Parliament is the institution that embodies society in the diversity of its composition and its opinions and which channels this diversity into the political process. Its vocation is to regulate tensions and maintain equilibrium between diversity and uniformity, individuality and collectivity, to enhance social cohesion and solidarity. It is fundamentally about debate and the transacting of the people?s business in public. It is also about the right to dissent in a civilized manner. Genuine political opposition is a necessary attribute of democracy, tolerance, and trust in the ability of citizens to resolve differences by peaceful means.

The division between government and opposition is as old as political democracy. In Aristotle?s Athenian polity the essence of self-government was that citizens were, in turn, both the rulers and the ruled. In an age of mass politics, direct citizen democracy has been replaced, with rare exceptions, by representative systems providing for periodic elections. In turn, these electoral contests are usually dominated by a few political parties which select their candidates and leaders. What has not changed, however, in our modern liberal-democratic society is the hallowed principle that government must rest on the consent of the governed ? which means, inter alia, that the minority accepts the right of the majority to make decisions, provided there is reciprocal respect for the minority?s right to dissent from these decisions and to promote alternative policies. With the advent of representative and responsible parliamentary government, the distinction between?government? and ?opposition? has become more formalized and routinized, but the underlying principles have not changed.

Every pluralistic democratic legislature contains both supporters and opponents of the executive. And, in all parts of the world, these legislatures are confronted with the problem of ?executive dominance? in the face of modern demands for more and more government services.

Although one speaks of a ?model,? British parliamentary practice has evolved over centuries and still rests entirely on convention. It was not until the 18th century that it came to be constitutionally accepted that an opposition could be ?loyal? across the whole spectrum of public policy.

It is crucial to maintain the distinction between parliamentary, representative democracy and the sort of direct, plebiscitary appeal to ?the people? which history shows can be compatible with technocratic and authoritarian forms of government.

A vigorous opposition in Parliament can be the chief bulwark against the temptation of force majeure and bureaucratic empire. ?The people? speak through the ?loyal opposition? as well as the government, through back-benchers and Cabinet ministers. There is no substitute for the ?checks and balances? which serve the representative and watchdog functions performed by ordinary MPs.

The opposition has a duty to offer voters a credible alternative to the government in office to make the majority accountable. However, the opposition must also be ready to exercise the responsibilities to which it aspires on a lasting basis. The existence of an opposition, without which politics ceases and administration takes over, is indispensable to the functioning of parliamentary political systems.