Talk:List of European Union member states by political system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured list List of European Union member states by political system is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
WikiProject European Union (Rated FL-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured list FL  This article has been rated as FL-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Politics (Rated FL-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured list FL  This article has been rated as FL-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


The term "competences" is used a lot on this page, and does not have a wikilink pointing to a discussion of what it means in this context. The best I can find from the disambiguation page Competence is Competence (law), but that deals with the ability of a person to be tried criminally, not with rights & responsibilities of governmental bodies. -- Tmhand 15:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't able to find anything suitable, either... —Nightstallion (?) 06:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Is this a list?[edit]

Is the word "list" in this article's title really appropriate? Although half is a list, the other half is prose and I can see the prose developing further. --Oldak Quill 15:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

shrugs List of European Union member states, which BTW needs a name change -- see talk page, has about as much prose, but it would never have passed FA; FL was possible, though. I suspect that this list will also not be able to become a FA, but a FL should be possible, as well. —Nightstallion (?) 18:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I think that this is a list. The list of Category 5 Pacific hurricanes is an FL and it has a large amount of prose. The reason I think that this is a list is the fact that the key information here is not the explanations of what a presidential system or legislature is but rather the categorization of the member states using the criteria that is explained by the prose. Theoretically, you could remove almost all of the prose and simply use wikilinks in table headings and picture headings to accomplish the same thing. In that case all of the explanations are external to this article rather than internal to it. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 21:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Mentioning Featured Lists, geez this is almost up to the standard. A very very good job. -- 23:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
That *was* my intention, yes. I'll put it up for FL review some time soon. I've put it up for FL status now. ;)Nightstallion (?) 06:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC) 11:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Section on EU neighbours[edit]

I've removed the section for the following reasons: It was factually wrong ("dictatorship" is not a form of government); and it didn't fit into the scope of this article (it would fit into Politics of Europe with a few changes, though). Hope that's okay. —Nightstallion (?) 21:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I think something like this section would be useful to put the EU's political systems in regional perspective. How about a section on EU candidate states? On the dictatorship issue - this article refers several times to the EU members being 'democratic' and that 'democracy' must be guaranteed as a criteria for membership. The definition of a democracy is entirely subjective, however, its opposite is clearly 'dictatorship'. And it is interesting that there are a number of states in europe which are offically considered to be dictatorships by the EU. Seabhcán 22:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, you didn't label Russia, Algeria and Morocco as dictatorships, and they most certainly are (check Freedom House). Also, you coloured a part of Ukraine as a dictatorship, while the rest was red for presidential system... ;) But fair enough, I'll whip something up about the Union's neighbours. —Nightstallion (?) 05:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I've included a short section about democracy in the first section. —Nightstallion (?) 06:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I like those changes you made. Great article by the way. Seabhcán 23:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks on both accounts. :)Nightstallion (?) 05:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Is Italy 'devolved'?[edit]

