Английская Википедия:Dutch cabinet formation
Шаблон:Short description Шаблон:Cleanup
The formation of a Dutch cabinet is the process of negotiating an agreement that will get majority support in parliament for the appointment of the council of ministers and gives sufficient confidence that agreed policies will be supported by parliament. Dutch cabinet formations tend to be a time-consuming process, and the process is for the most part not codified in the constitution.
Formation process
The cabinet of the Netherlands is the executive body of the Dutch government. It consists of ministers and state secretaries as they are called in the Netherlands. The cabinet requires support from both chambers of the Dutch parliament to pass laws. Thus to form a stable government sufficient, and preferably majority support in both chambers is required.
Due to several factors—the multi-party system and the nationwide party-list system of proportional representation—no political party (in the modern sense) has ever had a majority in the House of Representatives or has come close to it since the adoption of the current proportional representation system in 1918. To gain sufficient support in at least the House of Representatives, at least two parties must agree to form a government with majority support. The negotiations leading to this agreement are the cabinet formation period in the Netherlands.
Cabinet formation is engaged in, in two situations. Around the time of the general election, the incumbent cabinet resigns, but continues in a caretaker role (demissionary cabinet) until a new cabinet is formed. Due to changing party representations in the House of Representatives, a new cabinet has to be negotiated. Even if the same parties that were part of the previous government continue in office, the agreement has to be renegotiated to fit election promises and shift in powers. Another reason for cabinet formation can be the fall of a cabinet, i.e., those cases where the agreement between parties breaks down.[1] In the latter case (in principle) a new cabinet can be formed without general elections, although in practice the House of Representatives is often disbanded and early general elections are called.
The course of the formation can be roughly divided into three phases: scouting, constructing (also known as information phase) and formation phase.Шаблон:Sfn
Scouting phase
The day after the elections, the likely parliamentary groups meet, although the results are not yet final and the new House will not be installed until two weeks later. The likely faction then chooses their parliamentary leader, which in most cases is the lead candidate. The strategy for the formation are also often discussed.Шаблон:Sfn A day later, the likely parliamentary leaders meet to discuss the appointment of a "scout". The custom is for the largest party to nominate a scout. The scout then has the task to meet with all parliamentary leaders to see which parties can start programmatic negotiations.Шаблон:Sfn At the beginning and at the end of the assignment, the scout holds - just like later the (in)formateur - a press conference.Шаблон:Sfn The scout makes a report in which includes a recommendation for the follow-up process. This report will be discussed with the scout in the debate on the election results, which will take place as soon as possible after the installation of the new House.
At a later point in the formation, for example after negotiations between parties have failed, there may be a need for a new scouting phase. This is then carried out by an informateur.
Information phase
On basis of this advice, the House of Representatives then appoints an informateur who explores the options for a new cabinet.[2][3] The informateur often is a relative outsider and a veteran politician who has retired from active politics: a member of the Senate, Council of State or a minister of state. The informateur generally has a background in the largest party in the House of Representatives. It is also possible to appoint multiple informateurs, with backgrounds in other prospective partners. The informateur is given a specific task by the House of Representatives, often to "seek a coalition of parties with coalition agreement and a majority in parliament." The informateur has meetings with individual chairs of parliamentary parties, and chairs sessions of negotiations between them. During these negotiations the parties try to find compromises on the policies of the future government and draft a coalition agreement.
Formation phase
Unsuccessful informateurs tenders their resignation and the process starts again, with new consultations and the appointment of a new informateur. If successful, the informateur will advise the House of Representatives to appoint a formateur. By convention, the formateur is the leader of the senior partner in the prospective coalition, and hence the prospective prime minister. The formateur concludes the talks between the members of the prospective coalition, focusing on any matters left unresolved by the informateur. Once these matters are resolved, the formateur allocates the government portfolios and nominates cabinet members.
It usually takes several months of negotiations before the formateur is ready to accept a formal royal invitation to form a government. The monarch then appoints all ministers and state secretaries individually by Royal Decree (Koninklijk Besluit). Each minister swears an oath of loyalty to the Constitution. After this the entire Council of Ministers and the monarch are photographed on the stairs of Huis ten Bosch palace. The newly minted ministers all tender their resignations from the House of Representatives, as cabinet ministers are not allowed to be members of Parliament. The new cabinet then proposes its program to parliament, and is confirmed in office.
Historical development
Until 2010, the queen requested advice on a new cabinet to be formed from the speakers of the Senate and House of Representatives , the vice president of the Council of State, the parliamentary leaders in the House and possibly the Ministers of State. She would then appoint an informateur. Since 2012 the monarch plays no role substantial role in the formation. Until 1963, it was common for the formateur to draw up the coalition agreement on his own.
Criticism
There is criticism about the course of events of a formation in every formation. According to political scientist Carla van Baalen, these complaints can be divided into three categories: lack of dualism, democratic deficit and the rules of the game.Шаблон:Sfn
Dualism
Since 1946, cabinet formations have become more monistic, instead of the dualistic relationships envisaged between the House of Representatives and the cabinet. In those years, the coalition agreement was increasingly drawn up in consultation with the House of Representatives factions of the coalition parties. They thus commit themselves to the agreements in advance and are therefore less critical of the cabinet.Шаблон:Sfn
Democratic deficit
Voters have little influence on the outcome of the formation. For example, there is a weak connection between election results and formation. Losing parties can join a cabinet during this formation, while winning parties end up in opposition.[4]
The cabinet formation is seen as non-transparent. The actual negotiations usually take place behind closed doors.[5]
See also
Sources
References
Шаблон:Navigation Dutch cabinet formations
