I’ve read about this happening before in Israel and the UK and a handful of other countries; France is the latest country to dissolve their government.
According to [the story:
What does this mean, exactly? It seems to me that if the US tried to “dissolve” our government, we’d have a pretty freaking huge problem on our hands, but it also seems to me that I prolly just don’t understand the meanings of “dissolve” and “form” in this context.
Can y’all help me understand this better?
“Government” in this context means a parliamentary majority (or coalition to form a majority.) It does not refer to the country’s government structure as a whole. In parliamentary systems, under certain circumstances such as a vote of no-confidence, the majority will dissolve itself and call special elections. Depending on the country, parliamentary elections may be required every X number of years unless the government voluntarily dissolves itself before then. Most parliamentary countries don’t have regular election cycles like we do.
The apparatus of governing the country will continue to function during this time; they just won’t be conducting a lot of legislative business.
I’ve asked this question before. In a parlimentary democracy, “dissolving the goverment” just means that they’re going to hold new elections. It sounds much more serious than it really is.
US is not a parliamentary form of government. In the US, the President is elected and then serves four years, come hell or high water. Even if impeached and removed, the “term” still continues, just with the next in line. Same with Congress - it has a term. There cannot be Congress elections except on set dates (except for special elections in single districts in special circumstances).
In parliamentary systems, there are elections, then the parliamentarians that are elected in turn elect the head of government, who continues to be the head only if he has the majority in the parliament. If there is a confidence vote in Pariament that he loses, that government is done. What follows are new coalition negotiations, which often fail, and new elections are called. There is a maximum term for the Parliament, but there is no minimum term - it can be “dissolved” any time.
It means that the prime minister and other ministers resign or are dismissed, and will be replaced by a new set of ministers, usually from a different political party or coalition. The president or monarch remains in office, and the “permanent” public service carries on as usual. It happens from time to time in prime-ministerial, usually after a general election of the parliament, but sometimes when the prime minister loses the support of a majority on the parliament. It doesn’t happen like that in the US, because there’s no prime minister in the US.
Lots of very hot water.
Don’t reelected US Presidents formally fire the Cabinet before thei second inaugration?
One thing I am curious about, ministers in a parliamentary system are elected officials. So the Prime Minister, Defense Minister, etc. all got elected as member of parliament from a district. When they resign their Government positions as Prime Defense etc, do they leave public service or just go back to being a member of parliament? I assume they remain in the parliament, but I don’t know for sure.
Related question, does a Minister also serve on any parliamentary committee? Are there ever occasions when they testify or investigate themselves? How does that work?
Generally, in a parliamentary system, for ‘government’ read ‘cabinet’. Having learned British English as the standard kind of English, Americans referring to the legislative, the judiciary and the executive below cabinet level as part of government at first was confusing to me.
Correct. Some of them are often in the next government formed as well.
There’s a weird bit of folklore that I’ve heard before but never seen substantiated, that re-elected presidents ask for all their cabinet members’ resignations and then choose which ones to accept.
Even if this is true, and I strongly suspect it is not, there is no requirement, constitutionally or traditionally, that a president do so.
Customarily, all members of the cabinet submit letters of resignation at the end of each presidential term. The President may choose to accept or refuse any of them.
It’s not a law. Theoretically a cabinet member could refuse to tender a letter of resignation. In that case, the cabinet member will first be dealt with diplomatically and reminded to submit their letter. If some cabinet member ever actually refused, they could be fired by the President.
Different countries have different rules. I know Israel had a rule for a while (not sure if still has it) that an MK (parliament member) that became a minister had to resign from the Knesset (parliament) and the next person in the party’s list would fill in the seat. If the minister resigned, I don’t think he was slotted back into Knesset.
Oh and of course Ministers don’t have to be members of Parliament to begin with. They often are, but it’s not a requirement.
In the Canadian tradition, we wouldn’t say that the Cabinet is dissolved. Instead, it is the House of Commons which is dissolved by the GovGen, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister. All of the Cabinet retain their Cabinet positions during the election, as there must be a government in place at all times.
Yes, if a Cabinet member resigns from Cabinet, he/she is still a member of the Commons, unless he/she resigns their seat as well.
Cabinet members don’t sit on Commons committees. They do appear in front of committees to defend proposed legislation. Each minister, including the Prime Minister himself, must also appear in front of the finance committee each year, to defend the proposed budget for their ministry.
Whereas to dissolve a monarchy, you need aqua regia. (Although sulfuric acid has also been used, most notably in a well-publicized incident in 1918.)
As for the actual mechanics of a dissolution, the practice in Canada is that the PM calls on the GovGen and formally requests the GovGen to dissolve the Commons. The GovGen almost invariably does so, as an exercise of the royal prerogative. A proclamation then issues from the GovGen, a announcing the dissolution of the Commons and simultaneously directing that writs if election be issued for the general election.
Note that in the Canadian system, the Commons cannot dissolve itself. Only the Crown can do so.
One of the sources of confusion here it the matter of terminology. To an American, the ‘Government’ means the Presidency and the Congress (and I suppose the Supreme Court too); in the UK (as an example), the ‘Government’ means the Cabinet. Parliament by shorthand means the House of Lords and Commons, but strictly speaking also includes the monarch.
So when the French President dissolves the French Government, he’s really dissolved his Cabinet and is appointing a new one. Breaking news right now, by the way, is that the Ukrainian President has dissolved the Ukrainian Parliament.
What happen then if there is an emergency situation that Commons needs to vote on during the period between its dissolution and the next election?
For example, if a USA forces marched north across the border and threatened to annex Vancouver, but there was not enough money in the budget to defend Vancouver and an emergency appropriation was needed?
There’s still a government able to command the Armed Forces and it has plenty of delegated powers to carry on the government on a day-to-day basis; but anything beyond that would wait for a new Parliament.