I believe Italy should be considered a 'devolved' state along the lines of Spain and the UK. See Autonomous regions with special statute (Italy). Seabhcán 10:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I had been considering that, too, yes, but I'm not quite sure yet. Would Italy have become a federation under the new constitution, then, or just a "real" devolved state? I'm not quite certain on the present state... —Nightstallion (?) 05:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Of course this raises the old question of what is a 'federation'. A federation is usually defined as being when various independent units voluntarily join together and grant powers to the center. However, this implies that the units could elect to withdraw those powers leave that federation. But the world's two biggest 'federations', the US and Russia, both fought wars to prevent this (The US civil war and Chechnya).
So if the US states dont have the right to leave, does that make the US a federation or a devolved state?
The UK actually started out as a federation of England and Scotland, in 1707, the two parliaments unified. However, at some undefined point since then, Scotland lost the right to its own powers and had to ask the central government to grant it devolved powers.
Where does Italy fit in? Its a tricky question. Seabhcán 11:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, indeed... Basically, we *should* find some citeable sources for the degrees of devolution at some point, I'd wager. —Nightstallion (?) 13:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
In broad terms, the difference between a federation and a devolved state is the following: in a federation, powers to federal units are granted through the constitution, and thus cannot be revoked by the central government unless the federal system is abolished by constitutional referendum. So, in the US and Australia, for example, states are responsible for certain areas, and the central government has no authority to revoke their constitutional powers. In a devolved state, powers are granted to regions through laws passed by the central government, which can be revoked at any time by abrogating the devolution law. Some of Italy's regions are autonomous, and in this way it can be seen as a devolved state in the same way that the UK is. Of course, the actual extent of the powers varies (Scotland, I believe, has far greater powers than Sardinia or Sicily has). I would still, however, classify Italy as a devolved state, but devolved asymmetrically rather than symetrically (the UK is also asymmetrically-devolved, as is Spain, so in actuality there is no significant difference between them). Flag of Europe.svgFlag of Romania.svg Ronline 13:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
The question is rather whether it's a devolved state or a federacy... —Nightstallion (?) 08:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The United Kingdom is not devolved in that sense as the local parliaments/assemblies are not federated in the way Germany or the United States of America are. The United Jingdom remains unitaery as the parliaments were createdby the parliament in Westminster so neither Great Britain or Italy should realy be classed as "devolved" —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:46, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but you don't seem to understand -- there are rungs between "federation" and "unitary state", including "devolved state". The UK is one of those. (And a federacy, through the Channel Islands and Man, but never mind that.) —Nightstallion 16:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Importance of Freedom House stats?[edit]

I'm not sure how relevant the information from Freedom House is to this article. It seems that they have nothing to do with Europe in particular? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

It puts the European countries in regional context. Self-Described Seabhcán 09:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


A while ago I changes two of the images to their SVG versions, which was reverted for the following reason: "sorry, but I disagree; most people, including me, have no easy means of updating svgs." Aside from the Freedom House image, for which there is no SVG, I don't see a call for updating them. How soon do you think a member will get a second chamber, or turn republic? A third SVG has now been corrected (Italy was missing which is why I didn't put it up) so we have three SVGs, which look very good. I reckon we could include them, I'm sure the editor who created them would be willing to convert the fourth if we actualy use the three he has already done for us. - J Logan t: 15:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Mh. There is a call for updating them, if you ask me -- new members are joining regularily. ... I would be okay with using SVGs, I guess, if they're precise conversions of the current maps (including colour, size of the map, and so on and so forth). —Nightstallion 09:28, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Well that is two years away at best, I see yout point though. If we do make sure they are the same colour etc, then if something changes we could switch back to the png's we can update till the SVG's are updated by someone with the tech? - J Logan t: 17:13, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Mh, yeah, possibly. I'll look into it, I may actually have a program somewhere with which I can convert the PNGs to SVGs. —Nightstallion 19:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

"By definition, constitutional monarchies are parliamentary"?[edit]

Quoting the article:

By definition, constitutional monarchies are parliamentary, as there is no elected head of state who could assume non-ceremonial competences; ...

This seems dubious to me. The first counter-example that comes to mind is the Kingdom of Italy (1861–1946). It was always, at least on paper, even under Mussolini, a constitutional monarchy due to the Statuto Albertino, but hardly a parliamentary system. Another is Denmark, which became a constitutional monarchy in 1849, but the government did not depend on parliamentary support until 1901. Hemmingsen 16:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

How about we use "modern democratic constitutional monarchies" instead, so that those two cases are not included? —Nightstallion 11:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
That would indeed prevent those two cases from being included. The only other situation I can think of is the theoretical possibility of a constitutional monarchy with a directly elected prime minister, but "modern" does seem to imply that we are only discussing existing states, so your suggestion is acceptable to me. Hemmingsen 18:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Good, changed it. —Nightstallion 14:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Hemmingsen 06:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Dáil Éireann[edit]

The english translation of Dáil Éireann is House of Representatives as per the Irish Constitution a House of Representatives to be called Dáil Éireann [1] --Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 18:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

