Notesale: Turn your study into money

Document Preview

Extracts from the notes are below, to see the PDF you'll receive please use the links above

---

Assess the arguments for and against reforming the House of Lords
The House of Lords can be viewed as a ‘revising chamber’
...
In this way it serves as a useful check on the government
by making them think again Powers of the upper chamber are defined by the 1911 and 1949 Parliament Acts
...
Currently in the UK most members/peers in the HOL are appointed by the IAC and sit in the HOL for life while 92 hereditary peers still exist with 29 archbishops, many
believe this system of appointment is undemocratic as no other modern democracy apart Canada have a system where legislative powers is passed on as a birth right
...


FOR = An elected chamber would have increased credibility and public
support and therefore would be in a better position to challenge the growing
power of the government and the PM
...
For
example in the USA both houses of Congress; House of Representatives and
the Senate, are co-equals and there is no "upper" or "lower" chamber and no
hierarchical relationship between them
...

FOR = An elected chamber would allow for wider representation through the
use of different electoral systems and dates to ensure representation meets
the current view of citizens, this would reduce the dominance of the South
...
The Greens
have benefited from the use of the Additional Member System for the Scottish
Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly, and UKIP from the use of party list
for the European Parliament
...
Electing the second chamber would provide it with an
electoral mandate with the backing and consent of the public
...
For example there are still 92 hereditary peers in the House of Lords
and all Lords are life peers

AGAINST = A non-elected house allows for specialist knowledge, its
members can be chosen on the basis of experience and expertise, careerist
politicians would be no benefit to the political system
...
Another argument against is gridlock prevention as two Co-equal
chambers would be a recipe for government gridlock, if both Houses have a
mandate who is right
...

AGAINST = A non-elected house allows for descriptive representation as it is Overall against as Lords is
difficult for elected peers to make sure they resemble the social makeup of
representative in nature due to the
society as the makeup of the Commons demonstrates
...

for a more proportional that is
The current chamber more closely mirrors the popular vote at the last
representative HOL isn’t strong
general election than the Commons
...

drawbacks
...
For example the current Lords rejected the old Labour
to prevent government from
government’s bills frequently whilst commons only defeated government
dominating parliament
...
For example voting turnout is
house it would effectively lead to an
already low and even if we exclude MEPs there are at present 969 elected
elective dictatorship with no checks
office holders above local level in the UK
...

In conclusion, If there was ever a time to reform the Lords it would be now: the current chamber sits in limbo as a half-way house after Labour’s last attempt at reform in 1999; as a result of the 2005
Constitutional Reform Act the office of Lord Chancellor has been has been stripped of its legal and legislative functions, and the Law Lords are moving to a new home at Middlesex Guildhall
...


To what extent has the coalition government altered the relationship between parliament and the government
Parliament also known as the legislative is the
TO LITTLE EXTENT = PM patronage is much stronger under
the coalition as members of government and the Commons
are obliged to vote with the party on any issue brought to
parliament as loyalty repays well in politics through
promotions and more responsibility and disloyalty can harm
a politicians career has happened to Jesse Norman who was
kicked out of cabinet for refusing to vote for the bombing of
Syria
...

TO LITTLE EXTENT = Government still dominates parliament
because of the need both parties have to see that the
coalition does not unravel, there has been a very deep
commitment to the coalition programme especially from
Clegg and Alexander
...


TO SOME EXTENT = The coalition government is weaker than
most governments and so therefore isn’t able to dominate
parliament and therefore has more problems passing controversial
legislation as party discipline is weaker
...
This was
demonstrated, for example, in the vote on the raising of university
tuition fees
...
The coalition government was also susceptible to
backbench rebellion as was the case with the failed House of Lords
reform bill
...
Vince Cable the ExBusiness Secretary for example has clashed with George Osborne
the Chancellor on more than one occasion meaning the cabinet is
no longer as united as it was before
...
In 2012-2013 the government has suffered 48 defeats in
the Lords on issue s such as legal aid reform, welfare reform and
local government finance
...

In conclusion, the government has not lost any of its legislation in the Commons and the way in which committees and scrutiny operate have not changed fundamentally
...


To what extent is Parliament effective or not?
UNEFFECTIVE = Relative weakness of legislative committees
which are subject to partisan whipping
...
The power of party loyalty, the whips etc
...
In any event they are whipped I to
supporting government policy and the ultimate price for disloyalty
can be deselection
...
The
UNEFFECTIVE = Government controls the Commons agenda and
MPs are given little time for their own business
...
The PM controls the parliamentary
timetable
...
In addition MPs have very little opportunity to
effectively scrutinise the vast amount of legislation that now
comes through via secondary means such as Statutory
Instruments
...
Legislative committees
are subject to the pressures of the guillotine and kangaroo
motions
...
This has
occurred through the European Communities Act (1972) and
subsequent treaties such as Maastricht and Lisbon
...
The commons is still also
insufficiently socially and politically representative
...
5%)
...
The Greens have one seat and UKIP (an emerging
force pre-election) have no seats
...
g
...
Recently the
Defence DSC criticised the government’s plans to hand over defence
procurement to a non UK based company
...
Ministers do have to be
accountable regularly
...
in 2013
The Education Select Committee managed to force a U-turn on
Michael Gove's initial GCSE reform plan
EFFECTIVE = Reserve powers exist to dismiss a government if
required but this however required 2/3’s of the majority vote in
Parliament as happened with the 1979 government under James
Callaghan who was forced to resign after a vote of no confidence
from Parliament
...
Power handed out to devolved bodies can
also be taking back by parliament constitutionally so parliament on
paper could take back any or all powers handed down to Scotland or
Wales if it felt necessary
...
Government on the other hand is the body responsible for running the country day to day
...


