# "Forming a government" in a parliamentary system **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 23, 2018, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554 "2018-12-23T01:13:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![bob\_2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_2/32/3341_2.png) [@bob\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bob_2)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/101 "2018-12-28T18:08:08Z")
Just to add to the fun, Labour (aka Her Maj’s Official Opposition) have just suffered the indignity of having one of theirs convicted of a criminal offence. She claimed someone else was driving her car when it was clocked by a speed camera. She has been expelled from the Party, but refuses to resign her seat. Sometime in the new year she will probably become a guest of Her Maj’ in an establishment with rather high walls. (Not Windsor Castle in case you were wondering). ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/102 "2018-12-28T18:16:49Z")
Chris Huhne, a leading Liberal politician, went to jail for a similar conviction. (For those wondering, when the camera trips, a letter is sent to the Registered Keeper of the vehicle requiring them to state who was driving at the time the offence occurred. Refusal to answer is an offence in itself.) ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2018, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/103 "2018-12-28T18:27:17Z")
Like every party from Moscow to Washington and every flavour in between, Democrat, Republican, People’s, Liberals, Labour, Likud… A party is a legal organization with a form of incorporation, a bank account, board of some sort, and an executive; there is a president of the party organization, in some manner elected (directly or indirectly) by the members who have paid for memberships. The party organization has a constitution and bylaws. In a parliamentary democracy, the bylaws explain how the “leader” to be put forward as prime minister or leader of the opposition is arrived at. In Canada, for example, except in dire circumstances, there is a convention, delegates come from each riding and vote in an elimination process until someone gets 50%+1. That person is the one chosen whose name is given to the monarch or governor general as the party’s choice for leader. Anyone else can yell all they want, if the party brass don’t support them, they aren’t the chosen one. (It’s like as if someone lost the Republican convention and tried to claim they were still the Republican candidate.) A slightly less unlikely scenario is a party revolt - say 200 members support the leader, and 117 don’t. If they feel strongly enough, they can split and form a new party. Then, if the PM fails in a confidence vote in Parliament - see whole long thread above. But… unless they can replace the current leader according to the bylaws of the party, they cannot claim to be the official leader of that party. I suppose a leader could be deposed by the party and refuse to go… but generally, such a hard fall is the result of a massive political shitstorm and would be the equivalent of someone having their hands pried off the furniture and then being dragged out the door. Nobody has had to do that for a while - people know when it’s time to go. The Queen could simply tell the parliament “you tell me when it’s settled”, and leave it to the parliament’s Sargent at Arms to arrange for the removal or barring of uncooperative members so business can resume. If it descends into a fistfight with 300 MP’s on each side - well, democracy is over… ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2018, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/104 "2018-12-29T09:19:10Z")
> [@Melbourne](#): > > The even older convention was that the whole of government were all friend and political appointees. (As was the system in America at the time Abraham Lincoln was elected). That was called the “spoils system”—as in “to the winner belong the spoils.” It was expected that at every election turnover all civil service jobs would be filled by the winners’ cronies. Obviously this was ripe for massive corruption, and good-government reformers in the late 19th century fought to end it. Charles Guiteau thought he was owed a government job and when he didn’t get it shot President Garfield. This, I believe, gave the impetus needed to eventually end the spoils system. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/105 "2019-01-01T00:18:08Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > T > > 1. Confidence (duh) If this isn’t hijacking the thread - what, exactly, is “confidence”? I don’t think we have the equivalent in the US system and I can’t quite pinpoint it other than popularity/likability/maybe? ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/106 "2019-01-01T01:38:28Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > My understanding is that the Monarch can appoint whomever they want so after Cameron resigned and May was elected leader of the Conservatives, QE2 could have appointed a pro-Brexit politician\* to PM saying in effect, “You made this mess. Now clean it up.” > > Not saying she should have, just saying she could have. > [@Colibri](#): > > **Moderator Note** > > Let’s drop the hijack on this point. Posters have explained to you what the practical situation is. Nitpicking over the fact that it is technically possible doesn’t contribute further to the thread. > > Colibri > General Questions Moderator On the contrary, this is what I came for! In order to understand the system, I’m trying to understand the ways it could break. For instance, in the US, a person might win the electoral votes necessary for the presidency, but then lose in the electoral college. It’s won’t happen, but it _could_ happen, and if it did, the election results would be irrelevant. That dark horse candidate would be the POTUS, no arguments about it. So the