No, that's the English *name*, not the English *translation* of "Dáil Éireann". —Nightstallion 13:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
It has been translated as three separate names in English the current translation is House of Representatives [2] --Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 12:57, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Ahem, no. "Dáil Éireann" can only mean one thing, no matter what the *English name* is. The *translation*, not the *name*, of "Dáil Éireann" is what's in the table. —Nightstallion 13:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
What ? Dáil can mean more than thing the Oireachtas own website calls it the House of Representative the discussion on the dáil talk page list the three translations.--Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 18:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
The Irish word "dáil" has a single set of possible English words to which it translates, of which "council" appears to be the best fit. "House of Representatives" is not a translation, but the English name. —Nightstallion 11:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

The English name of Dáil Éireann is "Dáil Éireann". That's what Irish people speaking English call it, and that's what the English language text of the Constitution calls it, and that's what the Irish language text of the Constitution calls it. "House of Representatives" given in the English language Constitution corresponds to "Teach Ionadóirí" in the Irish language Constitution; it's a description, not a name. [3]

  • 1° An tOireachtas is ainm don Pharlaimint Náisiúnta, agus sin é a bheirtear uirthi de ghnáth sa Bhunreacht seo.
  • 2° An tUachtarán agus dhá Theach atá san Oireachtas: Teach Ionadóirí ar a dtugtar Dáil Éireann, agus Seanad ar a dtugtar Seanad Éireann.

jnestorius(talk) 17:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm also fine with the way you changed it, except for the fact that you didn't put the footnote in the right place; I've corrected that now, though, so everything should be in order. —Nightstallion 23:21, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks. jnestorius(talk) 00:36, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

List error[edit]

Am I the only one seeing the slight formatting error in the lists? Just wondering as it seems to have been there for an while an everyone is editing like it is fine. Whenever the lang template is used in the links on the lists, the link fails to work.- J.Logan`t: 21:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes it looks like the lang template kills the links. I'm removing them. - SSJ  22:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit request from, 22 June 2010[edit]


1. In the footnotes of the list by type of parliament, hide the </ref>.

2. On the footnote of Aland, replace «autonomous province» by «autonomous region».

3. On the footnote of Belgium, remove the German name of the Parliament of the Brussels-Capital Region. (talk) 19:21, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

1. Yes check.svg Done
2. Yes check.svg Done
3. Yes check.svg Done
Åland is listed as a province here and so it has been left as it is. Thanks. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 311° 1' 15" NET 20:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The 6 provinces of Finland were abolished on 31 December 2009 and replaced by 20 regions and Aland is one of the 20 regions (see this article). (talk) 11:41, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixed Set Sail For The Seven Seas 227° 26' 15" NET 15:09, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from, 26 November 2010[edit]

On the "Degree of self-governance", replace "in the Netherlands, the Caribbean island groups of Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles are equal partners to the Netherlands within the Kingdom of the Netherlands" by "in the Netherlands, the Caribbean island groups of Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten are equal partners to the Netherlands within the Kingdom of the Netherlands" (The Netherlands Antilles were abolished on 10 October 2010) (talk) 18:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Done, thank you for notification Petrb (talk) 20:38, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Djsahm, 7 May 2011[edit]

Hello, I think you should change the political system of Finland and Romania: in these countries, the prime minister is the head of government and he has the executive power. The President is the head of state and has not power on the policies in his country. France, for example, is a real semi-presidential state: the President is a member of a political party and manages the foreign policies and the internal policies, and the deputies vote laws.

Djsahm (talk) 16:40, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

They are, constitutionally, semi-presidential systems. —Nightstallion 15:46, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Greece is not unitary : Mount Athos[edit]

The Mount Athos is an autonomous state inside the Greek state. (talk) 03:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Portugal semi-presidential[edit]

Can we get a reference describing Portugal as semi-presidential? Which of the powers of the President of Portugal elevates the system from parliamentary to semi-presidential? Ability to dissolve parliament without prerequisites? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 23:10, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The President is elected by universal suffrage for a 5-year term, and can renew it once. He can reject the government suggested by the incumbent Prime Minister, has power of veto, may dissolve the parliament and dismiss the Government. Jorge Sampaio dismissed the Pedro Santana Lopes' Government in 2004. (talk) 00:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
You also may want to read the Role section where it refers the dismiss of that government by Sampaio. (talk) 00:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Guardian infographic[edit]

I'd suggest to insert a link to this Guardian infographic with a historical series on politics and governments in EU member states-- (talk) 10:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)