Login
Login

Dominant-party system

{{Short description|Continuous dominance of a single political party in elections}}

{{distinguish|One-party state}}

{{Use mdy dates|date=July 2021}}

{{multiple issues|{{update|date=January 2015|inaccurate=yes}}

{{original research|date=January 2021}}

{{cleanup rewrite|date=February 2021}}}}

{{party politics}}

A dominant-party system, or one-party dominant system, is a political occurrence in which a single political party continuously dominates election results over running opposition groups or parties.{{Cite journal|last=Ostroverkhov|first=A. A.|date=2017|title=In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (II)|journal=Politeia|volume=87|issue=4|pages=133–149 (p. 136)|doi=10.30570/2078-5089-2017-87-4-133-149|doi-access=free}} Any ruling party staying in power for more than one consecutive term may be considered a dominant party (also referred to as a predominant or hegemonic party).{{Cite journal|last=Ostroverkhov|first=A. A.|date=2017|title=In Searching for Theory of One-Party Dominance: World Experience of Studying Dominant-Party Systems (I)|journal=Politeia|volume=86|issue=3|pages=136–153 (p. 148)|doi=10.30570/2078-5089-2017-86-3-136-153|doi-access=free}} Some dominant parties were called the natural governing party, given their length of time in power.{{cite web|url=https://parli.ca/natural-governing-party/|work=The Dictionary of Canadian Politics|publisher=Campbell Strategies|title=Natural Governing Party|year=2022|access-date=5 December 2022}}{{cite book|isbn=9780307743879|year=2017|page=338|publisher=Knopf Doubleday|title=Hoover: An Extraordinary Life in Extraordinary Times|quote=The Republicans had come to see themselves as the natural governing party of the United States. Leaving aside the Cleveland and Wilson accidents, they had been in power since Grant's day. If Republican delegates declared an uncharismatic Hoover worthy of the presidency, voters were unlikely to argue. |chapter=The Wonder Boy}}{{cite web|url=https://asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/UMNO-intends-to-return-as-Malaysia-s-natural-governing-party|title=UMNO intends to return as Malaysia's natural governing party|website=Nikkei|access-date=5 December 2022|date=15 November 2022|last=Chin|first=James}}

Dominant parties, and their domination of a state, develop out of one-sided electoral and party constellations within a multi-party system (particularly under presidential systems of governance), and as such differ from states under a one-party system, which are intricately organized around a specific party.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} Sometimes the term "de facto one-party state" is used to describe dominant-party systems which, unlike a one-party system, allows (at least nominally) democratic multiparty elections, but the existing practices or balance of political power effectively prevent the opposition from winning power, thus resembling a one-party state.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} Dominant-party systems differ from the political dynamics of other dominant multi-party constellations such as consociationalism, grand coalitions and two-party systems, which are characterized and sustained by narrow or balanced competition and cooperation.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}}

In political literature, more than 130 dominant party systems between 1950 and 2017 were included in a list by A. A. Ostroverkhov.{{cite journal |url=http://politeia.ru/files/articles/rus/Politeia-2017-4(87)-133-149.pdf |last=Ostroverkhov |first=A. A. |title=В поисках теории однопартийного господства: мировой опыт изучения систем с доминантной партией (II) |trans-title=In search of a theory of one-party domination: world experience in studying systems with a dominant party (II) |date=2017 |language=ru |journal=Politeia |volume=4 |issue=87 |archivedate=2020-02-08 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20200208002311/http://politeia.ru/files/articles/rus/Politeia-2017-4(87)-133-149.pdf}} For example, in the post-Soviet states, researchers classify parties such as United Russia and Amanat (Kazakhstan) as dominant parties on the basis that these parties have long held the majority of seats in parliament (although they do not directly form the government or appoint officials to government positions).{{cite journal |last1=Isaacs |first1=R. |last2=Whitmore |first2=S. |title=The Limited Agency and Life-Cycles of Personalized Dominant Parties in Post-Soviet Space: The Case of United Russia and Nur Otan |date=2013 |journal=Democratization |volume=4 |issue=21}} In Russian political science literature, such associations are often called "parties of power".{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}}

