected (be united + effective + harmonious) →
weakens independence parliament
7. Parties in parliament are obedient to party in power (in government) or opposition →
weakens independence parliament
• After 2nd half 20th century powerful governments begin to lose power to new actors:
bureaucracies, local government, the media, political parties, lobbies and voters
Decentralisation
• Central government in The Hague gave power away (tasks + responsibilities) to provincial,
city and town councils = giving power away to lower layers government
• Centralization= gaining power by national government
• Reasons
1. Central governments become too powerful + got overburdened→ need to get rid of some
tasks + responsibilities
2. Dutch voters were losing interest in politics after 1970s → more power to local + regional
+ municipal governments → brings politics closer to the people
Decentralised government Netherlands
Provincial level
• Layer of government between national government (The Hague) + local government (in
towns + cities)
• Recently lost power – central government + municipal (local) gained power
• Powers: to do with zoning, planning, infrastructure, transport, water and sometimes
overseeing work of local town and city authorities
• The 12 Dutch provinces all have their own legislative parliament: Provincial Councils
elected every 4 years
• Above plan didn’t work: voter turnout for provincial + regional government decreased even
more
• Provincial councils
− Elected every 4 years
− Size dependent on number inhabitants
− Functions
1. Oversee + supervise implementation of their policies
2. Elect members of Senate (= 1st chamber) - senate reflects makeup provincial council
− Is important for parties to do well in provincial council elections: will help them vote in
members of own party to Senate
, Municipal level
• Decentralization - Town + city municipalities become
increasingly powerful
• Problem: too many small- scale municipalities → not effective
Solution: municipalities joined together = centralizing local
power = paradox
more effective town + city councils
BUT undermines idea politics closer to people because no
more small-scale local governments who were close to people
• Conflicts between central + local government
− Central government passes laws that have to be implemented by local government BUT
often without providing enough money + personnel to implement effectively
E.g. Immigrants, cuts in elderly + handicapped care, soft drugs and smoking (see 68)
− Central government unloads controversial + painful + unpopular + difficult policies onto
local government
E.g. Volkskrant (see 68)
− Central government directives often resisted + refused
• Municipal councils (local councils)
− Elected every 4 years (on same day throughout country) Dependent on size
− 9- 41 members municipality
− Council personnel itself elects 2-9 Aldermen/women
(like a company)
− Aldermen work together with Mayor to form municipality’s executive branch
− Usually (like national) made up of coalitions of parties
− In 2002 change: Aldermen cannot be members of municipal councils anymore (like
ministers cannot be members of parliament)
Reason: make municipal councils function more like central government + parliament in
DH
− Decide on public order issues: housing, building, health, arts etc...
− Sometimes powers decided by acts of parliament
Sometimes by councils themselves
National level Municipal level
− Central government (cabinet ministers): − Alderman + mayor: propose municipal
proposes new laws + carries out laws + carries out policies
policies
− Parliament: controls + monitors central − Municipal councils: controls + monitors
gov. them
− Cabinet ministers cannot be in − Alderman cannot be in municipal
parliament council
− Cabinet ministers have portfolios (eg. − Alderman large municipalities same
Health, education etc...)
Cabinet ministers equivalent to aldermen + mayor
Proportional representation system Regional system
• The country is one large electoral • Parliament or President is chosen
constituency through geographical constituencies:
• The proportion of votes a party wins the majority of votes in a particular
decides how many members of constituency (=electoral region) will
parliament the party has in parliament deliver that seat for the winning
• Pros candidate or party in parliament or
− Every vote counts equally → fairer Congress or Assembly
− Relatively easy for small parties to • Candidates represent a specific area
enter parliament in a parliament or congress
• Con: representatives are more distant • Pros
+ disconnected from the people they − National politics closer to the local
represent issues of the people
• Governments are made up of − Representatives closer to people
coalitions of parties with conflicting • Con: Unequal voting weight
interests: no one single party can win • 1 party wins an outright majority
an election outright
• Some countries (I.e. Germany) use a combination of both systems: some members elected
via proportional + others via regional representation
• Concessions to regionalism in Dutch system
− Voters can vote for parties + individual politicians (‘list-puller’ or other)
Dutch proportionalism
• Dutch system is one of the most extreme proportional systems in Europe
• Complications
1. Country officially divided into constituencies
2. Since 1970 compulsory voting abolished → system where the weight of each vote cast is
proportional to the number of votes cast (ipv number eligible voters)
Central government
• Before 20th century
− Governments not highly political
− Only privileged men could hold office or vote
− Made up of people not from party political backgrounds: selected to hold office on basis
of their expertise
e.g. people from business background, university background etc…
• From beginning 20th century
− Power in most democracies shifts to an increasingly powerful government + weakened
parliament
− Government becomes politicised with cabinet posts filled by people from political parties
• Contributing factors (power shift)
1. Introduction universal suffrage: ends age of privileged men controlling parliament
2. Increasing complexity of society → government needed effective + decisive power to
carry out expanded tasks
, E.g. post, transport, communications, health etc…
3. Parliament lacks expertise + knowledge that government were developing (complex
societies)
4. Parliament = old-fashioned institution based on debate + discussion: slow form of
decision making (compared to gov: faster)
5. Rise of political + universal suffrage → ends age of strong willed + privileged
parliamentarians acting alone
6. Parties have to appeal to voters to be elected (be united + effective + harmonious) →
weakens independence parliament
7. Parties in parliament are obedient to party in power (in government) or opposition →
weakens independence parliament
• After 2nd half 20th century powerful governments begin to lose power to new actors:
bureaucracies, local government, the media, political parties, lobbies and voters
Decentralisation
• Central government in The Hague gave power away (tasks + responsibilities) to provincial,
city and town councils = giving power away to lower layers government
• Centralization= gaining power by national government
• Reasons
1. Central governments become too powerful + got overburdened→ need to get rid of some
tasks + responsibilities
2. Dutch voters were losing interest in politics after 1970s → more power to local + regional
+ municipal governments → brings politics closer to the people
Decentralised government Netherlands
Provincial level
• Layer of government between national government (The Hague) + local government (in
towns + cities)
• Recently lost power – central government + municipal (local) gained power
• Powers: to do with zoning, planning, infrastructure, transport, water and sometimes
overseeing work of local town and city authorities
• The 12 Dutch provinces all have their own legislative parliament: Provincial Councils
elected every 4 years
• Above plan didn’t work: voter turnout for provincial + regional government decreased even
more
• Provincial councils
− Elected every 4 years
− Size dependent on number inhabitants
− Functions
1. Oversee + supervise implementation of their policies
2. Elect members of Senate (= 1st chamber) - senate reflects makeup provincial council
− Is important for parties to do well in provincial council elections: will help them vote in
members of own party to Senate
, Municipal level
• Decentralization - Town + city municipalities become
increasingly powerful
• Problem: too many small- scale municipalities → not effective
Solution: municipalities joined together = centralizing local
power = paradox
more effective town + city councils
BUT undermines idea politics closer to people because no
more small-scale local governments who were close to people
• Conflicts between central + local government
− Central government passes laws that have to be implemented by local government BUT
often without providing enough money + personnel to implement effectively
E.g. Immigrants, cuts in elderly + handicapped care, soft drugs and smoking (see 68)
− Central government unloads controversial + painful + unpopular + difficult policies onto
local government
E.g. Volkskrant (see 68)
− Central government directives often resisted + refused
• Municipal councils (local councils)
− Elected every 4 years (on same day throughout country) Dependent on size
− 9- 41 members municipality
− Council personnel itself elects 2-9 Aldermen/women
(like a company)
− Aldermen work together with Mayor to form municipality’s executive branch
− Usually (like national) made up of coalitions of parties
− In 2002 change: Aldermen cannot be members of municipal councils anymore (like
ministers cannot be members of parliament)
Reason: make municipal councils function more like central government + parliament in
DH
− Decide on public order issues: housing, building, health, arts etc...
− Sometimes powers decided by acts of parliament
Sometimes by councils themselves
National level Municipal level
− Central government (cabinet ministers): − Alderman + mayor: propose municipal
proposes new laws + carries out laws + carries out policies
policies
− Parliament: controls + monitors central − Municipal councils: controls + monitors
gov. them
− Cabinet ministers cannot be in − Alderman cannot be in municipal
parliament council
− Cabinet ministers have portfolios (eg. − Alderman large municipalities same
Health, education etc...)
Cabinet ministers equivalent to aldermen + mayor
