Strong party polarization is considered a disadvantage for the establishment government cooperation which by definition are built on the basis of compromise.

Political processes may precede elections, and the appearance of a clear winner usually speeds up this process. A small party does not mean a small ministry, and a large scheme may not be able to make decisions as quickly. The loss of electoral power, as well as political advantages, is faced by both small and large partners of the government.

These are some of the lessons from the political experience of countries such as Germany and Italy. They respond to “K” questions professor of political science at the Luis University of Rome. Vincenzo Emanuele and Head of Electoral and Social Research at the Konrad Adenauer Foundation in Berlin. Dr. Viola Noy.

– There is a tradition of cooperative governments in your country. How was this political culture created?

– B.Em. The tradition of coalition governments in Italy emerged immediately after World War II and was favored by two factors. Firstly, because of the fragmentation of its party system, that is, the many parties representing various divisions and divisions in the electorate. Secondly, from the adoption of an almost pure, simple proportional electoral system.

– B.N. Germany had coalition governments only after World War II. Even when the CDU/CSU once won an absolute majority, a coalition government was also formed in 1957. Thus, coalition governments in Germany are a matter of course.

– Highlight any factors that you would call permanent conditions for the successful formation of a government coalition?

– B.Em. A bibliography of political science – see Lijphart 1999 – shows us that the successful formation of a governing coalition depends mainly on the political elite’s attitude towards compromise. It is essentially a matter of political culture, as the examples of Belgium and the Netherlands show us. Another important condition is low ideological polarization. The greater the ideological distance between the parties, the more difficult the process of forming a coalition government.

– B.N. A certain programmatic affinity between the parties makes coalitions more likely. Moreover, in Germany there is a consensus among democratic parties not to form coalitions with extremist parties. However, even the current government coalition in our country shows that cooperation between parties with different political positions is possible.

– Do parties in your country usually discuss the political program after the verdict of the ballot box or is there an informal open line of communication in advance?

– B.Em. Since 1994, after the adoption of mixed electoral systems with a strong majoritarian component, the process of forming a ruling coalition is mainly carried out before elections. Of course, the election results may lead to repeated negotiations between members of the election coalition that won the election.

– B.N. As a rule, there are no political debates before elections in Germany.

– As for the stage of post-election consultations, how long does it usually last and what can delay the process?

– B.Em. If there is a clear winner, the process only takes a few days. Consultations, on the other hand, are delayed when no one has a majority of seats. At this point, negotiations between the parties under the supervision of the President of the Republic may last for weeks or even months.

– B.N. Negotiation processes can be very long or very short. The longest consultations lasted 172 days, and the shortest 24 days.

– Do important ministries usually end up in the first batch or not necessarily? In addition, there is an opinion that the participation of a small party in a coalition government usually causes political damage to it. What does experience show us?

– B.Em. The first point is not necessarily true. We often see the first party hand over important government posts to their smaller partners. As for the second part of the question, what we have seen in Italy since 1994 is that being in government, whether you are a major partner or a junior partner, results in a loss of votes.

– B.N. Who benefits from the coalition does not depend on the size of the party. Since the largest party provides a chancellor, she is likely to receive a bonus for her position. But smaller coalition partners can also improve their performance. There are no stable patterns here.

– In the same discussion, there is also an argument that a cooperating government does not make decisions as quickly and effectively at the stages of anti-crisis management. What is your image of your country?

– B.Em. The argument you mentioned is good for Italy: the more coalition partners there are and the greater their ideological distance, the less efficient the decision-making process.

– B.N. Since there were only coalition governments in Germany, no firm conclusions can be drawn regarding the self-government scenario.

– Can we say that internal rivalry in a cross-party government creates a disadvantage in comparison with a self-governing government? I assume that the internal balance sheets of the respective ruling coalition are often taken up by the press in your country.

– B.Em. Every government faces this problem. Even a one-party system suffers from intra-governmental party competition – see recent developments in the UK Conservative Party. Of course, the more partners in the coalition, the higher the potential competition. But it also depends on the cohesion of the opposition, the leadership of the Prime Minister, and also on the time gap until the next elections.

– B.N. The principle of balance of interests is deeply rooted and evident in Germany. Of course, under any government, federal state election results and changes in opinion polls lead to public debate about the party’s course and compromises.

– Do you think that important reforms require cooperating governments for the broadest possible political consensus, or instead autonomous governments that are likely to act faster and more decisively?

– B.Em. This question does not necessarily have a correct answer. Italy has faced deadlocks and failed reforms under both types of governments. With technocratic governments that enjoyed the support of all major parties – see Modi or Draghi. But also with strong homogeneous governments – see Craxi or Renzi. In general, I believe that important reforms, in order to be successful, also need the participation of the opposition and public opinion.

– B.N. German public opinion is accustomed to the fact that some compromises take longer or require more effort. However, this is not the norm either. For example, we see that the current government – the SPD, the Greens, the FDP – makes political decisions smoothly.