official way a person becomes POTUS is to win in the Electoral College and be sworn into office, presumably by the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS. I’ve learned from this thread that the only official way to be PM is to accept a commission from the head of state, who could offer it to anybody, but would offer it to the leader of the victorious party, who was elected perhaps years earlier in a party function. If the head of state were to commission someone else, the Parliament would vote “no confidence” and start over. Right? So to progress past selecting the PM, how does forming the rest of the government work officially and in-practice? I believe the process comprises picking a head of each department or cabinet post, is that right? After I choose someone for everything, I’m done “forming a government”? And then what? Parliament votes to approve this selection? Is that why I need to bribe enough of the Chess Party with appointments, so they vote Yea to my slate of department heads? When do we do that? Days later? Months, usually? Does the Head of State have any **official** say in this? ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/107 "2019-01-01T02:28:31Z")
> [@amarinth](#): > > If this isn’t hijacking the thread - what, exactly, is “confidence”? > I don’t think we have the equivalent in the US system and I can’t quite pinpoint it other than popularity/likability/maybe? “Confidence” means having the support of a majority of members of the lower house of parliament, i.e., having a majority willing to vote for important legislation, particularly bills allowing the spending of money on government activities. It can be shown by an actual vote, or by members undertaking their support for the government on matters of “confidence”. ---
**Author:** ![penultima\_thule](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penultima_thule/32/3833_2.png) [@penultima\_thule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/penultima_thule)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/108 "2019-01-01T04:28:54Z")
You need to stop thinking of this process in US terms, you are just tying yourself in knots. > [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > I’ve learned from this thread that the only official way to be PM is to accept a commission from the head of state, who could offer it to anybody, No. Not anybody. HoS offer the commission to anybody who can demonstrate that they can control a majority votes in parliament on matters of major policy and supply. > [@](#): > > the leader of the victorious party, who was elected perhaps years earlier in a party function. No, they have just won an election. The elected party members will caucus post election and reconfirm their Leadership team, usually by acclamation. > [@](#): > > If the head of state were to commission someone else, the Parliament would vote “no confidence” and start over. Right? No. If the incoming PM could not form a majority government before Parliament is reconvened, they would tender their resignation. HoS could then ask them to form a minority government, or ask somebody else. If nobody can form a majority coalition government or a stable minority government then another election may be called without parliament reconvening. The latter is not a favoured option. > [@](#): > > So to progress past selecting the PM, how does forming the rest of the government work officially and in-practice? I believe the process comprises picking a head of each department or cabinet post, is that right? After I choose someone for everything, I’m done “forming a government”? Firstly, there is a distinction between Ministers who are the political head of each department and will be selected by the PM, and the operational/public service head of each department who may not change from government to the next. There are all manner of political considerations was to who gets which portfolio(s) and which of the ministers get a post in Cabinet. Secondly the number of ministries is not fixed and they can be reduced, expanded or reformed as deemed fit by the PM. e.g. Senator Simon Birmingham is Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment. Sometimes Trade is stand alone, sometimes with Foreign Affairs, sometimes in some other combination. The department of Trade continues, just who is it’s political head changes. Senator Brigid McKenzie is Minister for Regional Services, Sport, Local Government and Decentralisation. She’s in Cabinet because she’s deputy NATs leader. While MHR Ken Wyatt is not in Cabinet but is Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care and the Minister for Indigenous Health. > [@](#): > > And then what? Parliament votes to approve this selection? No. The guy who selected them has a majority in parliament. q.e.d. > [@](#): > > Is that why I need to bribe enough of the Chess Party with appointments, so they vote Yea to my slate of department heads? :smack: > [@](#): > > When do we do that? Days later? Months, usually? Does the Head of State have any **official** say in this? Days. After the July 2nd 2016 election the new government was sworn in on July 19th. This was longer than usual because Turnbull won only a single seat majority which took a while to confirm. In the event of a returning government the process can be done in under a week. The HoS has no say in the selection of ministers. The PM selects them, the HoS swears them in. ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/109 "2019-01-01T08:49:52Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > So to progress past selecting the PM, how does forming the rest of the government work officially and in-practice? I believe the process comprises picking a head of each department or cabinet post, is that right? After I choose someone for everything, I’m done “forming a government”? > > And then what? Parliament votes to approve this selection? Is that why I need to bribe enough of the Chess Party with appointments, so they vote Yea to my slate of department heads? > > When do we do that? Days later? Months, usually? Does the Head of State have any **official** say in this? No, the incoming PM will have had a permanent “shadow” team in Parliament with spokespeople on every aspect of government business. Election on Thursday, result usually clear by 2am on Friday, formalities of appointing the PM at the Palace sometime during the day on Friday, PM’s staff start calling in the shadow team to see the PM and learn their fate, from then onwards. The bulk of the Cabinet jobs are announced over the weekend, or maybe even in time for the first editions on Saturday, with secondary “junior minister” and parliamentary aides’ jobs announced in the following day or two. The civil servants get out the briefing papers they have already prepared for incoming ministers, and most departments are ready to get down to work on the incoming government’s programme on the Monday morning. No further formal approval is needed from Parliament, though it’s not unknown for an incoming PM to want to reorganise the departments themselves (maybe merging some or creating something new), and that may require legislation. Technically, there may be some formalities involving the Palace on the appointment of some senior ministers if entitled Secretary of State (I’m not sure on that point, but it doesn’t affect their getting down to work straight away): but apart from that, HM isn’t involved, and it’s all considered Parliamentary business. The first time a new government faces anything like a vote of confidence is when it presents its first budget - and if it’s got a clear majority at the election, it will expect that support from its own party to continue and to suffice. All that, of course, depends on there being a decisive election result. If negotiations between parties are necessary to establish a working majority, it all takes longer. If memory serves, there was about a week after the 2010 election when the LibDems were being wooed by both the Tories and the outgoing Labour government, before an agreement was settled and the Palace formalities could take place. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/110 "2019-01-01T08:53:15Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > In a parliamentary democracy, the bylaws explain how the “leader” to be put forward as prime minister or leader of the opposition is arrived at. And even IF the same person who acts as the party’s visible head is the same that will be proposed to be prime minister / president / lead its parliamentary group… (not necessarily the case for Spanish parties). ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/111 "2019-01-01T18:16:38Z")
> [@PatrickLondon](#): > > Technically, there may be some formalities involving the Palace on the appointment of some senior ministers if entitled Secretary of State (I’m not sure on that point, but it doesn’t affect their getting down to work straight away) Appointment to the Privy Council, maybe? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/112 "2019-01-01T18:47:59Z")
> [@penultima\_thule](#): > > No. Not anybody. HoS offer the commission to anybody who can demonstrate that they can control a majority votes in parliament on matters of major policy and supply… Suppose the makeup of HOC is so fractured with minor parties that no one person can demonstrate a majority on all (or most) of the major issues? ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/113 "2019-01-01T19:37:48Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Suppose the makeup of HOC is so fractured with minor parties that no one person can demonstrate a majority on all (or most) of the major issues? If negotiations can’t arrive at some sort of working arrangement (even if it’s no more than agreeing to keep things ticking over without trying to introduce any big changes), then there would have to be new elections. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/114 "2019-01-01T20:18:40Z")
> [@penultima\_thule](#): > > No. Not anybody. HoS offer the commission to anybody who can demonstrate that they can control a majority votes in parliament on matters of major policy and supply. And again we get into the pedantic distinction between CAN and DOES. CAN the Monarch offer the the commission to anyone?\* Yes.\*\* DOES the Monarch offer it to anyone they want? Of course not. Part of the Monarch’s job is to ensure a functioning government and the only way to do that is to appoint someone who can make the government function. But this is why we always talk in circles on this. Americans talk about what the monarch _legally_ can do and the Brits talk about what the monarch _politically_ can do as if they’re the same thing. \*I don’t know if legally it would need to be a citizen of the UK and/or an MP. \*\* And we are all agreed that 99.99999% of the time it would be political suicide and may result in the removal of the Monarch but let’s take the Lord Halifax/Winston Churchill in 1940 scenario remembering Halifax was a believer in appeasement. Assume Edward VIII was still king. I don’t think that it is outside the realm of possibility given Edward VIII’s personality that he would have offered the commission to Halifax even if Churchill was the candidate put forward by the HOC. Or suppose the UK has their own version of King Donald of the House of Trump. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/115 "2019-01-01T20:21:05Z")
