unitary government

unitary government

Exploring the Advantages and Disadvantages of Unitary Government Systems

1. Introduction to Unitary Government Systems

Throughout the UK, the government is one of a unitary system. Some powers, however, are given to bestow governmental responsibilities on regions such as Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales, through a mechanism generally known as devolution. Laws are proposed and made by the national Parliament, often known as Westminster, and English local government has far-reaching authority. England no longer holds the sway of the UK government. England does not have its own parliament, and its government and councils have no authority to aid. Generally, international conference councils also have some modest functions. These include the UK, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man (on which Tynwald, the team of the Isle of Man is responsible), and British overseas colonies. Furthermore, following the 1997 referendum, the British government gave a new level of peace governing to Greater London (now at the level of the whole country).

2. Advantages of Unitary Government Systems

Political unity: One of the greatly cited virtues of a unitary system is the fact that it promotes political unity. Decisions of the government are uniformly enforced across the entire country. With substantial focus on national political interests and not on state or regional ones, there is no scope for the creation of centrifugal tendencies.

Higher police efficiency: With all regulations and laws being uniform, law enforcement officials do not run into problems about which law is to be enforced where, i.e. state jurisdictions are not a problem.

Ease of implementation: Once decisions are made, their implementation is relatively easier.

Uniform policies and laws: A unitary government can lay down a uniform policy for the entire country. Laws can be uniform across regions.

Efficient decisions and policies: Decision making in unitary governments is quicker and more efficient. There is one central legislature, one executive, and one set of public policies. These can address and solve problems more promptly.

Unitary systems do have certain advantages. Some of these are as follows:

3. Disadvantages of Unitary Government Systems

The population is increasing, which leads to the problem of administering large societies as a result. Especially, residing in rural areas of societies being administered from a center – from very far – requires great sacrifices for the citizens in question, both physically and psychologically. Centralist unitary government systems compel the society to be administered under the conditions of insufficient or even unfair service. Small societies may oppose a center in which decisions are not for them, and thus claim an independence desire; this state is not in favor of unitary systems. The population balance may vary greatly and unexpectedly over time and within the political-geographical structure of the center.

Citizens do not find unitary government systems very helpful in societies that are large and have diverse groups such as social, cultural, religious, and even ethnic. They cannot fully express themselves in such governments. As a result, social conflicts and lawsuits cannot be avoided, which are harmful for the society. Citizens wish to have authority over the society, more than the existing system.

4. Case Studies and Examples of Unitary Governments

Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, East Timor, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France.

The following list represents a small number of many current examples of unitary governments. Unitary states can be contrasted with federal states, where governmental powers and functions are more diverse in geographic and regional terms.

5. Conclusion and Future Implications

The limitations of this study imply that subsequent empirical investigations are required. First, more evidence would help to clarify whether the opportunities to undertake particular responsibilities created by the lower and upper houses are indeed exercised and, if exercised, whether it matters. It would also help to compare the relative effectiveness of unicameral and bicameral legislatures. Textual analysis could be used to categorize the tasks of both the lower and upper houses of the bicameral system and a suitable arrangement in the unitary system. The allocation of responsibilities according to categories defined carefully and observed over a longer period would have the advantage of stability in the data and provide richer evidence as to how the presence of the upper house might influence the tasks performed by both chambers.

Research studies on unicameral unitary governments are largely scanty, while the subject of bicameralism has been studied extensively. Equally, both qualitative and quantitative studies on unicameral powers have been limited. Other issues that have been minimally addressed include the assignment of legislative tasks and the removal powers assigned to the prime minister or the president. Future investigations have to deeply consider these. Future studies have to inform the formulation of a hypothesis about the imposition of unicameral powers. A hypothesis of representative democracy argues that unicameral powers provide sufficient control in parliament; voters will be more satisfied with outcomes, more informed, and more likely to vote. This, in turn, should lead to more productive policies, better assignment of resources, lower taxes, less corruption, and better economic performance.