The Power of the Vote of No Confidence

How is the motion of no confidence passed and approved on corporate executive boards and in?national governments? Apart from significant reputational and career damaging effects that a positive motion of no confidence brings to the Leader, what are the other elements that under-pin the vote of no confidence? Are there any other positive alternatives? Can the vote of no confidence be vetoed by Executives ? And how is the motion of no confidence different to a call for impeachment?

A motion of no confidence, also called a vote of no confidence is a statement or vote about whether a person who is in a position of responsibility is still deemed fit enough to hold that position. The motion is typically raised when the person in found to be inadequate in some aspect, fail to carry out their duties or make decisions that other members feel are detrimental to the business of the day [1].

?Before we move over to governance practises on Executive Boards and let’s take a trip around the world and look at how the different governments a handle a motion of no confidence in their leaders. Let us explore the similarities or differences across nations to evaluate if there is a common trend in the execution of a call for a motion of no confidence??

In South Africa

In South Africa, any minister in the National assemble may request a motion of no confident in either the cabinet or the President. The Speaker of the House gives the motion a priority and if a vote of no confidence is successful against the President, then the Speaker assumes the position of acting President.

In August 2017, Speaker Baleka Mbete announced that she would permit a motion of no confidence in Jacob Zuma’s government. This was the 8th motion to be brought against Zuma in his presidency and the first to be held via secret ballot. After the vote, the motion was defeated 198-177 with 25 absentations and with Zuma blatantly refusing to offer his resignation. ?After further evidence of abuse of power was uncovered by the then Public Prosecutor Thuli Madonsela, involving the Gupta family capturing the state, the ruling party, the ANC, requested?Jacob Zuma to step down as President or face a vote of no confidence in Parliament, where the ANC will vote against him. Their plan to maintain stability in the country's leadership was to swear in the then Mr Ramhophosa after Zuma was ousted by the vote. To save further reputational damages, and to show allegiance to the ANC, Jacob Zuma resigned ?from the Presidency in Feb 2018.

In the United Kingdom

The United Kingdom is a parliamentary democracy under a constitutional monarchy. Executive government is exercised by the Prime Minister, Head of British government, on behalf of and by the consent of the Monarch, Queen Elizabeth II. The two dominant parties are the Conservative party (Tory) and Labour party.?In the United Kingdom, a no confidence motion exists under the fixed term parliaments Act 2011. A motion of no confidence begins by declaring ?“ the house has no confidence Her Majesty Government ".?

Currently Borris Johnson faces a vote of no confidence, which if successful, will force him to resign. There have been numerous allegations of ethical misconduct, in particular to breaking covid regulations by hosting a party called "Bring your own Booze" at 10 Downing street and lying to the British Parliament about his involvement in it. The 1922 committee is a parliamentary group that overseas conservative party leadership challenges. If conservative lawmakers have no confidence in their leader, they can submit letters to the 1922 Chairman asking for a vote of no confidence. It takes 54 letters of no confidence to trigger a vote of no confidence. To date, 20 letters have been submitted to the 1922 committee. MPs are free to make public if they have submitted a letter to the committee.

?If the majority of Tory MPs voted to support Johnson in this vote, no new vote can be called for another 12 months. If Johnson lost the vote, he would be forced to step down and a Conservative leadership contest would begin. Johnson would not be allowed to stand for re-election. The other less damaging alternative is for Johnson to resign of his own accord, however he shows no signs of agreeing to a resignation.?In British history, 11 prime ministers have been defeated through?a vote of no confidence motion.?

In the European Union

The European Parliament can dismiss the European Commission, which is the Executive body of the European Union. This can be done via a motion of no confidence and similar to the SA and the UK, the EU also requires a two thirds majority vote.?A successful vote on the motion leads to the resignation of the European Commission. The German Republic presents a?very effective sustainable leadership pattern in the motion of no confidence process. In Germany, the vote of no confidence in the Federal Chancellor requires the option on the same ballot, to propose a candidate as successor. Thus, the motion of no confidence may only be brought forward, if there is a positive majority for a new candidate. Unlike the British system, Chancellors do not have to resign in response to failure of vote of no confidence, they may request the President to call on general elections.