It is believed that a system with a dominant party can be either authoritarian or democratic. However, since there is no consensus in the global political science community on a set of mandatory features of democracy (for example, there is a point of view according to which the absence of alternation of power is, in principle, incompatible with democratic norms),{{cite book |last=Przeworski |first=A. |title=Democracy and Development: Political Institutions and Well-Being in the World, 1950–1990 |date=2000 |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=16}} it is difficult to separate the two types of one-party dominance.{{cite journal |url=http://politeia.ru/files/articles/rus/Politeia-2017-4(87)-133-149.pdf |last=Ostroverkhov |first=A. A. |title=В поисках теории однопартийного господства: мировой опыт изучения систем с доминантной партией (II) |trans-title=In search of a theory of one-party domination: world experience in studying systems with a dominant party (II)| date=2017 |journal=Politeia |volume=4 |issue=87 |page=134 |archivedate=2020-02-08 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20200208002311/http://politeia.ru/files/articles/rus/Politeia-2017-4(87)-133-149.pdf}}

Theory

Dominant-party systems are commonly based on majority rule for proportional representation or majority boosting in semi-proportional representation.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} Plurality voting systems can result in large majorities for a party with a lower percentage of the vote than in proportional representation systems due to a fractured opposition (resulting in wasted votes and a lower number of parties entering the legislature) and gerrymandering.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}}

Critics of the "dominant party" theory argue that it views the meaning of democracy as given, and that it assumes that only a particular conception of representative democracy (in which different parties alternate frequently in power) is valid.Suttner, R. (2006), "Party dominance 'theory': Of what value?", Politikon 33 (3), pp. 277–297 Raymond Suttner, himself a former leader in the African National Congress (ANC), argues that "the dominant party 'system' is deeply flawed as a mode of analysis and lacks explanatory capacity. But it is also a very conservative approach to politics. Its fundamental political assumptions are restricted to one form of democracy, namely electoral politics, and display hostility towards popular politics. This is manifest in the obsession with the quality of electoral opposition, and its sidelining or ignoring of popular political activity organised in other ways. The assumption in this approach is that other forms of organisation and opposition are of limited importance or a separate matter from the consolidation of their version of democracy."{{Primary source inline|date=April 2024}}{{Long quote|date=April 2024}}

One of the dangers of dominant parties is "the tendency of dominant parties to conflate party and state and to appoint party officials to senior positions irrespective of their having the required qualities." However, in some countries this is common practice even when there is no dominant party. In contrast to one-party systems, dominant-party systems can occur within a context of a democratic system as well as an authoritarian one.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} In a one-party system other parties are banned, but in dominant-party systems other political parties are tolerated, and (in democratic dominant-party systems) operate without overt legal impediment, but do not have a realistic chance of winning; the dominant party genuinely wins the votes of the vast majority of voters every time (or, in authoritarian systems, claims to).{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} Under authoritarian dominant-party systems, which may be referred to as "electoralism" or "soft authoritarianism", opposition parties are legally allowed to operate, but are too weak or ineffective to seriously challenge power, perhaps through various forms of corruption, constitutional quirks that intentionally undermine the ability for an effective opposition to thrive, institutional and/or organizational conventions that support the status quo, occasional but not omnipresent political repression, or inherent cultural values averse to change.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}}

In some states opposition parties are subject to varying degrees of official harassment and most often deal with restrictions on free speech (such as press laws), lawsuits against the opposition, and rules or electoral systems (such as gerrymandering of electoral districts) designed to put them at a disadvantage.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} In some cases outright electoral fraud keeps the opposition from power.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} However, some dominant-party systems occur, at least temporarily, in countries that are widely seen, both by their citizens and outside observers, to be textbook examples of democracy.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} An example of a genuine democratic dominant-party system would be the pre-Emergency India, which was almost universally viewed by all as being a democratic state, even though the only major national party at that time was the Indian National Congress.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} The reasons why a dominant-party system may form in such a country are often debated: supporters of the dominant party tend to argue that their party is simply doing a good job in government and the opposition continuously proposes unrealistic or unpopular changes, while supporters of the opposition tend to argue that the electoral system disfavors them (for example because it is based on the principle of first past the post), or that the dominant party receives a disproportionate amount of funding from various sources and is therefore able to mount more persuasive campaigns.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} In states with ethnic issues, one party may be seen as being the party for an ethnicity or race with the party for the majority ethnic, racial or religious group dominating, e.g., the African National Congress in South Africa (governing since the end of apartheid in 1994) has strong support amongst Bantu peoples of South Africa and the Ulster Unionist Party governed Northern Ireland from its creation in 1921 until 1972 with the support of the Protestant majority.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} Similarly, the Apartheid-era National Party in South Africa had the support of Afrikaners who make up the majority of White South Africans while English-speaking white South Africans tended towards more liberal and reform-oriented parties like the Progressive Federal Party.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}}

Sub-national entities are often dominated by one party due to the area's demographic being on one end of the spectrum or espousing a unique local identity.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}} For example, the current elected government of the District of Columbia has been governed by Democrats since its creation in the 1970s, Bavaria by the Christian Social Union since 1957, Madeira by the Social Democrats since 1976, and Alberta by the Progressive Conservatives from 1971 to 2015. On the other hand, where the dominant party rules nationally on a genuinely democratic basis, the opposition may be strong in one or more subnational areas, possibly even constituting a dominant party locally; an example is South Africa, where although the African National Congress is dominant at the national level, the opposition Democratic Alliance is strong to dominant in the Province of Western Cape.{{Citation needed|date=April 2024}}

Methods of dominant-party governments

In dominant-party governments, they use institutional channels, rather than repression, to influence the population.{{Cite journal |last=Frantz |first=Erica |date=2018-11-15 |title=Authoritarianism |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/wentk/9780190880194.001.0001 |doi=10.1093/wentk/9780190880194.001.0001|isbn=978-0-19-088019-4 }} Coercive distribution can control citizens and economic elites through land reform, poverty alleviation, public health, housing, education, and employment programs.{{Cite journal |last1=Hassan |first1=Mai |last2=Mattingly |first2=Daniel |last3=Nugent |first3=Elizabeth R. |date=2022-05-12 |title=Political Control |journal=Annual Review of Political Science |volume=25 |issue=1 |pages=155–174 |doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-013321 |issn=1094-2939|doi-access=free }} Further, they distribute private goods to the winning coalition (people who are necessary for its reign) in order to stay in power.{{Cite book |last=Newton |first=Kenneth |url=http://worldcat.org/oclc/1156414956 |title=Foundations of comparative politics : democracies of the modern world |date=December 24, 2020 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-92494-8 |oclc=1156414956}} Giving the winning coalition private goods also prevents civil conflict.{{Cite journal |last=Meng |first=Anne |date=2019-09-25 |title=Ruling Parties in Authoritarian Regimes: Rethinking Institutional Strength |journal=British Journal of Political Science |volume=51 |issue=2 |pages=526–540 |doi=10.1017/s0007123419000115 |s2cid=204450972 |issn=0007-1234|doi-access=free }} They also use the education system to teach and uphold compliance. The recruiting, disciplining, and training of teachers allow for authoritarian governments to control teachers into following their objective: to foster compliance from the youth.{{Cite journal |last1=Weigele |first1=Annika |last2=Brandt |first2=Cyril Owen |date=January 2022 |title='Just keep silent'. Teaching under the control of authoritarian governments: A qualitative study of government schools in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102497 |journal=International Journal of Educational Development |volume=88 |pages=102497 |doi=10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102497 |s2cid=245164001 |issn=0738-0593}} Another way that they maintain control is through hosting elections. Even though they would not be fair elections, hosting them allows citizens to feel that they have some control and a political outlet.{{Cite journal |last1=Hong |first1=Hao |last2=Wong |first2=Tsz-Ning |date=2020-05-05 |title=Authoritarian election as an incentive scheme |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0951629820910563 |journal=Journal of Theoretical Politics |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=460–493 |doi=10.1177/0951629820910563 |s2cid=13901166 |issn=0951-6298}} They can also enhance rule within their own state through international collaboration, by supporting and gaining the support, especially economic support, of other similar governments.{{Cite journal |last=von Soest |first=Christian |date=2015-10-25 |title=Democracy prevention: The international collaboration of authoritarian regimes |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12100 |journal=European Journal of Political Research |volume=54 |issue=4 |pages=623–638 |doi=10.1111/1475-6765.12100 |issn=0304-4130}}

Current dominant-party systems

=Africa=

=Americas=

=Asia and Oceania=

=Eurasia=

=Europe=

Formerly dominant parties

=North America=

  • {{flag|Canada}}:
  • {{flag|Alberta}}:
  • The Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta (often referred to colloquially as the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta or the Alberta PC Party) formed the provincial government, without interruption, from 1971 until the party's defeat in the 2015 provincial election.{{cite web|title=List of MLAs|url=http://www.albertapc.ab.ca/admin/contentx/default.cfm?h=10383&PageId=4|work=Pc Alberta|access-date=April 18, 2013}} At 44 years, this was the longest unbroken run in government for a political party at the provincial or federal level in Canadian history.
  • In 2017, the Alberta PC Party merged with Alberta's other major centre-right party, the Wildrose Party, to become the United Conservative Party (UCP). The UCP has formed the provincial government since 2019, winning their second consecutive election in 2023.
  • {{flag|Ontario}}:
  • The Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario (known colloquially as the Ontario PC Party or simply as the "Tories") enjoyed a 43-year unbroken stretch as the party that formed the provincial government from 1943 to 1985. The party in particular was at its most powerful under the Red Tory principles of premier Bill Davis from 1971 to 1985; its dominance led the party to be nicknamed "The Big Blue Machine" during this era.
  • The Ontario PC Party would regain power from 1995 to 2002 under Blue Tory premier Mike Harris and his brief successor Ernie Eves, and has formed the provincial government since 2018 under Doug Ford, winning elections in 2022 and 2025 as well.
  • {{flag|Mexico}}:
  • The Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and its predecessors Partido Nacional Revolucionario (PNR) (1929–1938) and Partido de la Revolución Mexicana (PRM) (1938–1946) in Mexico held the presidency from 1929 to 2000. The party governed all states until 1989 and controlled both chambers of congress until 1997. As of 2023, the PRI has continued an uninterrupted hold of the governorship in one state: Coahuila.
  • The Liberal Party, later known as the National Porfirist Party, ruled consistently from 1867 to 1911.
  • Southern {{flag|United States}}:
  • After Reconstruction through the Jim Crow era, and until the 1990s in non-presidential elections, the South (usually defined as coextensive with the former Confederacy) was known as the "Solid South" due to its states' exceptionally reliable support of the Democratic Party, enabled in part by significant amounts of voter suppression and outright election subversion during Jim Crow.{{cite book |last1=Maxwell |first1=Angie |url=https://www.amazon.com/Long-Southern-Strategy-American-Politics-ebook/dp/B07RWP3D3V/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=the+long+southern+strategy&qid=1690421291&sprefix=the+long+sotuhern+%2Caps%2C107&sr=8-1 |title=The Long Southern Strategy: How Chasing White Voters in the South Changed American Politics |last2=Shields |first2=Todd |date=June 24, 2019 |publisher=Oxford University Press}}{{Cite book |last1=Mickey |first1=Robert |url=https://www.amazon.com/Paths-Out-Dixie-Democratization-Authoritarian-ebook/dp/B007BOK3A0/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= |title=Paths Out of Dixie: The Democratization of Authoritarian Enclaves in America's Deep South, 1944-1972 |date=February 19, 2015|publisher=Princeton University Press }}{{cite web |last1=Trende |first1=Sean |title=Misunderstanding the Southern realignment |url=https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/09/misunderstanding_the_southern_realignment_107084.html |website=Real Clear Politics}}

=Caribbean and Central America=

=South America=

=Europe=

  • {{Flag|Serbia}}: The dominant party in Serbia is the Serbian Progressive Party led by Aleksandar Vučić. The party has won all parliamentary and presidential elections since 2012 and rules in almost all municipalities and cities in the country.{{Cite web |last=Portal |first=BUKA |date=2020-06-22 |title=SNS dominacija na lokalu, pali Šabac i Paraćin, traži se ponavljanje izbora u Šapcu {{!}} 6yka |url=https://6yka.com/region/sns-dominacija-na-lokalu-pali-sabac-i-paracin-trazi-se-ponavljanje-izbora-u-sapcu/ |access-date=2025-04-07 |website=6yka.com |language=bs-BA}}
  • {{Flag|Kingdom of Serbia}}: People's Radical Party, led by Nikola Pašić, dominated the political landscape of the Kingdom of Serbia from 1904 and 1918. Pašić also served as the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia from 1918 to 1926 with brief interruptions.{{Cite web |date=2017-12-15 |title=Народна радикална странка |url=http://srpskaenciklopedija.org/doku.php?id=%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%B0 |access-date=2025-04-07 |website=Српска енциклопедија |language=sr}}
  • {{flag|FR Yugoslavia}}: The Socialist Party of Serbia controlled the country from 1992 to 2000.
  • {{flag|Spain}}
  • {{flag|Andalusia}}: The PSOE-A party (the Andalusian branch of nationwide PSOE) was the ruling party in the Andalusian Autonomous Government continuously between 1978 and 2019, being also the most voted party in all elections for the Parliament of Andalusia during that interval, except one (2012). After the 2018 Andalusian election, a right-to-centre coalition led by the People's Party entered office, and in 2022 the People's Party achieved an absolute majority.
  • {{flag|Catalonia}}: The Convergence and Union coalition (federated political party after 2001) in Catalonia governed the autonomous Catalan government from 1980 to 2003, under the leadership of Jordi Pujol, with parliamentary absolute majority or in coalition with other smaller parties. The party later governed again from 2010 until its dissolution in 2015.
  • {{flag|Extremadura}}
  • Spanish Socialist Workers' Party, in power in the Extremaduran Government from 1983 to 2011, and again since 2015.
  • Extremaduran election, 2019: PSOE 46.8%, 34 of 65 seats.
  • Spanish Parliament election, November 2019: PSOE 38.3%, 5 of 10 seats.
  • {{flag|Valencian Community}}: The People's Party of the Valencian Community (the Valencian branch of nationwide People's Party) was the ruling party in the Valencian Autonomous Government between 1995 and 2015, being the most voted party in all elections for the Valencian Parliament during that interval. After the 2015 Valencian elections, a left-to-centre coalition entered office.
  • {{Flag|Switzerland}}: From 1848 to 1891, the Free Democratic Party held all seven seats of the Federal Council, thus having full control of the Swiss Directorial Government.
  • {{flag|Sweden}}: The Swedish Social Democratic Party in Sweden governed from 1932 to 2006, except for some months in 1936 (1936–1939 and 1951–1957 in coalition with the Farmers' League, 1939–1945 at the head of a government of national unity), 1976–1982 and 1991–1994. The party is still the largest party in Sweden and has been so in every general election since 1917 (hence the largest party even before the universal suffrage was introduced in 1921). The former prime minister and party leader Tage Erlander led the Swedish government for an uninterrupted tenure of 23 years (1946–1969), the longest in any democracy so far. Since 2006, the party support has declined, but in 2014, it returned to government, although its centre-left coalition had no majority.
  • {{flag|Turkey}}: In Turkey's single-party period lasting until 1945, the Republican People's Party (CHP) was the major political organisation of the single-party state. However, the CHP faced two opposition parties during this period, both established upon the request of the founder of the Republic of Turkey and CHP leader, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, in efforts to allegedly jump-start multiparty democracy in Turkey.{{Cite web |url=http://www.utoronto.ca/ai/learningtolose/participants.html |title = Learning to Lose: Adapting to Democracy in One Party Dominant Systems… |archive-url=https://archive.today/20140604202006/http://www.utoronto.ca/ai/learningtolose/participants.html |archive-date=4 June 2014 |url-status=dead}} The pro-Kurdish Peoples' Democratic Party{{NoteTag|Formerly its predecessors People's Labor Party (with SHP), People's Democracy Party, Democratic People's Party, Thousand Hope Candidates and Labour, Democracy and Freedom Bloc.}} was the dominant party in the mainly Kurdish southeast from 1991 until the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt which resulted in massive purges and the takeover of municipalities by the state. The landslide election victories of the Justice and Development Party led to the party gaining majority in parliament between 2002 and 2018.{{cite web|date=January 19, 2012|title=Turkey Under the AKP: The Era of Dominant-Party Politics|url=http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/turkey-under-akp-era-dominant-party-politics|access-date=May 30, 2015|work=journalofdemocracy.org}} Since the 2018 parliamentary election, the party has minority in the parliament and is in a coalition.{{cite news |title=Turkey's undecided voters are leaning towards opposition alliance |url=https://ahvalnews.com/nation-alliance/turkeys-undecided-voters-are-leaning-towards-opposition-alliance |access-date=8 April 2022 |date=10 June 2021}}
  • {{flag|United Kingdom}}:
  • The Whigs dominated the Kingdom of Great Britain's politics from 1714 to 1762 during the Whig supremacy.
  • The Tories, governed from 1783 to 1806, and 1807 to 1830.
  • The Liberal Party governed from 1905 to 1922.
  • The Conservative Party, governed from 1895 to 1905, and from 1935 to 1945, and from 1951 to 1963, and from 1979 to 1997, and lastly from 2010 to 2024.
  • The Labour Party governed from 1997 to 2010.
  • {{flag|Northern Ireland}}: The Ulster Unionist Party won every election between 1921 and 1972 in the former devolved administration of Northern Ireland.{{cite book |title=Exploring British Politics |last=Garnett |first=Mark |author2=Lynch, Philip |year=2007 |publisher=Pearson Education |location=London |isbn=978-0-582-89431-0 |page=322 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-YI5u5PlHgQC }}
  • {{flag|Scotland}}:
  • Scottish National Party
  • Has been the largest party in the Scottish Parliament since 2007. It also won the majority of seats to the House of Commons in Scotland in every election from 2015 until it lost to Scottish Labour in 2024.

