top of page
Tom Monto

How Switzerland got Proportional Representation

the Electoral Reform Society of UK in recent newsletter (Jan. 2023) has article on how the Swiss got PR back in 1890s or so. here's link https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/how-did-switzerland-get-proportional-representation/

I think PR-man John D. Hunt in his 1917 book The Dawn of New Patriotism was likely referring to the convoy types when he disparaged nihilists in his book. the Electoral Reform Society of UK in recent newsletter has article on how the Swiss got PR back in 1890s or so. here's link https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/how-did-switzerland-get-proportional-representation/ he defined nihilists as those who would throw out what we have, with no replacement in mind. likely the unrest that moved Switzerland to PR was not nihilists like the convoy but organized protest action and political action and perhaps civil disobedience. google search brought up "Switzerland in the 19th Century" download. it talks of enfranchisement of Jewish, labour movement supported by Radical politicians, the founding of the Swiss federation, but nothing on PR (aagghh) and nothing on how PR came in - on what form of unrest drove it. perhaps that does show us that Switzerland was in throes of various political and social ferment (not unlike Canada today) and PR was just one of many changes wrought at the time. other item that came up is "The History of Direct Democracy" talks of growth of direct democracy (referendums) we see this info [I added underlining] In 1884, following a decade of referendum defeats, the Radicals finally gave in and opened the circle of political power. In an effort to co-opt the opposition, a Catholic (who was also a conservative) was elected to the Federal Council and made President - Josef Zemp. This concession resulted in a degree of referendal success for the Radicals. Between 1885 and 1890, only two laws were challenged; and neither was ultimately rejected by the people. However, the election of Zemp was not enough to enlist the full support of Catholics and conservatives. Early in 1891, a law providing pensions to federal officials was challenged and defeated in a referendum. Later the same year, a crucial statute nationalizing the Swiss railways was rejected by 68.9 percent of the electorate. What then resulted was a rare occurrence in the Swiss political system - a Federal Councillor resigned. The Councillor concerned was Emil Welti, one of the most prominent Swiss politicians of his era. The vacancy was filled by a second Catholic conservative, a move which finally gave the Catholics a meaningful level of participation in the national executive body. The event marked an important turning point in Swiss political history. It was the first step in the process of making the composition of the federal executive proportional to the strength of parties in the electorate. The process would culminate in 1959 with the establishment of the 'magic formula' whereby the Federal Council would henceforth be composed of two Radicals, two Christian Democrats, two Social Democrats, and one member of the agrarian Swiss People's Party. In 1891, Switzerland left behind the majoritarian concept of democracy in which government and opposition theoretically alternated between full possession of political power and relative powerlessness. The sharing of power embodied in the concept of Konkordanz-Demokratie was born. The role of the referendum in bringing about this transformation is difficult to exaggerate. Without it, the Catholics and conservatives would never have been able to force open the doors of power. The 1874 introduction of the federal legislative referendum also demonstrated how one structural innovation could have far-reaching consequences on informal (but crucial) distributions of political power. ... This hints at use of referendum to force change in Canada somewhat pessimist notee inserted later 1891-1945: Direct democracy on the road to consensual politics In the first 20 years of the initiative's operation, nine constitutional amendments were launched which also received the 50,000 signatures necessary to qualify for the ballot. Of the nine, only two passed; and another was withdrawn in favor of a government counterproposal which succeeded. The onslaught of initiatives dreaded by some opponents of the device had not occurred. It is worth noting that none of the initiatives urging dramatic structural reform or concerning fundamental rights won popular approval. The Swiss people rejected a right to work amendment (1894), proportional representation in the national legislature (1900 and 1910), popular election of the Federal Council (1900), and an amendment concerning seats in the lower house, the National Council (1903)... so even in Switz. it was not smooth going. But final victory was achieved due to propitious interlace of various factors. It took 30 years from time PR first used at canton level. UK is not at 30 year mark of use of PR in Scotland. Canada does not yet have PR at province/Terr level. can we hope Yukon to start the clock ticking? not that the 30 year schedule is set in stone. ... After the war's close, the Social Democrats began to make effective use of the federal initiative. In 1918, the Social Democratic Party achieved its most important victory with the long sought-after introduction of proportional representation (PR) in National Council elections. Proportional representation had appeared in some cantonal legislatures as early as the 1890s. In 1913, the Social Democrats and Catholic Conservatives co-sponsored and submitted a constitutional initiative for proportional representation in the National Council; but the voting was postponed by the war. On 13 October 1918, the polling took place; and the initiative succeeded, with 68.8 percent of the voters and 19 1/2 cantons in favor. This was the parties' third PR initiative; the previous two attempts failed in 1900 and 1910. The victory in 1918 brought about a fundamental structural change in the Swiss political system, demonstrating that the initiative was not only a vehicle for routine legislation, but a device of genuine constitutional reform as well. Events at the close of 1918 pushed the new electoral system into use sooner than had been planned. Socialist ferment among industrial workers and fears of civilian unrest in Zürich prompted Ulrich Wille, General of the Swiss Army, to send in troops. The Federal Council apparently concurred. The ensuing display of force prompted a one-day protest strike in Zürich, which was followed by the nationwide General Strike beginning on 11 November. On 13 November, the 'Olten Action