Skip to main content

The Stability of Party Duopoly in Multi-Party Britain

  • Chapter
The Logic of Multiparty Systems

Part of the book series: International Studies in Economics and Econometrics ((ISEE,volume 17))

Abstract

It has frequently been observed that the British two-party system of government is not only unique in Europe, but also unusually robust. A critical assessment of the solidity of the claims made on the ability of a plurality system of voting to produce responsive, yet stable and efficient government has remained something of a set piece for students of the British political system, and an important touchstone for those claiming the superiority of the system to the multi-party systems of Europe and America (Ranney, 1962; Jennings, 1960–62; Blondel, 1973; Kirkpatrick, 1975; Mezey, 1979; Giulji, 1980; D. Olson 1980; M. Olson, 1982, pp.51–2).

“In a sophisticated industrial society, multi-party politics is more ‘natural’ than a two party system because there is a Bur wider diversity of interests seeking representation than can be accommodated by two major parties ….Yet … British Constitutional norms have hardly adapted to the norms of multi-party politics … the Constitution still assumes the continued existence of a stable two-party system with single-party governments alternating in office. There is thus a serious conflict between the realities of electoral life and the presuppositions of the Constitution.”(1983, p.43, 196)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alt, J.B., B. Sarlvick and I. Crewe (1974). “Partisanship and policy choice”, British Journal of Political Science, 6, 273–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, J.B., I. Crewe and B. Sarlvick (1977). “Angels in plastic: the liberal surge in 1974”, Political Studies, 25, 343–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, J.E. (1979). The Politics of Economic Decline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. (1970). Conflict of Interest. Chicago: Markham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachrach, P. (1969). The Theory of Democratic Elitism. London, University of London Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagehot, W. (1963). The English Constitution. London: Fontana (First published 1863 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Beattie, A. J. (1974). “The two party legend”, Political Quarterly, 65, 288–299. Undents

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1956). “Pressure groups and parties in Britain”, American Political Science Review, 50, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1969). Modern British Politics. London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1982). Britain Against Itself. London: Faber