> [@PatrickLondon](#): > > If negotiations can’t arrive at some sort of working arrangement (even if it’s no more than agreeing to keep things ticking over without trying to introduce any big changes), then there would have to be new elections. Really? Not doubting you but I thought there was a statutory minimum time between elections and if there was no majority/coalition then as Tim Gunn would say, “Make it work.” ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/116 "2019-01-01T20:43:02Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > \*I don’t know if legally it would need to be a citizen of the UK and/or an MP. Legally it could be anyone, but practically speaking these days it would have to be an MP. Standing to become an MP is open to anyone (of sufficient age - 18, I think) who is a UK citizen, an Irish citizen or a citizen of any Commonwealth country who has indefinite leave to remain in the UK. ---
**Author:** ![penultima\_thule](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penultima_thule/32/3833_2.png) [@penultima\_thule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/penultima_thule)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/117 "2019-01-01T21:37:43Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > But this is why we always talk in circles on this. Americans talk about what the monarch _legally_ can do and the Brits talk about what the monarch _politically_ can do as if they’re the same thing. No and you have it wrong again. It’s neither legal or political. There is no law that allows/disallows what the Monarch actions as Head of State. The rights and responsibilities are not codified. Being an American your fixation and intractable logic is: “If it is not against the law, then it is legal”. Which is why Washington is the lawyer capital of the world. There doesn’t need to be a law. There is convention, conventions tested and honed over a couple of centuries, closer to a millennia. The monarchy wants stability and the monarchy does not interfere in the political process. Similarly in Australia the Reserve Powers of the HoS are not codified. Probably the same in all the constitutional monarchies. It’s a key strength of the model. Even staunch republicans with memory of the occasions of when Reserve Powers came into play like Paul Keating accept they probably cannot and should not be codified. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/118 "2019-01-01T21:45:19Z")
> [@penultima\_thule](#): > > No and you have it wrong again. > > It’s neither legal or political. > > There is no law that allows/disallows what the Monarch actions as Head of State. > The rights and responsibilities are not codified. > > Being an American your fixation and intractable logic is: “If it is not against the law, then it is legal”. Which is why Washington is the lawyer capital of the world. > > There doesn’t need to be a law. There is convention, conventions tested and honed over a couple of centuries, closer to a millennia. The monarchy wants stability and the monarchy does not interfere in the political process. So the House of Commons puts forth James Johnson as their PM candidate. QE2 for whatever reason offers the position to Amelia Abernathy and she accepts, who is the Prime Minister? Please don’t answer, “Parliament will …”" The question is very simple. It may only be 1 day until Parliament shaves their heads and Lilybet gets her head lopped off but for that 1 day who is the Prime Minister: James or Amelia? ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/119 "2019-01-01T22:27:53Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > So the House of Commons puts forth James Johnson as their PM candidate. QE2 for whatever reason offers the position to Amelia Abernathy and she accepts, who is the Prime Minister? > > Please don’t answer, “Parliament will …”" The question is very simple. It may only be 1 day until Parliament shaves their heads and Lilybet gets her head lopped off but for that 1 day who is the Prime Minister: James or Amelia? Amelia Abernathy is the Prime Minister. For about as long as it takes for Parliament to withhold confidence from her. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2019, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554/120 "2019-01-01T22:56:51Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > So to progress past selecting the PM, how does forming the rest of the government work officially and in-practice? I believe the process comprises picking a head of each department or cabinet post, is that right? After I choose someone for everything, I’m done “forming a government”? The mechanics will vary from country to country, but it’s the PM who decides will be a minister and in Cabinet. The PM prepares the list of assignments and the Crown then formally appoints them to their positions. In the UK, I think the appointments are done under the prerogative, but in Canada they are done under statutory provisions. Those appointments are made by the Crown in an Order-in-council, recommended by the PM. That’s the formal document which legally appoints the ministers, and your government is up and running. > [@](#): > > And then what? Parliament votes to approve this selection? Is that why I need to bribe enough of the Chess Party with appointments, so they vote Yea to my slate of department heads? There’s no vote on the Cabinet in Parliament. The new government shows up and takes their seats on the front benches. However, the first order of business for the new Parliament (after the election of a Speaker) is the Speech from the Throne, presenting the Government’s legislative agenda. That speech is debated, and then there is a vote whether to agree to the Speech. That is a confidence measure. If the House votes to approve, the Government stays in office. But if the House rejects the Speech, the Government has fallen and either the Crown appoints someone else as PM, if there is someone who clearly has the confidence of the House, or there is a new election. The New Brunswick example from the fall that I mentioned upthread was an example of that. After the Government fell on the vote on the Speech, the Lt Gov appointed the leader of the other large party as Premier. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forming-a-government-in-a-parliamentary-system/826554.md?page=7)