In the United States

In the USA, there is no parliamentary government structure, hence a motion of no confidence in the President, cannot be called for. The President has the executive right of veto. In the USA, if a law is passed that the President does not like, he/she can simply veto it down.?The President, however, can be subjected to impeachment. Impeachment involves investigations into ethical misconduct on the Presidential members. The passing call for impeachment similar to the motion of no confidence also requires a two thirds majority win to execute.

Perhaps the most famous of all calls for impeachment in USA history, has been the Clinton case. Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the Unites States, was impeached by the House of Representatives in 1998 for "high crimes and misdemeanours" according to article 3 section 4 of the United States constitution. The House adopted 2 articles of impeachment against Clinton, with specific charges against Clinton lying under Oath (perjury) and obstruction of justice and abuse of power. The charges stem from allegations of sexual harassment made against Clinton by Paula Jones, and the sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky was used as supporting evidence to testify to his pattern of behavour. ?Clinton was acquitted on both charges as neither received the two thirds majority for a strong conviction and removal from office. Clinton remained in his office for the remainder of his second term as President of United States.?

Motion of no confidence practises on Executive Boards

At Executive Board level, great care in the form of due diligence is taken in the selection process of Directors. Critical to the selection process, are qualities such as honesty, open communication, commitment and motivational leadership qualities. Directors who fit these basic criteria, in addition to the business specific and subject matter expertise are selected for the role. But what happens?when the Director talks a good talk but fails to perform according to expectations??The Board may be able to cast out the Director with a motion for a vote of no confidence. The Chair will typically use a majority rules voting system mandate in such cases. This is the most democratic approach. However, other options should first be considered by the Board, before resorting to the vote of no confidence. Directors should first meet and delibate on the topic by taking 360 degree views before agreeing to the motion.

Explorative questions that can be considered are [2].

What is the goal and purpose of the motion?

What will it achieve?

What action will be taken after the vote and how will the action be completed?

Who and what will be affected by the Board decision?

What is likely to occur within 6 months of the decision?

Who is likely to support the vote?

Who is likely to oppose the vote?

What are the facts supporting the motion for a vote, is it based on a Directors performance or hersay based on someone’s opinions?

The pros and cons of the vote should also be considered and discussed by the Board. The main pro is that a vote of no confidence effectively removes the Director from the board before he/she can do further damage. Apart from significant reputational damage done to the Director, their career growth or movements into other industries is severly impacted and he/she may never be able to recover from it. ?

The cons to the case are?cases of collateral damage in this case, and the Board’s decision making ability and Board Leadership can come under question. ?Since it was the Board who, appointed the Director in the first place. If there is evidence of groupthink at Board level, it will negatively impact future Directors wanting to fill a seat on that board. Using the vote of no confidence also shed a negative light on the Board Leadership, in that it demonstrates that the Board Chair did not explore other positive less career damaging alternatives to the Director in question.

As Board Chair, I would recommend first exploring positive alternatives to support, develop or lead the Director in question according to the strategy envisioned by the Board. I would look at additional training in a specific area for the Director or supplying additional resources to assist the Director to enable him/her to fairly perform his/her duties. External third parties can also be called upon for any remediation assistance. If all the above positive alternatives have been considered and explored, a last call would be for the resignation. A call for resignation is less career damaging than a call for a motion of no confidence. If a motion of no confidence has to be passed. The Board Chair should focus on the facts at hand and make a plan for the organisation to move forward both in the interim measure and until a new Director is appointed to fullfil that role on the Board.

A call for motion of no confidence is not to be taken lighty. Apart from the evidence at hand, Board Chairs and Governmental parties should look at the humanitarian side of the call. The power of the vote of no confidence is significant enough to destroy both the career growth and reputation of the Leader.

?

References

?1.??????Motion of no confidence, Wikipedia

2.??????Vote of no confidence, Yea or Nay, 30 July 2016, J. Barlow

Follow and connect with me on Social Media by clicking on the image below: