Unitary government | Disadvantages of a Unitary government

A unitary government is a state governed by a single central governing structure which, in every decision, treats itself as the final say. The central government can decide or choose to establish or abolish administrative decisions, to give delegated authority to sub-national units, and to make local-level changes whenever and however it wishes. With 165 out of 193 UN member states having a unitary system of government, it is the most common form of governance in the world today.

Difference between a unitary government and a federal state

The difference with a federal state is this: where the federal state sees the national government as being an equal actor with the other levels of required governing (local, county, and state/provincial), the unitary government sees itself as being overall. It is possible to have a unitary republic or monarchy while using this structure.

Example of practicing countries

The United Kingdom and France are two of the best examples that are fond of this form of government. Technically, the UK is a constitutional monarchy, but since all executive authority is exercised by Parliament, it acts as a unitary state. The other countries in this confederation have their own legislatures, but legislation that would influence any other part of the UK will not be enforced. In France, for all the local political subdivisions, the central government exercises absolute power.

Although it is the most common form of governing found in the world today, there are still several advantages and disadvantages of a unitary government to consider. But we will only be focusing on the disadvantages.

See also: Presidential system of government

Disadvantages of a Unitary Government

1. A unitary government can be lacking in infrastructure.
While decisions can be taken rapidly by a unitary government, the system can lack the resources it requires to execute the choices it makes. If during an emergency situation, there is inadequate local support available for communities, this centralized administration could leave the resolution to local decision-makers instead of intervening. The absence of an elected local council may often do more harm than good because this delegation does not have the power to make the required improvements to protect residents.

2. It is a structure that can ignore local needs.
The gain of having a government at the local, county, and state-level is that it can focus on local needs without impeding on the national level. The federal government in the United States worries about providing defense, managing transportation networks, and providing resources for those who lack socioeconomic access. Local governments can then focus its attention on their micro-economy, creating solutions for needs that occur in their community, and support the national government with their actions at the same time.

Since the unitary government functions through a centralized structure, it is not strange for it to fail to meet local needs. There may be times when some communities are solely ignored because arising international situations take a priority to overcrop subsidy applications or other domestic issues.

3. This governing structure can encourage abuse of power.
Usually, the unitary form of government would place a legislative body or a single person in the ultimate place of authority. Almost every decision-making responsibility will be exercised by these persons or governing bodies until they are put into office. The pages are easy to demonstrate that if power is possessed by just a few or only one, then it is manipulated all too easily as we take a look back at the tales of history.

This drawback is the exact reason why a federated state was instead formed by the United States. Instead of just one type of centralized authority, there is a complete system of controls and balances to be included in the governing process to provide further equality.

4. Manipulation can occur quite easily 
While efficiencies can be enhanced by a unitary government since there is a lack of bureaucracy, the arrangement also makes it possible for people in the government to exploit the system. There are very few ways to avoid the operation when someone in authority wishes to seek more money or governing possibilities for themselves. The majority of the population must compensate for the rise in power and resources that one person earns by developing a structure that provides a chance to exploit the system for personal needs.

5. It is a governing structure that will protect the central body first.
Since a government’s aim is self-preservation, when it comes to budgetary problems, the various “arms” that operate at the local level are typically the first services to be removed. The needs of this government at the national level will still outweigh what the local needs are. That indicates that instead of taking the needs of the population into consideration, the decisions it makes are usually based on its own survival. It can also lead to local communities being ungoverned in extreme circumstances with a lack of access to services, even though they are also expected to pledge support to the government that does not help them.

6. Many unitary governments do not allow areas of any autonomy.
If there is a unitary government that gives the areas under its jurisdiction no degree of autonomy, then the sub-national regions are not permitted at any time to determine their own laws. Currently, Norway, Ireland, and Romania are examples of this form of governance. There is no sharing of power except where the government permits the participation of sub-national governments in this system. Their right to exist is at the discretion of the general government, and the control of these divisions will shift at any moment.

See also: Confederal system of government

Leave a Comment