Political Leadership

1
Political Leadership

• Alistair Cole

2
Political leadership

• A key distinguishing feature within the academic
  literature has been between those advocating
  universal propositions about political
  leadership and those concerned with a more
  limited, usually national, framework
• Jean Blondels attempt to construct a universal
  model of political leadership proves the
  weaknesses of over-ambitious definitions of
  leadership.
• Blondel proposes a general model of political
  leadership claimed to be valid for all polities.
  Little account of different systemic contexts
  within which leadership is exercised for
  instance between liberal democratic,
  authoritarian, traditional or military
  leaderships. Extensive coverage but what really
  is being said?

3
Definitions

• Blondel leadership is ability to make others do
  what they would not otherwise do. Classic face
  of power (Lukes). Leadership is exercise of
  coercive power.
• Elgie, 'political leadership is best understood
  as the control over the public policy-making
  process by a particular institution'. This limits
  the study of political leadership to one of
  interaction between formal institutions, and
  overlooks or underplays the mobilising aspect of
  individual political action.
• Charismatic leadership (Weber). Leadership as
  mobilisation
• Leader-follower relations ( Burns) Leadership
  relational
• Symbolic leadership (Blondel)
• Psycho-biographies and socio-psychological
  studies define leadership in terms of personal
  attributes of leaders, typically authoritarian
  personality.
• Leadership can be all of thesea transversal
  concept which requires framework of analyses to
  allow operationalisation.

4
Framework of analysis 1.

• Leadership is multidisciplinary. It has attracted
  work in the fields of psychology, management
  studies, organisational theory, and history, as
  well as from political scientists.
• Within the framework of political science, most
  attention has been centered upon
• the institutional offices or positions occupied
  by leaders
• the personality traits associated with
  leadership (what distinguishs leaders from
  routine office-holders, for instance)
• the political environment or settings within
  which political leaders operate
• Styles of leadership, both individual and
  collective
• Leadership as part of broader core executive
  studies
• Most involve some combination of the personal
  qualities of leaders, their positional strengths
  and weaknesses, and the wider environmental and
  cultural constraints and opportunities that help
  shape their political leadership. Frameworks give
  rise to a number of questions

5
Structure and Agency

• What is the interplay between structure and
  agency?
• To what extent are political leaders bound by
  structural and political constraints how far are
  they free agents, able to determine leadership
  goals and policy outcomes?
• Are certain types of leader (for example the
  caretaker, the authoritarian, the visionary, or
  the coalition broker) suited to certain types of
  environmental setting?
• Do particular psychological character traits
  (such as an authoritarian personality) predispose
  certain individuals for political leadership?

6
Leadership settingsGermany as a case study

• Appreciating leadership potential depends first
  and foremost upon understanding the structural
  bases of a given polity.
• The case of Germany illustrates this well .The
  domestic political setting within which a German
  chancellor functions is far more restricted than
  that of his French or British counterparts.
• Post-war German political leadership has been
  built upon a political structure which embodies
  the diffusion of power across several
  interlocking institutions.
• The forces militating against strong leadership
  include the compromises inherent in coalition
  management, the impact of factional politics
  within the governing coalition, the federal
  system, which vests a virtual veto power in the
  hands of state governments and the second
  chamber the prevalence of sectoral corporatism
  as a model of state-group relations, and the
  impact of a particular institutional framework
  designed to dissipate decision-making authority
  across separate, but interdependent
  institutions.
• These constraints can also become opportunities
  for astute and skilful politicians, but
  leadership constrained by memory.

7
Agency and individuals

• Personal character traits are an important facet
  of an ability to exercise political leadership.
• The leadership qualities of decisiveness,
  strength, resolution, risk-taking, vision and
  imagination are differentially distributed,
  irrespective of wider structural circumstances.
• Different personal skills are appropriate to
  varying leadership styles and circumstances.
  Certain leaders appear to possess personal
  characteristics enabling them to leave their
  permanent imprint upon their offices. the
  examples of Charles de Gaulle in France and
  Konrad Adenuaer in Germany were exemplary in this
  respect.
• As with the French presidency and de Gaulle, the
  character of the German Chancellorship owes a
  great deal to the legacy of the first Chancellor,
  Adenauer. Adenauer crafted the chancellorship
  into a powerful weapon of executive leadership.

