This book assesses the larger influences that government termination by parliaments has on executive–legislative relations, claiming that the way in which the governments may be challenged or dismissed has far greater impact than previously understood. The core feature of a parliamentary system is not that governments tend to emerge from the legislatures in some way or another, but their political responsibility to this body. While in only some parliamentary systems the government needs formal support of parliament to take office, in all parliamentary systems no government can survive against the will of parliament. The academic literature related to the rules for how governments form is vast. Strikingly, scholars have paid far less time to unpack the core institution of parliamentary systems of government – the confidence relationship and the various no confidence procedures. The chapters explore the institutions by which parliaments hold governments accountable and how they balance elected parliaments and appointed governments in parliamentary systems. Contributions move beyond the standard focus on government formation and instead analyse government termination by parliament evaluating its consequences in a detailed and comprehensive manner. This book will be of interest to students and academics in the field of political science, governance and political theory. The chapters in this book were originally published in West European Politics.

The existence of noticeable 'unified' parties is central to the theory and practice of democracy in general, and to parliamentary democracy in particular. However, legislative studies scholars have good reason to cease treating parties as monolithic, unitary actors, for they evidently are not. The first step in this direction is to ask why one of the distinguishing features of modern political parties is their legislative unity. Do parties enter parliament as unified actors, or are they moulded into this model by the legislature? The answer depends on whether one is looking at cohesion or at discipline. The goal of this collection of articles is to present a conceptual delineation between these two key concepts. This book was previously published as a special issue of the Journal of Legislative Studies.

The existence of noticeable 'unified' parties is central to the theory and practice of democracy in general, and to parliamentary democracy in particular. However, legislative studies scholars have good reason to cease treating parties as monolithic, unitary actors, for they evidently are not. The first step in this direction is to ask why one of the distinguishing features of modern political parties is their legislative unity. Do parties enter parliament as unified actors, or are they moulded into this model by the legislature? The answer depends on whether one is looking at cohesion or at discipline. The goal of this collection of articles is to present a conceptual delineation between these two key concepts. This book was previously published as a special issue of the Journal of Legislative Studies.

What kind of impact do centre parties have in parliamentary democracies? How does the existence and growth of centre parties affect party system polarization, electoral competition and government stability? This text reassesses the perception of centre parties as a force of moderation. The author argues that this intuitive judgement, which has become accepted by political scientists is dubious, if not incorrect. He examines contemporary centre parties in Europe and asserts that the opposing tendency of centre parties contributes to party system polarization.

Traditional perceptions of centre parties stress their moderating factors, but their opposite tendency of contributing to party system polarization has generally been treated as if it were of lesser consequence. This study seeks to settle an age-old debate by claiming that what has become acceptable almost universally by political scientists, and has achieved the status of an axiom when politics are discussed, is dubious, if not outright incorrect. Examining this important aspect of European parliamentary democracies, this book reassesses the perception of centre parties as a force of moderation, arguing that the centre has the capacity to cause polarization. An examination of contemporary centre parties is provided to prove this maxim.

Parliamentary members and parliamentary leaders recurrently find themselves in uneasy - and even testy - relationships. The interests of parliamentary leaders in programme adoption often are at tension with the concerns of members of parliament with individual advancement in parliament and party, with interest articulation and with constituency concerns. This cross-national work analyzes these difficult and often testy relations and tensions between parliamentary members and leaders through studies ranging from Germany to the United States, and from New Zealand to global perspectives. The bases of such uneasy member-leadership relations, their manifestation and sometimes resolution, and the consequences of member-leadership tension to effective parliamentary performance and policy-making is considered in each examination.