Peter H. Russell’s (2023) Two Cheers for Minority Government is reflective of the Bismarckian view that politics is “the art of the next best.” His central argument is not that minority government is perfect but rather that it is better than “its main alternative-false majority government” (2). The two likeliest results for governments in Canada, Russell notes in chapter two, are false majority government where a party wins the most seats but not a majority of votes and minority government, wherein no party wins a parliamentary majority (3). The subsequent three chapters describe occurrences of minority government: first federally, then provincially, and finally in other countries. His argument is that minority governments are capable; “An appraisal of minority governments based on empirical study rather than ignorance and prejudice does not support the view that such governments lack governing capability or effectiveness” (102). This point is bolstered with instructive examples.
With the effectiveness of minority government established, chapter six turns to why it is better democratically. Largely, this is about decision making in parliamentary democracy. Due to party cohesion and power centralization, a prime minister with a majority government has almost complete discretion over policy. This is not true when the government is a minority; in order to get their policy initiatives through parliament, the prime minister will be forced to make compromises that are “more inclusive of opinion in the country” (125).
The final chapters are devoted to prescriptions for making minority government work better. Chapter seven focuses on institutional reforms designed to stabilize minority governments and ensure they do not collapse prematurely. Chapter eight focuses on how to revitalize parliamentary democracy amongst citizens. Russell concludes with a restatement of his argument that, by forcing compromise, minority government provides for a more representative parliamentary government than a government built on a false majority (159–60).
Russell’s book is a compelling argument for minority government, and a worthwhile second edition. Not only does he bring Canada’s federal experience with minority government up to date, but his inclusion of a chapter on minority governments in the provinces and territories is necessary considering that, as he notes, provincial regimes have often led the way in providing innovation to parliamentary management (63). This chapter not only serves to buttress his overall argument on the effectiveness of minority governments but also allows for a more complete picture of Canadian experiences with this form of government.
Russell further deserves praise for how his argument is built. He addresses the common critique of the dysfunctionality of minority government head on in the three review chapters. For instance, he responds to critiques that more minority governments will lead to the parliamentary instability exhibited in Israel or Italy by citing more appropriate comparisons to Canada’s Westminster parliament (91–3). Additionally, his repeated argument that the stability of a false majority is not worth the price to parliamentary democracy is well stated, and Russell offers well-thought-out solutions for how minority governments could be made more stable.
I would be remiss if I did not mention the secondary argument for electoral reform running through his text. While promoting electoral reform is not his primary objective, his arguments in favour of minority government effectively “serve to counter” the common refrain that, since electoral reform would produce more apparently unstable minority governments, it must be avoided (3–4). This argument is subtle and often left unstated but certainly serves as a leitmotif throughout the text. His utilization of New Zealand in chapter five is particularly well suited to this secondary argument, considering its status as a Westminster democracy with proportional representation.
One critique is Russell’s optimism toward confidence and supply agreements. He recommends these agreements to stabilize minority governments and notes that recent occurrences make them more likely going forward (144). More pessimism is perhaps merited. The Green–NDP accord in British Columbia, which he cites, serves as a lesson in why parties may avoid this form of stabilization in the future. Despite seeing some policy victories, the accord failed to prevent the NDP from calling an advantageous snap election and saw the Greens lose support compared to their previous electoral performance. Electorally, the lesson seems to be that minor parties should avoid these agreements as they may prove costly. Though Russell, of course, accepts that a key flaw with these accords at present may be an electorate that punishes compromise (156).
Regardless, Two Cheers for Minority Government is a powerful argument for minority governments. Its review of the record of these governments is useful for reference purposes, and I believe that the argument would be well suited to classes on Canadian politics, particularly as it challenges assumptions many Canadians have toward minority governments. I would recommend this book to any student or scholar of Canadian politics.