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, R. (1980). The Limits of Politics: Collective goods and political change in post-industrial societies. London and Chicago: The Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, A. (1949). The Process of Government. Evanston, 111: Principa Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birch, A. H. (1971). Representation. London; Pall Mall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blondel, J. (1973). Comparative Legislatures. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdanor, V. (1983). Multi-Party Politics and the Constitution. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, A. (1982). “Corporatism, capitalism and depression in twentieth-century Britain”, British Journal of Sociology, 33, 200–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brittan.S. (1976). “The economic contradictions of democracy”, British Journal of Political Science, 5, 129–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, E. (1908). “Speech to the Electors of Bristol, 1774”, in Speeches and Letters. London: Dent.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D., and M. Pinto-Duschinsky (1980). “The Conservative Elite: 1918–78: does unrepresentativeness matter”, in Layton-Henry (ed.), Conservative Party Politics. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, L.P. (1976). “Corporatism in Britain: 1930-45”, Journal of Contemporary History, 11, 3–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, F.W.S. (1975). Minor Parties at British Parliamentary Elections 1885–1974. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, I. (1976). “Party identification theory and political change in Britain” in I, Budge, I. Crewe, and D. Fairlie (eds.). Party Identification and Beyond. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, I., B. Sarlvik, and J. Alt (1977). “Partisan dealignment in Britain 1964–1974”, British Journal of Political Science, 7, 2, 129–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crewe, I. (1982). “Is Britain’s two party system really about to crumble”, Electoral Studies, 1, 3, December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, R., Flanagan, S., and Beck, P. (eds.). (1984). Electoral Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of the Environment, Scottish Office and Welsh Office (1985). Report of the Widdicombe Inquiry into Local Authority Ethics. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denver, D.T. (1983). “The SDP-Alliance; the end of the two-party system”, West European Politics, 6, 4, 75–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodd, L. C. (1976). Coalitions in Parliamentary Government. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, K.M. (1979). “Two-party politics in the United Kingdom”, Parliamentary Affairs, 32, 1, 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy, P., and Ward, H. (1981). “Exogenous voter preferences and parties with State Power: some internal problems of economic theories of party competition”, British Journal of Political Science, 11, 351–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, L.D. (1980). “What happened to the British Party Model?”, American Political Science Review, 74, 9–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eulau, H. and Wahlke, J.C. (eds.) (1978). The Politics of Representation. Beverley Hills, London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, B.J and Taylor, A.J., (1984). “The rise and fall of two-party electoral co-operation”, Political Studies, 32, 2, 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, S., and Zuckerman, A.S., (1982). “Partisan attitudes and the vote: moving beyond party identification”, Comparative Political Studies, 15, 2, 197–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finer, S.E. (1980). The Changing British Party System 1945-79. Washington (D.C): American Enterprise Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, S.O., and Dalton, RJ. (1984). “Parties under stress: realignment and dealignment in advanced industrial societies”, Western European Politics, 7, 947 - 23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup Poll (1976). “Voting Behaviour in Britain, 1945–1974”, in R. Rose (ed.), Studies in British Politics. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallup Poll (1983). The Gallup Poll, undertaken for the BBC. Published in The Guardian, June 13th, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giulji, S. (1980). Le Statut de l’Opposition en Europe. Paris: Documentation Française, Notes et Etudes Documentaires.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladish, K. R. (1972). “Two-party versus multi-party in the Netherlands and Britain”, Acta Politica, 111, 3, 342–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasgow University Media Group (1976). Bad News. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasgow University Media Group (1980). More Bad News. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutmann, A. (1980). Liberal Equality. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guttsman, W. L. (1965). The British Political Elite. London: MacGibbon and Kee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hailsham, Lord (1976). Elective Dictatorship. London: BBC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamer, D.A (1977). The Politics of Electoral Pressure: a study of Victorian reform agitations. London: Harvester Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, D. (1977). “Political parties and macroeconomic policy”, American Pohtical Science Review, 71, 467–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibbs, D. (1982). “On the demand for economic outcomes: macroeconomic performance and mass political support in the United States, Great Britain and Germany”, Journal of Politics, 44, 2, 426–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, J. (1985). “The relationship between Government popularity and approval to the Government’s record in the United Kingdom”, British Journal of Political Science, 15, 165–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. (1976). “Values, objective needs and subjective satisfaction among Western Publics”, Comparative Political Studies, 9, 429–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, I. (1960–1962). Party Politics, 3 Volumes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavanagh, D. (1981). “The politics of Manifestos”, Parliamentary Affairs, 34, 7–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1975). “Overload: problems of government in the 1970”, Political Studies, 23, 290–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1982). “Whatever is happening to the British Party System”, American Political Science, 15, 1, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, E.M. (1975). “Toward a more responsible two-party political system: political science, policy science or pseudo science”, American Political Science Review; 65, 965–990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, D. (1981). “Is the North-South divide a great British myth?”, Sunday Times, September 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mckenzie, R.T. (1958). “Parties, pressure groups, and the British Political Process”, The Political Quarterly, 29, 1, 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mezey, M.L. (1979). Comparative Legislatures. Durnham. N.C, Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michels, R. (1959). Political Parties, (trans. E. and. C. Paul). New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middlemas, K. (1979). Politics in Industrial Societies. London: Andre Deutsch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W.L. (1980). “What was the profit in following the crowd: the effectiveness of party strategies on immigration and devolution”, British Journal of Political Science, 10, 15–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W.L. (1983). “Problems of testing the power of a media consensus”, Paper presented at the Political Studies Association Conference, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 14-16th April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mori (1983) Market and Opinion Research Poll, New Statesman, June 17th.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, P. (1984). The British Polity. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Offe, C (1981). “The attribution of public status to interest groups: observations on the West German case”, in S. D. Berger (ed.), Organising interests in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D.M. (1980). The Legislative Process: a comparative approach. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1982). The Rise and Decline of Nations, New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1985). Plenary Session Address, World Congress of Political Science, Paris, 15–20 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pateman, C. (1970). Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, William, Sir (1690). Political Arithmetick. London: Printed for Robert Clavel and Henry Mortlock. Microfilm of original, Yale University Library, Michigan: Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, William, Sir (1899). The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty, C. Henry Hall (ed.), 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitkin, H F. (1967). The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punnett, R.M. (1984). “Regional partisanship and the legitimacy of British governments, 1868–1983”, Parliamentary AiBurs, 37, 2, 141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (1976). The Comparative Study of Political Elites. Englcwood-Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranney, A. (1962). The Doctrine of Responsible Party Government. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W.H. (1962). The Theory of Political Coalition. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W.H. (1982). Liberalism Against Populism. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, D. (1976). A Theory of Party Competition. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rokkan, S. (1970). Citizens, Elections, Parties. New York: Daniel McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rokkan, S., and D.W. Urwin (1983). Economy, Territory, and Identity. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R., and G. Peters (1979). Can Government Go Bankrupt?. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. (1979). “Ungovernability: is there fire behind the smoke?”, Political Studies, 27,3,351–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, R. (1984). “Still the Era of Party Government”, Parliamentary Affairs, 37, 3, 289–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schofield, N (1985). “Manipulation of the international economy”. Paper presented at the World Congress of Political Science, Paris, 15–20 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J.A. (1954). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, J.E. (1981). “Attempting to assert the Commons Power: Labour Members in the House of Commons, 1974–1979”, Comparative Politics, 14, 1, 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SCPR. (1985) British Social Attitudes: the 1985 Report, Social and Community Planning Research. London: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Studler, D.T., and S. Welch (1981). “Mass attitudes in political issues in Britain”, Comparative Political Studies, 14, 3, 327–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A, (1985). “The politics of the miner’s strike”, Politics, 5, 1, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor-Gooby, P. (1983). “Moralism, self-interest and attitudes to welfare”, Policy and PoUtics, 11, 2, 145–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (1980). “How (and to some extent why) to study British contention”, Working Paper 212, Center for Research on Social Organisation, University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, L.A., and Tilly, C. (eds.). (1981). Class Conflict and Collective Action. London and Beverley Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E.P. (1975). Whigs and Hunters: the Origins of the Black Act. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truman, D.B. (1958). The Governmental Process. New York: A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weale, A. (1984). “Review Article: social choice versus populism. An interpretation of Riker’s Political Theory”, British Journal of Political Science. 14, 369–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willis, D. (1983). “Political control of the economy: the riddle of the loyal and the disaffected”, Paper presented at the Political Studies Association Conference, University of Newcasde-upon-Tyne, April 14-16th.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, D. (1985). “Private preferences for public goods: towards a model of interaction of pressure group and electoral politics”, Scandinavian Political Studies, 9, 1, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wootton, C. (1975). Pressure Groups in Britain 1720–1970. Harmondsworth; Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zentner, P. (1982). Social Democracy in Britain. London: John Martin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1987 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Willis, D. (1987). The Stability of Party Duopoly in Multi-Party Britain. In: Holler, M.J. (eds) The Logic of Multiparty Systems. International Studies in Economics and Econometrics, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3607-2_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3607-2_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8114-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-3607-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics