Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better?
Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better?
Introduction
The parliamentary form of government is democratic in nature. The head of the state and the head of the government are held by different people. The executive and the legislative branches are linked to each other and Prime Minister is the head of the government. Countries that have a parliamentary form of government are India, Pakistan, Canada, Denmark and Bangladesh.
In the presidential form of government, the head of the government and the head of the state is the same person and he leads an executive branch which is separate from the legislative branch. The executive is often known as President. Countries that have a presidential form of government are US, Afghanistan, Brazil, Maldives and Nigeria.
Now, let's see which form of government is a better one?
Parliamentary form of government is better.
1. Symbol of unity - The parliamentary form of government is a symbol of unity as it binds all the people together. People from different religions or various walks of life can be a part of this government system. People have the authority to question the government if the members misuse the power.
2. No single boss – Parliamentary form of government gives an equal opportunity and representation to all. It does not follow the concept of a single boss government. People have an equally important to role to play in this form of government. They have the right to elect their representatives during the election and also posses the right to vote.
3. Group decisions – The decisions taken in a parliamentary form of government are with the consent of each and every member. At times, the decisions are taken very slowly due to a difference in opinion among the members of the parliament. But, usually, the group decisions are taken after a deep scrutiny of the whole issue.
4. Collective responsibility – The members of the parliament have a collective responsibility towards the people of the country. India is a country which follows a diversity in religion. Hence, while taking decisions, the government keeps in mind the views of various communities. The entire government has to take the responsibility if something goes wrong in the system.
5. More accountable – In this system, the government is directly accountable to the legislator (parliament). The power and legal authority of the government is derived from the parliament. It can help to scrutinize the actions of the government in a better way and thus, can provide the citizens with a good and efficient government.
Presidential form of government
1. Avoids misuse of power – The presidential form of government avoids the misuse of power and thus, the country can be run in a better way. It is a stable form of government and is free from political evils such as corruption etc. President has the supreme power and there is no distribution of power. More the distribution of power, more the misuse of it.
2. Quick decisions – The decisions are made quickly in a presidential form of government as the president does not have to consult with too many members or people. It is a one man government. Delayed decision making is a major set back for the parliamentary form of government. Decisions made on war policies etc are made quickly in presidential form of system.
3. No party influence – In presidential form of government, the executive is free from the evils of part influence in his daily administration. He does not lead a political party in legislature. This allows him to carry his responsibilities without any obstacles.
Conclusion
Both the forms of government have their own merits and drawbacks. But in a country like India, where different religions, languages, culture are practiced, it is necessary that opinions of all the people should be taken into consideration.
Thus, parliamentary form of governance is best wherein the people can elect their representatives. The citizens play an equally important role as the government in the functioning of the country.
Discussion
- RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -Mohd usman khan (06/03/19)
- I like it
- RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -TRILOK SINGH LOOMBA (12/03/18)
- India the seat of knowledge was ruled by fabulous kings in the past. We have never sung glories of kings like Dasharatha who practically ruled like a father of the nation. The first rule he made was to tell all Gurus flaunting their skills to change the lives of people. He told them, either they let him rule or create a consortium of them to administer the business of the State and direct the masses. Gurus could never come to a common platform to form such a consortium. The King then asked them to establish their quarters away from the habitation of commoners and the King promises that he would provide them any amount of facilities to establish their ashrams, organizations and whenever needed the King would call upon them to seek their guidance. All Gurus were thus shunted out and the King smoothly conducted the business of the State and steered the destinies of the public. Lord Rama followed in the footsteps of his father. To crown every head, Rama suggested to his father that the King should not isolate him from the general public and his role should only be to control the business of the State as a representative of people. Rama was sent on exile for 14 years. Bharat promised Rama that he would wait for his return when together they will establish the Crowd Fund not as Kings but as one of the investors in the Crowd Fund which would form the Treasury of the State. Till then, Bharat assured Rama that people will follow his principles of keeping the margins of their profits as low as a pinch of salt in the dough. When Rama returned, He found that rich had become richer and the poor had become poorer. Then Rama abolished all taxes and created the State Crowd Fund when He as any other investor declared His personal assets and became one of the investors. All enterprises, all social needs, all health care, all education needs were funded, every hand was provided work and wages and after all the expenses the pooled profits the Nation as a whole made was proportionately distributed among people. Rich still remained rich and ever got richer but poor never got poorer. The Parliamentary System would never be able to do that. It would need a President like a King of promise. India's massive problems can only be solved through a Presidential form of Government. Let the President have just a yearly term, but the Crowd Fund would not let any body drop below the poverty line as the capitalist also becomes an investor in the Crowd Fund. For this the youth of the country which by 2020 is going to be 64% work force has to collect on one platform not connected with any political party to acquire power to legislate.
- RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -gopal agrawal (08/25/15)
- as said by late indira gandhi that a single mind cannot make a wise decision .there are some circumstances where review of different people are been needed for some concern, this leads to a decision undertaken by the different minds having their own mindset. thus a parlimentary goverment leads in this form. the presidency goverment may provide decision quick but sometimes the decision taken may be sterile when taken in haste and also from one mind set view.
also the parlimentary provide people right to express their feeling on certain laws and actions and goverment goverance the parlimentary always is edgeing the presidency. - RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -shweta (08/25/15)
- parliamentary or presidential rule over a country has its own significance.one cannot say that if a country is big then it should have a democratic rule and if a country is small,it should have a presidential rule. it is up to the people of a nation what they accept and what kind of governance they want?one cannot say that whether the presidential or the parliamentary rule is going to remove corruption or develop the nation.Be it India or America,one can see the difference. but it doesn't mean that presidential rule rules over parliamentary rule.i believe that it is the attitude of the subject of a nation,that is :THE PEOPLE OF A NATION.We Indians have democratic rule but we believe that everything should be done by the government and they don't have any responsibility,be it to keep our city clean or remove corruption. it can be any issues. Now let's have a look of America which is having a presidential rule, means everything will be decided by one person ,but,the people of that country used to think democratically that it is not only the government but they themselves are there to carry out the commands as well as it is their responsibility to co operate with the government.for example:SWACHH BHARAT ABHIYAAN.everyday we talk about it ,we see it in newspapers but do it really has helped us a lot?no,not at all.it is still there in our country.why??because we indians think that it is government 's responsibility and not theirs because government has started it so it should imply it.this is the difference.
- RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -PRIYA JOSHI (06/17/15)
- Good afternoon everyone
according to my views Parliamentary government is better than Presidential government because it represents a democratic government. For the betterment of the country democracy is must in which every citizen has right to express his/her view about any topic. In presidential government nothing is like that. In that all the decisions are taken by an individual itself which results in centralization of power and in turn reduces the efficiency whereas in parliamentary government rules and regulations of the country is set, amended and followed by the general public. Along with this people themselves select who should be our leader, who will listen to the problems faced by them, set proper system to rule out those problems of public so that they can live a good lifestyle.
- RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -Deepa Kaushik (06/16/15)
- Both forms of Government have their own pros and cons. Parliamentary form involves a bigger group of people to govern, whereas the presidential form has the consolidated power with a single person. The areaand the population tobe governed also matters in choosing the proper form of government.
A huge area with a larger population cannot be controlled by a single head. It isnot possiblefora singleperson to take care of every nook and corner of the whole country. Also, with a huge populationhaving a vivid distribution with respect to religion or dialect or tradition or any other basis, it becomes highly important to meet and satisfy every group of citizens. This becomes nearly impossible under the surviellence of single head. So, the parliamentary form of government has a better prospect in such a population.
On the contrary, a small geographic unit can be better maintained under a single head. Distribution of power for a small population would create undue challenges to be met every now and then. Presidential rule can have a better say in small population.
Any governance could be better if it is run by fair and honest means. Distribution of power is to have an efficient governance and not to increase corrupt practices. But we cannot say that corruption is alwaysabsent in Presidential rule. Just that the single headed rule can have better and faster justice than the Parliamentary form. Still, a better governance is the one which gives a hearing ear to its citizens. - RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -Aparna Prusty (06/15/15)
- "Government is for the people, by the people and of the people" We have been taught this in the school. People have an equal say in the government decisions. If any of the members misuses the power, people should have the right to question it. Adopting the presidential form of Government takes that right away from the people. Democracy has to be protected in a country like India. Democracy is what we stand for.
- RE: Parliamentary or Presidential - Which form of government is better? -Ishwar Kad (06/15/15)
- Yes
The presidential government is better than parliamentary government becoz there is all control on whole country one single person . He is responsible for anything happen in country therefore he always try to develop our country there is less chances to corruption.
We take an example of Obama, Obama construct plan for destroye th e laden if there is Parliament these operation is no possoble.
