For a vibrant democracy to prevail a Consensus Coalition Politics is better

Notably, two-thirds of Europe adheres to this form of government, as a single party getting majority has become the rarest of rare events in Europe.  The coalition form of government can happen in two ways:  the pre-political one wherein the political parties consciously form an alliance and contest the election and if they are successful, they form the government.  Another way a coalition is formed is, after an election where parties with a smaller vote-share who are unable to form the government on their own come together to form a coalition (post-election coalition). 

England, considered as the ‘Mother of Parliamentary Democracy’ had the tradition of a majority party ruling the country.  All through the 20th Century, there is no other record in the history of England having a coalition form of government, except for the one during the Second World War, when Sir Winston Churchill headed the wartime coalition.  However, 2010, witnessed a change in the political climate, when England formed the first coalition (after the Second World War) government with David Cameron as the Prime Minister and Nick Clegg (see pic) as the Deputy Prime Minister and the country was ruled by a coalition of the Conservative and the Liberal Democratic Party.  In spite of the Conservative Party, gaining a majority to form the government, owing to the Brexit vote, David Cameron resigned in 2016 and Theresa May succeeded him only to dissolve the Parliament to gain a majority in the aftermath of Brexit referendum in 2017.  Unable to get a majority she went for an agreement with the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party), to form the government.  Hence, even in England, coalition and post-party alliances take place to form the government.  Moving the focus from Europe to Asia, coalition governments are prevalent in many Asian countries.  Some South Asian countries embracing coalition governments include Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Maldives, and Sri Lanka.  

In the Indian context, coalition politics is nearly a quarter century old, noticeably from 1991 to 2014.  The NDA (National Democratic Alliance) and UPA (United Progressive Alliance) were able to complete their terms with their coalition partners between 1999 and 2014. During these phases, a prominent level of stability was established when the national parties such as the Indian National Congress (INC) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led the coalition.  Regional parties found the coalition to be a comfortable arena to negotiate their regional demands with the national party, which headed the coalition.  In addition, this paved way to get few ministerial berths for their party in the cabinet.  While the pre-poll coalitions survived the first term (1999 to 2014), the post-poll coalitions could not complete their terms (1991 to 1999). 

The regional parties can contribute significantly by being members of the coalition by highlighting the State and regional issues to the government, thus helping the government in power, to understand more clearly their concerns.  Since, India follows a federal government, the State, and regional issues have to find a place in the governance and the best way of doing it is through the regional parties.  The regional parties can really strengthen the federal structure by bringing the issues of the State and provide visibility to them at the national level.  The rise of the regional parties and coalition politics is also due to the absence of space for the regional parties at the national level.  In the Rajya Sabha (Council of States), the States are denied equal representation and therefore the regional parties’ recognition and visibility is enhanced in the coalition politics.  The UPA in its first term had to struggle with left parties who offered outside support over the economic policies.  The nuclear agreement with the USA was another issue wherein the stand of the left parties and the UPA was diametrically opposite.  The UPA II faced challenges from the TMC (Trinamool Congress) of West Bengal who wanted the government to be anti-left in the State and later took a hostile stand against the Presidential candidate proposed by the UPA.  Another challenge for the UPA was from the southern regional party the DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam), which asked the Centre to toe its line on the Sri Lankan Tamil issue.  From March 2012 through 2013, the DMK made their stand clear that India should support the resolution sponsored by the US against Sri Lanka, in the Human Rights Council in Geneva.  

On the question of the advantage of a Coalition over Majority Single-party Government, the Dutch Political Scientist Arend Lijphart examined the performance of 36 modern democracies in recent decades by contrasting the Westminster model of Majoritarian Democracy with the continental model of Consensus Democracy characterised by power-sharing arrangements. Lijphart concluded that Consensus Democracies were as good as Majoritarian Democracies in stimulating economic growth, controlling inflation and unemployment, and limiting budget deficits, although coalitions tended to spend more than single-party governments. However, Consensus Democracies outperformed Majoritarian systems on measures of political equality, women’s representation, voter turnout, and greater proximity between voters’ preferences and government policies.

The advantage of coalition government lies in building consensus politics.  Besides, the danger of a major political party in a coalition becoming ‘dictatorial’ could be averted in a coalition government.  In a parliamentary form of government, the leader of the majority party becomes the Prime Minister and the leader of the majority party is elected only after the general election.  The possibility of coalition partners playing a role in identifying a leader will also go a long way in strengthening the consensus politics.    

Now it is time to compare the Coalition Politics of 1991 to 2014 to that of a Majority Party rule in the last five years, i.e. 2014-19.  History indicates that the economy was doing well during the coalition era.  In the Parliament, due to the provisions of the anti-defection bill, the whip of the party rules the Parliament.  There is also evidence of different shades of opinion prevailing on various issues even within the same party. As a result, the whip of the party has reduced the discussion space in the Parliament.  Members feel restrained to discuss freely and offer their opinions especially when there are differences in their views (of their own government) on debates concerning issues that require immediate attention affecting the country.  Dissent has no space in the Parliament where the whip of the party rules.  Most of the bills are government piloted bills and with the majority in the Lower House and with the strong whip, all the bills sail through the Parliament and the only place it faces a challenge is in the Rajya Sabha and even those in some cases are overlooked or bypassed.  Extreme and one-sided reforms and policies could be averted in the coalition government in the sphere of politics, economy, and society.  For a vibrant democracy to prevail a Consensus Coalition Politics is better and preferred. 

Bernard D. Sami