8
Leadership Roles

• What leadership roles are performed? Successful
  political leadership in complex liberal
  democracies depends upon the ability to perform
  different roles appropriate to variable contexts.
• The qualities required of a party manager are not
  always the same as those for a governmental
  coordinator the skills required for domestic
  economic management are distinct from those of
  the foreign policy suzerain.
• The extent to which individual political leaders
  are able to carry out particular roles is
  predicated in part upon the nature of the office
  they occupy Mitterrand and Thatcher performed
  foreign policy roles that were, arguably, not
  available to Chancellor Kohl in the 1980s, on
  account of the constrained leadership setting
  within which German chancellors then operated.
  The structure of the domestic political system is
  one very important dimension of political
  leadership.
• But roles are not, literally, pre-given. To a
  degree, individuals can determine the roles they
  perform, or even invent new ones. Sarkozy is
  arguably crafting the French presidency into a
  new type of political office

9
Position Presidential Leadership

• The key principle of a pure presidential system
  (such as the US) is that one individual
  symbolises the political executive, and is
  ultimately responsible for the activities of the
  government in the US, the President in theory
  fulfils this function, although in practice it is
  impossible for the President always to know what
  is going on in his name.
• The US President combines the functions of Head
  of State and Head of Government. The President is
  elected - by electoral college - and is
  responsible only to the people.
• Thus, in pure presidential systems, governments
  are responsible to the President alone, and can
  not be overturned by elected Parliaments. They
  will, however, change with a change of
  presidential incumbent.
• In the US system, there is a separation of
  powers, with legislative, executive and judicial
  branches of government separate from each other
  and providing checks and balances on each others
  operation.
• In most countries with powerful Presidents,
  however, there is no such pattern of divided
  government and the presidential form equates
  with a powerful form of unchecked and often
  corrupt executive power (the model in Africa,
  for example).

10
PositionParliamentary leadership

• In parliamentary systems, by contrast, government
  is held to be a collective enterprise
  responsibility for government decisions is
  invested in a collective body known as a cabinet,
  or a Council of ministers.
• The Prime minister is the foremost personality
  within Cabinet, but decision-making is
  collective. The PM is not directly elected, and
  can be overturned by a negative vote in an
  elected Parliament. In parliamentary systems,
  governments are held to be responsible to elected
  Assemblies, themselves representative of the
  people.
• In a pure presidential system, such as the US,
  the executive is separate from the legislature
  members of the US government can not be members
  of Congress as well. In a parliamentary system,
  such as the UK, the executive is drawn from the
  legislature members of the government are first
  elected as members of Parliament. In nearly all
  European states, there is a fusion of powers,
  rather than a strict separation.

11
Semi-presidential system

• The semi-presidential system combines features of
  the presidential and the parliamentary
• A semi-presidential system combines a directly
  elected President and a government responsible to
  parliament.
• Francois (2008) Frances semi-presidential
  system equates with the lack of political
  responsibility of the core executive leader, the
  President, who is de facto unaccountable.
• Executive drawn in part only from elected
  Assembly. Rule of incompatibility. Nomination by
  President of personalities who have not been
  elected
• A model that is not really for export?

12
Political Leadership in comparative context (1)
formal constitutional resources

• Proposition 1 formal constitutional powers are a
  necessary, but not sufficient component of
  leadership
• the powers vested by the constitution on the core
  executive leader
• Power of nomination
• Powers of selection and dismissal of ministers
• Limits on terms in office?
• Specific constitutional responsibilities, e.g. in
  defence
• Limitations to exercise of core executive
  authority? EG the guarantee of individual
  ministerial autonomy in the FRG.

13
Political Leadership in comparative context (2)
role of party system

• Proposition 2 .Role of party system in producing
  homogeneous versus coalition governments. The
  strong prime minister at the head of a
  disciplined party majority is likely to exercise
  tighter control over government than the
  broker-style leader of a coalition of five or so
  parties
• The nature of the relationship between government
  and governing party/coalition is vital. The
  colonisation of important ministries by a
  coalition partner (e.g. Welfare by Social
  democrats in Germany) can frustrate the claim by
  the premier to exercise political leadership.
  Party political and organisational variables can
  conflict
• Style of leadership likely to be strongly
  influenced by the party system. Are brokerage
  skills rewarded, for example, or are is the
  relationship framed in terms of providential
  leader and subordination? There are no absolute
  rules, but behavuoural observations.

14
Political Leadership in comparative context (3)
Nature of elective mandate

• Proposition 3. Direct election and elective
  legitimacy. The core executive leader who has
  been directly elected (such as the French
  President) enjoys an additional elective
  legitimacy by comparison to parliamentary prime
  ministers. French President remains in office for
  the duration of a mandate and can not be
  overturned by a party or parliamentary revolt,
  unlike in Germany, UK or Italy.
• On the other hand, direct presidential elections
  do not automatically invest officeholders with
  increased power, as the Portuguese or Finnish
  examples demonstrate.
• New democracies in central and eastern Europe
  tempted by institutional design of the
  semi-presidential system, but in practice have
  evolved into parliamentary regimes.

15
Political Leadership in comparative context (4)
Elections and government formation

• Proposition 4 Elections and government formation.
• The closer the link between electoral victory
  and government formation, the stronger the
  position of the office holder.
• The strength of the British PM (and, for that
  matter, the German Chancellor) usually relates to
  the fact that s/he has led the ruling party to a
  victorious general election.
• There is- usually - a strong relationship
  between general elections and government
  formation, even in case of the Grand coalition.
• In Italy, or France, this relationship is less
  apparent - which limits the political prestige of
  the Prime minister
• Thus, Helmut Kohl, Margaret Thatcher or Tony
  Blair all led their parties to successive
  electoral victories, thereby strengthening their
  leadership positions. Although Thatcher and
  Blair was eventually overturned by a party
  revolt, and Kohls leadership threatened to go
  the same way, there is no doubt that Kohl and
  Thatcher had more authority and power than a
  string of Italian premiers whose occupancy of the
  premiership was decided by party committee in
  between election periods.
• After all, who can remember Spaldolini in Italy?

16
Political Leadership in comparative context (5)
longevity of office

• longevity in office. This is a precondition to
  exercising effective political leadership..
• Learning leadership, exploiting opportunities
• But experience also demonstrates that it is
  extremely rare for any one leader to stay in
  office more than 10 years or soThe nature of
  obstacles in the democratic process

17
Political Leadership in comparative context (6)
Relations within and beyond the core executive

• Political leadership is behavioural in part a
  function of the relations of political leaders
  with other decision-making actors, both within
  and outside of the core executive.
• Relations between Prime ministers, Finance
  ministers, spending ministries often tense
  crystallises tensions at a macro level
  duplicated by rivalries between bureaucratic
  divisions
• Government competition for scarce resources.
  Nature of bureaucratic resources, rules and
  regulation. Who has the best expertise? What
  rules govern access to these resources? How are
  promotions managed in the civil service? What is
  role of political appointments or spoils
  systems
• Leadership is positional relational Powerful
  external relations can strengthen a PMs internal
  standing.

18
Political Leadership in comparative context (7)
constraints and resources

• the existence or otherwise of institutional and
  political counter-weights to strong leadership
  (such as constitutional courts, a written
  constitution, or a constraining party system).
• The role of Assemblies and especially
  constitutional courts is critical importance here
• The rise of the EU regulatory state and the legal
  order basis of the European Union and the ECJ,
  has provided a powerful check on unbridled
  executive authority.

19
Germany 1.

• German Chancellors have generally proved strong
  leaders
• In Germany the post-war period has seen the
  emergence of a strong political office in the
  form of the Chancellor. It was believed by the
  allies that the absense of strong,
  institutionalised leadership had been partly
  responsible for the rise of Nazism. For this
  reason, it was important to strengthen the
  Chancellor at the expense of the President- whose
  capacity for intrigue had to be broken. The
  pre-eminence of the Chancellor was recognised in
  the Basic Law (Guideline principles) strengthened
  by the following provisions
• 1. He can not be dismissed by the President of
  the Republic (unlike in France)
• 2. he can only be dismissed by the Bundestag in
  the event of a vote of constructive no
  confidence being passed against him. This
  involves an absolute majority against the
  incumbent chancellor in the Bundestag - an
  unlikely occurrence except for a shift in policy
  alliances. The CVNC has been a German
  constitutional export Spain and Poland have
  followed suit.

20
Germany 2.

• The German Chancellor who has led his party/
  coalition to victory in an election finds himself
  in a strong position relatively disciplined
  party support focus of media attention during
  elections.
• This position reinforced by the Convention that
  he should be appointed for the duration of a
  legislature. The only exceptions to this rule
  have been Adenauer's retirement in 1963, and the
  resignations of Brandt, Schmidt in mid-office and
  Schroders 2005 dissolution.
• Between 1949 and 2007, Germany had shown more
  stability of personnel than in any other of the
  countries considered it has had only 8
  Chancellors during this period (Adenauer, Erhard,
  Kiesinger, Brandt, Schmidt, Kohl, GS and AM).

21
Constraints on a German Chancellor

• According to the principle of Ressortprinzip,
  enshrined in the Basic law, each Minister is
  responsible for running his own department, and
  the Chancellor can not order a Minister to run
  department in a different way (unlike in the UK,
  eg).
• The existence of coalition partners constrains
  the Chancellor, to the extent that bargains must
  be struck which other leaders might dispense
  with.
• And fixed-term parliaments effectively make it
  extremely difficult for Chancellors to dissolve
  the Bundedstag, in order to seek general
  elections at favourable moments this is one of
  the reasons which makes the British and French
  leaders so powerful.
• As measured by this checklist, in their domestic
  settings German Chancellors occupy a median
  position amongst west European leaders. In
  practice, there is no real equivalent in Germany
  of the French or British ministerial reshuffle
  traditions of ministerial autonomy and of
  coalition capture of particular portfolios are
  far too strong for this.