=Asia=

=Africa=

=Oceania=

  • {{flag|Australia}}: The Liberal Party (generally in a near-permanent Coalition with the National Party) held power federally from 1949 to 1972 and from 1975 to 1983 (31 out of 34 years). After the expiry of the 46th Parliament in 2022, the Liberal-National Coalition held power for 20 out of the 26 years between 1996 and 2022. Overall from 1949 to 2022, the Liberal Party held power for 52 out of 73 years. The longest-serving Prime Minister was Robert Menzies, who served from 1939 to 1941 (2 years) as a member of the United Australia Party, and from 1949 to 1966 (16 years) as leader of the Liberal Party. The second longest-serving was John Howard (Liberal Party), who was Prime Minister from 1996-2007 (11 years).
  • {{flag|Northern Territory}}: The Country Liberal Party held power from the granting of self-government in 1978 to 2001 (23 years).
  • {{flag|New South Wales}}: The Labor Party held power from 1941 to 1965 (24 years), and from 1976 to 1988 and 1995 to 2011 (28 out of 35 years) – in total 52 out of 70 years from 1941 to 2011.
  • {{flag|Queensland}}: The Labor Party held power from 1915 to 1929 and from 1932 to 1957 (39 out of 42 years). The National Party then held power from 1957 to 1989 (32 years) with and without the Liberal Party. These were facilitated by a Labor-designed malapportionment that favoured rural districts. The National Party under Joh Bjelke-Petersen increased the malapportionment with the Bjelkemander, allowing them to rule alone without the Liberals, and used the police to suppress dissent and opposition from Labor. The National Party dominance was ended by a corruption inquiry, Bjelke-Petersen was forced to resign in disgrace, and police and politicians were charged with crimes. Since 1989, Labor has held government aside from a National Party government (1996 to 1998) and Liberal-National Party government (2012 to 2015) (28 years of Labor government out of 33 years).
  • {{flag|South Australia}}: The Liberal and Country League held power from 1933 to 1965 (32 years) using the playmander. The Labor Party held power from 1970 to 1979, from 1982 to 1993 and from 2002 to 2018 (26 out of 38 years).
  • {{flag|Tasmania}}: The Labor Party held power from 1934 to 1969 and from 1972 to 1982 (45 out of 48 years), from 1989 to 1992, and from 1998 to 2014 (16 years) – in total 64 out of 80 years from 1934 to 2014.
  • {{flag|Victoria}}: The National Citizens' Reform League (1902–1909), the Deakinite Liberal Party (1909–1917) and the Nationalist Party (1917–1924) consecutively held power from 1902 to 1924 (22 years). The Country Party then ruled from 1924 to 1927 (3 years), followed by the Nationalist Party from 1928 to 1929 (1 year) in a coalition. The Country Party and the United Australia Party (later as the Liberal and Country Party) held power with and without a coalition from 1932 to 1945 (13 years) and 1947 to 1952 (5 years). The Liberal Party then held power from 1955 to 1982 (27 years). In total, centre-right governments ruled 71 out of 80 years from 1902 to 1982.
  • {{flag|Western Australia}}: The Liberal Party held power from 1947 to 1983 with two one-term interruptions between 1953 and 1956 and 1971 to 1974 (30 out of 36 years).
  • {{flag|Australian Capital Territory}}: The Labor Party has held power since 2001 (23 years as of 2024) (in coalition with the ACT Greens since 2012), previously holding government between 1989 and 1995 (24 years out of 30 years since self-government).
  • {{Flag|New Zealand}}: The Liberal Party governed from 1891 to 1912.
  • {{Flag|Samoa}}: The Human Rights Protection Party governed from 1982 to 2021.

See also

Notes

{{NoteFoot}}

References

{{Reflist}}

{{Authoritarian types of rule}}

{{Authority control}}

Category:Political party systems

Category:Elections

Category:Political systems

Category:Unitary state