Do political parties help or hinder representative democracy?

Political parties play a major role in democratic processes around the world. Citizens generally agree, but they also display growing critical attitudes and behaviour towards them. In the UK, as well as elsewhere, party identification is dropping and parties hold ever fewer members. 

• A representative form of democracy could not function without political parties. If there were no parties and representative assemblies such as Parliament  had politicians who simply represented their own individual views, it would be very difficult to form a government since there would not be a united party with a common political ideology. 

• Parties enable voters to judge a government or opposition as team rather than individuals- in this way they can form an opinion of their competence and credibility to govern. This is called valence politics: that is, when there is little ideological difference between the main parties, voters make a judgement based on the party they think is most likely to deliver a strong economy and good public services, and the leader they prefer.

• Parties enable a government to be formed more quickly. Imagine the UK would not have any parties at all, and all of the 650 parliamentary seats would be given to individual representatives acting on behalf of their voters. The MPs would still need to conclude on a prime minister, a government and a policy programme to be implemented. Even if they found common ground on all three fronts, it would take them a very long time. Parties mean this process is expedited with pre-election grouping of representatives .

• Political parties develop policies ( proposals for action) by internal discussion and debate in order to form  political programmes generally described in manifestos (party platforms USA). Manifestos enable voters  to consider a choice of policies (see rational choice voting ) By giving support to a party programme electors give the government, if it wins power, a mandate (permission) to carry out these policies.

• political parties provide an easy to understand label for voters to know what policies and values to associate with a particular candidate. 

• Parties give governments  a mandate for policies agreed before achieving power. This means governments can be held to account more effectively if they fail to act on these 'promises'

• Parties can develop policies to address  national or global issues. Imagine if the UK had 650 individual MPs with no parties that group them, without any overarching entity in place such as a party, it would be rational for MPs to only pursue small, easily recognisable projects. This would ensure visibility to those who voted for them, and it would increase the chance of re-election. They would not follow a bigger plan on what is beneficial for the country in the long run. For example weaker party discipline in the USA has led to parochialism See parochialism USA

• The selection of candidates by parties prepares candidates who have the qualities to stand for public office.-Strong control by central leaderships can be an effective way to increase diversity. Controlling and imposing candidate lists as the Conservatives did through the ‘A-List’ or mandating the selection of candidates with particular characteristics, as Labour has done through all-women-shortlists delivered results in terms of a more representative pool of candidates.    This is not the case in counties which hold primaries such as the USA where, wealthy individuals with populist agendas (Trump) might find it easier to get elected.

• Political parties run for election on a broad range of policies (manifesto or platform) this means they claim a mandate for their manifesto but in reality, a voter may support some policies and not others so the manifesto as a whole might not fully represent their political views. A voter might support policies on the environment but not on tax.

• The Participation crisis gives further evidence of the decline in parties. Their membership, income, and voter identification are in decline.

• Party discipline means that MPs are expected to support the mandate for the party's manifesto. However, MPs also have an individual mandate to follow their conscience. Party leaders and whips put considerable pressure on MPs to put the party above conscience. As Benjamin Disraeli once said, ‘Damn your principles. Stick to your party.’  MPs are expected to vote in line with their party's 'whip' in the Commons - a position on an issue agreed by the party's leadership - or risk disciplinary action. However, MPs stick together and oppose MPs from other parties due simply to the fact they belong to different parties. A culture of loyalty, hopes of future advancement, a selection process that chooses like-minded people, and the adversarial culture of the House of Commons all mitigate against representatives who think for themselves. In other words, parties are not good for creating thoughtful open-minded debate.

•  Parties select candidates who have the qualities of electability and loyalty rather than skill, experience, and intelligence.  Historically this has led to white, middle-class, male candidates. Many MPs have benefitted from exclusive education and a privileged upbringing and later move on to well-paid influential careers.  Case study Revolving Door UK Greensill and David Cameron  Revolving Door UK 

Case Study Liz Truss The declining numbers of members within the UK’s main political parties meant that Truss was chosen by a group of 98,000 individuals mostly white and elderly and with more extreme views than the average Conservative voter.

Scandals  Do parties select the 'best people?'

•  The number of MPs who previously had manual occupations has been falling. Only about 1% of the current crop of Tory MPs (2022) entered parliament from a working-class job, according to new research that suggests a growing “representation gap” in parliament.  MPs who worked in business are more likely to be Conservatives and those who worked in the public sector (e.g. teachers) Labour. 28% of Labour MPs came from working-class jobs after the 1987 election – the proportion has since halved  Just 7% of all MPs can be considered “working class”, compared with 34% of all UK working-age adults. (The analysis, by researchers of the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR- 2022)

• Disciplined political parties can be criticised for becoming too dominant see 'elective dictatorship'.

• Party politics is seen as divisive and confrontational. This creates an adversarial rather than bipartisan political culture, in which political conflict and success come before cooperation. Party politics has led to broad dissatisfaction and disengagement with traditional forms of politics and the political system. This has contributed to anti-politics and populism seen in Trump, and Brexit.

• Adversarial politics can also lead to political polarisation in society. For example in the USA between the Democrats and the Republicans which has led to temporary shutdowns in government. 

• Parties are seen to represent a group, tribe, region or class and they seek power to advance the interests of their supporters. As President Andrew Jackson said 'To the winner goes the spoils' In 1796, President George Washington lambasted political parties for allowing "cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men" to "subvert the power of the people".