Please note that the following is an opinion piece, and the sole responsibility for its content rest with the author.
The Shadow Cabinet
"Step into my parlour, said the spider to the fly..."
It is believed that the phrase "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition", and the philosophy it implies, are an English invention. It is a rather grand and ambitious thing to say that Government should be opposed, and that that opposition is in its own way a form of service, rather than a hindrance. In the United States, the President "shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." Anybody who knows me well knows that I think this article has its heart in the right place, but is fundamentally flawed.
The State of the Union is an address. An important one, but nonetheless, it is an address. It is (usually) listened to politely, and the Congressmen are not permitted to question the President as he delivers it. It is important, but it is rather dry and lifeless. It is but a shell when compared to the Question Period a Prime Minister in a Westminster government faces two or three times a week. The Prime Minister and his entire government must face the House, while the critics in the Opposition benches hurl questions at them, which the Ministers must answer on the spot. There is nothing which manages to be simultaneously quite so ugly and so glorious.
Europeia has no Parliament, and its Government is elected by the People and appointed by its President, and has largely relied on the Fourth Estate (newsmedia), individual concerns, and the ballot box to drive criticism. Anybody who's read one of PhDre's Aftermath articles where Anumia had a chance to comment can see how effective this has been for Europeia. The Government does not have a formally recognized body which is to hold it to account.
Well it does, but they don't hold the Government to account, not really. Instead of seeing the Government consistently questioned by a body which is charged to do so for the good of the region, we get a mess of private concerns and snarky news articles. This is not going to help anything. Repeat with me, folks: Critique of Government is part of Government. If it were me, and if I had the power to introduce any change I liked into the Europeian system, I would give up the Senatorial Confirmation of Ministers (shocking!). I would emphasize the Senate's power to bring down the Government and force elections, and I would specifically charge the Senate to be the critical engine of government.
In effect, I would make the Senate into a shadow cabinet.
The concept of a shadow cabinet may not be known to all Europeians, but it works like this. Certain elite members of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition are charged by their Party Leader to be critical of their opposite number, the Minister on the Government bench. At Question Period, it is usually the Critic (member of the shadow cabinet) who poses questions to the Minister Opposite. It is the critic's job to be a nuisance, which forces the Minister to do such a good job that the critic has nothing to be a nuisance about.
Now, imagine that Ministers, rather than being invited to speak in the Europeian Senate, were summoned to answer for their activity. The Senate Critic for Foreign Affairs would ask his questions, and the Minister would answer them, and the people would be better informed. Ministers would do their jobs in the knowledge that they would be held to account for their own work, and Senators would have a chance to truly be the check that they are intended to be. Criticism of the Government would be formalized, expected, and understood to be a form of public service; and the weight of such a responsibility would be ponderous indeed in the hands of the Senators who wield it.
Again. Repeat. Critique of Government is part of Government. To do otherwise is simply to encourage criticism which is informal, unchecked, and often too strong.
The Shadow Cabinet
"Step into my parlour, said the spider to the fly..."
It is believed that the phrase "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition", and the philosophy it implies, are an English invention. It is a rather grand and ambitious thing to say that Government should be opposed, and that that opposition is in its own way a form of service, rather than a hindrance. In the United States, the President "shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." Anybody who knows me well knows that I think this article has its heart in the right place, but is fundamentally flawed.
The State of the Union is an address. An important one, but nonetheless, it is an address. It is (usually) listened to politely, and the Congressmen are not permitted to question the President as he delivers it. It is important, but it is rather dry and lifeless. It is but a shell when compared to the Question Period a Prime Minister in a Westminster government faces two or three times a week. The Prime Minister and his entire government must face the House, while the critics in the Opposition benches hurl questions at them, which the Ministers must answer on the spot. There is nothing which manages to be simultaneously quite so ugly and so glorious.
Europeia has no Parliament, and its Government is elected by the People and appointed by its President, and has largely relied on the Fourth Estate (newsmedia), individual concerns, and the ballot box to drive criticism. Anybody who's read one of PhDre's Aftermath articles where Anumia had a chance to comment can see how effective this has been for Europeia. The Government does not have a formally recognized body which is to hold it to account.
Well it does, but they don't hold the Government to account, not really. Instead of seeing the Government consistently questioned by a body which is charged to do so for the good of the region, we get a mess of private concerns and snarky news articles. This is not going to help anything. Repeat with me, folks: Critique of Government is part of Government. If it were me, and if I had the power to introduce any change I liked into the Europeian system, I would give up the Senatorial Confirmation of Ministers (shocking!). I would emphasize the Senate's power to bring down the Government and force elections, and I would specifically charge the Senate to be the critical engine of government.
In effect, I would make the Senate into a shadow cabinet.
The concept of a shadow cabinet may not be known to all Europeians, but it works like this. Certain elite members of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition are charged by their Party Leader to be critical of their opposite number, the Minister on the Government bench. At Question Period, it is usually the Critic (member of the shadow cabinet) who poses questions to the Minister Opposite. It is the critic's job to be a nuisance, which forces the Minister to do such a good job that the critic has nothing to be a nuisance about.
Now, imagine that Ministers, rather than being invited to speak in the Europeian Senate, were summoned to answer for their activity. The Senate Critic for Foreign Affairs would ask his questions, and the Minister would answer them, and the people would be better informed. Ministers would do their jobs in the knowledge that they would be held to account for their own work, and Senators would have a chance to truly be the check that they are intended to be. Criticism of the Government would be formalized, expected, and understood to be a form of public service; and the weight of such a responsibility would be ponderous indeed in the hands of the Senators who wield it.
Again. Repeat. Critique of Government is part of Government. To do otherwise is simply to encourage criticism which is informal, unchecked, and often too strong.