22
Italy

• Italy During the first Italian Republic, the
  Italian premier generally had only a minor role
  to play, but the office strengthened under
  Berlusconi and Prodi.
• Until 1994, Italian governments lasted for less
  than one year on average. Ministers were imposed
  upon an Italian premier by considerations of
  party and factional balance within the ruling
  coalition.
• The means at the disposal of an Italian premier
  for co-ordinating governmental action were
  derisory, despite a large bureaucratic apparatus
  under direct control of the premier.
• Italian premiers were so weak because they
  presided over coalition governments, navigated
  between divided political parties, were
  responsible to a parliament determined to assert
  its control, and in general did not benefit from
  a strong relationship between election results
  and government formation.
• The post-1994 Italian regime has gone some way to
  rebalancing this, with the governments of Prodi
  and Berlusconi creating a bipolar competition
  assisted by the majoritarian electoral system and
  providing stronger, though deeply contested and
  still coalition-dependent leadership.
• Extent of the role of institutional engineering
  in creating political outcomes.

23
Britain 1.

• UK The British Premier, by any standards,
  occupies a key leadership position within the
  family of west European nations.
• British prime ministers have often appeared in a
  stronger leadership position than their European
  counterparts. There is a close linkage between
  the leadership of an electorally majoritarian
  political party and the exercise of the office of
  Prime minister.
• Election campaigns are centred around the
  personalities of rival party leaders, as much as
  the policies espoused by their parties the
  success of Tony Blair in 1997 was testament to
  this. There is also a close relationship between
  electoral success and government formation.
  Strengthened by the majoritarian effects of the
  first-past-the post electoral system, elections
  tend to produce single party majorities.
• Successful Prime ministers have usually been able
  to rely on disciplined party support. But
  Thatcher, Major, Blair all constrained by their
  parties.

24
Britain 2.

• Unlike their German, Italian and French
  counterparts, they have not been tightly
  constrained by a written constitution outlining
  their powers and responsibilities indeed, the
  doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty removes
  most checks and balances on a British premiers
  use of executive authority, on condition that a
  parliamentary majority is retained.
• British premiers have powerful sources of
  patronage at their disposal each recent
  incumbent has made regular use of their freedom
  to hire and fire ministerial colleagues. At the
  height of her activism in July 1989, for
  instance, Mrs Thatcher replaced or reshuffled
  12 out of 21 Cabinet ministers.
• The departure of Margaret Thatcher in 1990 or
  Blair in 2007 also revealed the limits to prime
  ministerial power in Britain, however a
  disillusioned party will not tolerate a leader
  with whom it has lost faith, even when this is an
  incumbent prime minister.
• While ministerial autonomy is less manifest than
  in the German case, any British Prime minister
  must be careful not to ride roughshod over
  powerful ministers. An embattled premier such as
  Blair could not afford to lose senior
  ministerial colleagues hence the effectiveness
  of the Chancellor of the Exchequer Clarke

25
France

• France Along with the British premier, the French
  President is a serious contender for the key
  executive office in western Europe.
• The President is directly elected for a five year
  period direct election confers a status on the
  French President which his colleagues find
  difficult to match.
• Until the quinquennat reforms of 2000, the
  presidential term of office was longer than that
  of any of his counterparts. Whatever the French
  constitution says, French Presidents have enjoyed
  considerable freedom of manoeuvre in selecting
  and dismissing prime ministers and ministers and
  in personalising control over core policy
  choices.
• French Presidents dispose of powerful sources of
  political patronage, and most Presidents have
  been backed by solid parliamentary majorities.
• In instances of cohabitation (1986-88, 1993-95
  1997-) the prime minister has become the chief
  executive leader, with uncontested control over
  domestic policy, but having to contend with
  continuing presidential involvement in the
  presidential sector of foreign affairs, defence
  and European integration.
• As in the other systems surveyed, individual
  ministers can occupy pivotal positions, but they
  are less secure in their tenure than in Germany

26
Poland and Czech Republic

• Czech Republic and Poland. In both cases, early
  transition saw the development of strong
  Presidents.. but , faced with the accession
  process and problems of political majroty
  building, Prime ministers, at the head of
  shifting party coalitions, have emerged as much
  stronger figures, with the corresponding decline
  of the Presidency.