Unicameralism - Concept

Concept

Unicameral legislatures exist when there is no widely perceived need for multicameralism. Many multicameral legislatures were created to give separate voices to different sectors of society. Multiple chambers allowed for guaranteed representation of different social classes (as in the Parliament of the United Kingdom or the French States-General), ethnic or regional interests, or subunits of a federation. Where these factors are unimportant, in unitary states with weak regional identity, unicameralism often prevails. Sometimes, as in New Zealand and Denmark, this comes about through the abolition of one the two chambers, or, as in Sweden, through the merger of the two chambers into a single one, while in others a second chamber has never existed.

Unicameral legislatures are also common in Communist states such as the People's Republic of China and Cuba. Similarly, many formerly Communist states, such as Ukraine, Moldova and Serbia, have retained their unicameral legislatures, though others, such as Russia and Poland, adopted bicameral legislatures after the fall of Communism. The socialist viewpoint regards upper houses as typically conservative and representing the interests of the upper classes.

The principal advantage of a unicameral system is more efficient lawmaking, as the legislative process is much simpler and there is no possibility of legislative deadlock. Proponents of unicameralism have also argued that it reduces costs, as even if the number of legislators is the same as it would be in a multicameral system, there are fewer institutions to maintain and support.

The main weakness of a unicameral system can be seen as the lack of restraint on the majority, particularly noticeable in parliamentary systems where the leaders of the parliamentary majority also dominate the executive. There is also the risk, depending on how seats are allocated in the legislature, that important sectors of society may not be adequately represented.