The Presidential And Parliamentary Systems Essay

1566 Words Nov 19th, 2016 7 Pages
The Presidential and Parliamentary systems, albeit similar, differ in many important ways from each other. For example, Parliamentary systems tend to be more efficient at legislating, consequently causing them to be more dangerous than the presidential system. An argument is also certain to be made to the contrary in that the presidential is more dangerous because it is more democratic. However, it is worth noting that both systems are utilized all over the world by stable nations. The United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden and Japan are all perfect examples of stable parliamentary systems. While the United States, Chile, Costa Rica and Uruguay are examples of stable presidential systems.
A fundamental difference between the two is that the presidential system has a separation of powers into the legislative and executive branches. However, In parliamentary systems, this separation isn 't as robust, meaning the executive and his/her cabinet is a part of the legislature. For instance, Theresa May’s (PM of the UK) cabinet, includes Philip Hammond as Chancellor of the Exchequer and Boris Johnson as Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. They are both members of the legislature. This concept of a combined legislative and executive branch does have some positives one being that there are frequent parliamentary sessions where the Prime Minister and the cabinet are called to account for their actions as well as debate issues.This practice is called Prime minister 's…

Related Documents