Committee' representing the strikers finally capitulated to an ultimatum delivered by the President of the Confederation. Instilling fears of revolutionary violence, the crisis induced the government to bring the next elections forward. [under PR] In 1919, a very different National Council was elected. The Radical Democrats (with 28.8 percent of the vote), their conservative allies in the small Liberal Party (with 3.8 percent), and their governing partners, the Catholic Conservatives (with 21.0 percent), could still produce a parliamentary majority. However, it was a greatly reduced one, in which they controlled 110 of 189 National Council Seats, compared to 157 in the 1917 election. The Social Democrats won 23.5 percent of the vote and 41 seats; and the newly-formed Agrarians broke away from the Radical Democrats to win 15.3 percent of the vote and 30 seats in their first election. Radical hegemony was dead. The introduction of proportional representation made it virtually impossible for any party in the Swiss system to achieve a parliamentary majority. In virtually every election since, the three largest parties - the Radical Democrats, the Catholic Conservatives, and the Social Democrats -have each received between 19 and 26 percent of the vote. The Agrarians have regularly received 10-13 percent. The Independent Alliance, founded in 1935 primarily on a platform of consumer interests, has usually claimed 4-8 percent of the vote. The Communist Party formed in the 1920s has never received more than 2.9 percent of the vote, with the exception of 1947, when it won 5.1 percent. and the essay reveals lower down that PR of a sort had been used to resolve political issue even before official adoption of PR in 1918 ... In 1917, Federal Councillor Hermann Hoffman was forced to resign when his secret diplomacy on behalf of Germany to Russia was exposed. To placate the infuriated French-speakers of Western Switzerland, the government offered them a French-speaking seat on the Federal Council. In this way, proportionality in the executive was used to bridge a second political cleavage. In the same spirit of reconciliation, Switzerland joined the League of Nations in 1920. However, this decision was fervently opposed by many who argued that it compromised the country's long-standing posture of neutrality. They maintained that it was precisely this policy of neutrality which had prevented the nation from tearing itself apart during the war. In spite of their objections, the decision to join the League was narrowly ratified in the ensuing referendum, with 56.3 percent in favor. So we see a referendum used to resolve political issue that even PR-elected government could not solve. Canada cannot simply appoint people to effect balance - oh wait we can, to the Senate. Perhaps NDP could demand seats there as part of next GSA (?) agreement. Perhaps PR movement could demand Senator seat somehow. or in federal cabinet. And PR and referendum evoked further fair reforms. In 1959, the development of consensual government culminated in the 'magic formula', by which all four major parties were represented on the Federal Council in a 2:2:2:1 ratio. The Social Democrats, after six years' voluntary withdrawal, returned to the Council with two seats. The other parties were undoubtedly anxious to bring the SPS back on board after its referendum campaign in opposition to a 1958 tax hike which was seen as insufficiently progressive. The finance measure succeeded narrowly, with only 54.6 percent approving. The Christian Democrats and the Radical Democrats retained two seats each on the Federal Council, with the Swiss People's Party allotted one. This informal distribution of seats has continued unchanged to the present day. In 1959, the four governing parties represented 85 percent of the electorate. For the next three decades, roughly 80 percent of Swiss voters were continuously represented by their party on the national executive. In 1987 the governing parties' share of the vote dropped to 72.3 percent, falling again in 1991 to 69.5 percent. This shift has primarily been due to the rise of small, issue-oriented parties since the early 1970s, described in detail in Chapters Four and Five. In addition to proportionality according to party, seats on the Federal Council are informally distributed according to language. There are usually four German speakers, two French speakers, and one Italian speaker This actually mimics the regional balance used in Canada federal cabinets where possible. Under Switz.'s Canton-level PR , we see all major parties represented to one degree or another in each canton (I assume) (and expect same in Canada provinces under PR in Canada ) and therefore no party or linguist group is barred from federal cabinet. in past no Alberta Liberal could sit in federal cabinet cause there was none elected. no such problem under PR. in Switz. referendum pivotal to opening door to PR, it seems ...3. The referendum and the initiative have long been used by minor parties and political outsiders as a minority veto against the governing majority, or as a way of opening the doors of power. The Radicals of the 1830s were the first to use direct democracy in this way, legitimizing their attacks on the waning political establishment. The Radicals gradually rose to become the dominant party of the nineteenth century and have remained in the government to the present day. The perceived utility of the referendum to Radicals declined accordingly. Then, starting in 1839, conservative forces and Catholic groups began to use the referendum as effective brake on Radical power. This process reached its apogee in the 1870s when Catholic-led referendums nearly brought the Radical government to its knees. In the late 1880s, The Catholic Conservatives gained for themselves a perpetual seat on the Federal Council through the effective use of referendums. After 1900, it was the Social Democrats' turn. They fought the legislation of the ruling bourgeois parties with the facultative referendum, and they were the first out-group to successfully change the structure of the political system via the constitutional initiative. In bringing about proportional representation, they made their eventual position on the Federal Council a virtual certainty. It is difficult to overstate the importance of direct democracy in fostering Swiss consociationalism. The pressure generated by referendum campaigns led directly to the inclusion of the four major parties in a grand coalition government. we don't have the power of referendum as easily in Canada as in Switz. but we do have courts. we must hope for good outcome in court challenge underway.

2 views

Recent Posts

See All

Kommentare


bottom of page