Legislative Practice in Brazil and the UK

On 5-7 February I had the opportunity to participate in an international seminar on good legislative practice in Brasília. The seminar was organized by the British Embassy, Brazil’s Federal Senate, ALESFE (the association of lawyers and consultants of the Brazilian Senate), the Brazilian Legislative Institute (ILB), and Interlegis, the ILB’s programme for the professional training of the staff of the National Congress. The theme of the seminar was how the national legislatures in Britain and Brazil can improve their performance, communicate with their citizenry, and remain relevant in a world that is increasingly skeptical of elected representatives, political parties, and professional politics.

The seminar began with a panel that included Jonathan Dunn, Deputy Chief of Mission at the British Embassy, Dave Watts, a Labour MP from St. Helens North in the UK, Helder Rebouças, an economist and lawyer, and the Director-General of Brazil’s Federal Senate, Sebastião Bala Rocha, a Brazilian Federal deputy from Amapá (Solidariedade Party), and Antônio Carlos de Mendes Thame, a Federal Deputy from São Paulo (PSDB, the Social Democratic Party). In their comments, the panelists pointed out some of the important differences between the two countries’ national legislatures. In the UK’s House of Commons, there are 650 constituencies averaging 68,000 voters each. MPs ignore the needs of these constituents at their peril. The first-past-the-post electoral system has resulted in what is essentially a two-party system (with one significant other party, the Liberal Democrats, and nine minor parties) characterized by a high degree of party discipline, party identification on the part of the electorate, and the re-election of incumbents. In Brazil, in contrast, there are 513 seats in the Chamber of Deputies, and the average district – which is the representative’s entire state – contains 5 million voters. (This makes the average district in Brazil 73 times larger than its UK counterpart.) State electorates range from about 271,000 in Roraima to 32 million in São Paulo, but all are much larger than House of Commons constituencies. This forces candidates to campaign throughout their states. Brazil’s low threshold for the registration of parties and open-list proportional representation in the electoral system has resulted in a fragmented party system, with twenty parties in the Camara (House of Deputies) and relatively low rates of party discipline in Congressional voting. Brazilian Congressional elections are also marked by low rates of party identification and high turnover.

In the following days, the seminar covered topics such as inter-parliamentary diplomacy, declining income inequality in Brazil (a masterful presentation by Marcelo Neri of the Secretariat of Strategic Affairs and the Institute of Applied Economic Research), public security in Latin America, education policy in the Brazilian Congress, evaluation of the impact of legislation in Brazil, the importance of research in the Brazilian Congress, public participation in legislation in Brazil, and Brazilian e-democracy. One striking difference between Brazil and Britain was discussed, albeit briefly. This is that voting is obligatory in Brazil, but optional in the UK. In Brazil, most voters who are dissatisfied cast null or blank ballots, whereas in the UK, they do not vote at all. In the last UK general election in 2010, voters aged 18 to 24 had the lowest voter turnout, at 44%, while voters aged 65 and older had the highest rate of voting, at 76%.

My presentation was on a citizen’s view of the UK Parliament. I talked about the concerns of my local MP, Siobhan McDonagh of Mitcham and Morden, and the ways voters try to get information about how Parliament is performing. The latter includes television programmes such as Question Time, hosted by the journalist David Dimbleby, and Private Eye, a bimonthly satirical magazine not unlike the Brazilian publication O Pasquim, a scourge of the military dictatorship in Brazil in the 1970s. I also mentioned some of the important think tanks in the UK that provide policy briefs to MPs but also convey political ideas to members of the electorate. These include The Fabian Society, the Institute for Public Policy Research, and the New Economics Foundation.

The seminar initiated a dialogue between British and Brazilian parliamentarians, parliamentary staffers, and members of the public, and I hope this exchange of experiences and reflection on best practice can continue. The IT revolution and the changing media landscape has made democratic governance more difficult everywhere, and parliaments must adapt if they are to effectively channel citizen concerns. Our exchange was brief but the challenges we discussed will endure.

Professor Anthony Pereira is the Director of the Brazil Institute at the King’s College London.