DOESN’T = Parliament is legally sovereign and therefore , in
principle should be more powerful than the government
...
Reserve
powers exist to dismiss a government if required but this
however required 2/3’s of the majority vote in Parliament as
happened with the 1979 government under James Callaghan
who was forced to resign after a vote of no confidence from
Parliament
...
A more activist and significant
House of Lords has led to the blockade of several bills which
may have been passed through Commons forcing the
government to make amendments, for example the House of
Lords reform in 2012 was blocked by Lords as well as
backbenchers from the Conservatives and also the Anti-terrorism
legislation was blocked by the Lords under the labour
government

DOESN’T = Select committees have a good record of
bipartisanship and forcing government to be accountable and
to amend policy on occasions (e
...
defence procurement)
...

Parliament’s sovereignty over time has being granted away to other
institutions such as local governments, devolved assemblies such as
those in Wales and Scotland or the EU
...
Governmental ministers who also sit
in the commons or lords enjoy parliamentary privilege to start the vast
majority of new legislation
...

DOES = UK’s party system gives the government a significant degree of
power to limit opposition, hence helping it to dominate Parliament
...
MPs have a natural
allegiance to the party they represent and will therefore support it
most of the time
...
Ministers are less likely to break a 3 line whip or revolt
against parliamentary decisions as they face penalties or being made to
resign by their own party as happened to George Galloway who was
forced to resign after opposing Labour’s bill in 2003
...

DOES = Collective responsibility protects ministers from questions over
mistakes as happened with Theresa May, Secretary of State if the Home
office who wasn’t forced to resign over her immigration policies
...
Members of the executive have
the full power to make any changes and new
laws therefore the right to make new laws
doesn’t rest with Parliament as the legislative
body but rather with the executive
...

DOES as carry more political authority than
Parliament does
...
However PM’s are less likely
to rule via elective dictatorship so therefore is
compelled to involve Parliament in the decision
making process of most of its policy thereby
giving parliament the ability to have a say and
block or amend anything they see fit
...

Overall, DOES as Parliament lacks real political
influence and power when it comes to its role of
holding the government to account for its

Recently the Defence DSC criticised the government’s plans to
committees are also not binding on the government as membership of actions
...
In
committees can sometimes be influenced by the government
...

Conservative and 5 Lib Dem’s meaning government still had a majority
members of the government have become more
Ministers do have to be accountable regularly
...
Prime Minister’s question as well as
united in the form of collective responsibility
...
For example, former Home Secretary David
in their content meaning the only purpose they fully serve is to make
account and force their resignation than one
Blunkett in 2004 following a major parliamentary enquiry and
the Prime Minster seem more legitimate
...

media campaign against him for a visa scandal
...
As the executive is formed from the majority party in the legislative here in the UK, and because constitutionally most laws come
from the government itself
...


How representative is parliament
According to the resemblance model, Parliament should be a microcosm of society
...
Firstly, women are not fairly represented
...
Thirdly, Parliament is overwhelmingly middle class
...
This essay will outline and asses the representative nature of parliament and argue why parliament doesn’t truly
represent the current UK population
...
For General Elections
vote
...
2% of the national vote
...
Compared to
whatever region of the UK a voter is from
...

mentally ill, have the right to vote and each person has the right to vote
only once
...

During General Elections there are a wide variety of parties to choose
Elections distort the complexion of the House of Commons result in
from and thus there should be one which marries with the views of a
terms of party representation
...
Traditionally the working classes were represented by the Labour
and governments with only the minority of support from the electorate
party and the middle classes by the Conservatives
...
For example the current Conservative government were
who believe in independence for Scotland and Wales like the SNP and
elected only by 22% of the total population
...
Environmentalists have the Greens and euro sceptics have
4
...
4% of the vote
...

MPs are elected to serve the interests of all of their constituents, Much
MPs cannot claim to fairly represent their constituents as in 2010 only
of an MP’s time is spent dealing with constituency business, and they
just over one third of all MPs elected achieved a majority of the votes cast
build up a very good local knowledge as a result
...
MP Glenda Jackson won her seat by 0
...
8% to 32
...
Which means at least 68% of her constituency
different systems which use much larger geographic areas for
didn’t want to be represented by her
...
This strong MP-constituency
polled by Gordon Banks in Perthshire with just 31% of the vote
...
For example, Lynne Featherstone the exBethnal Green who managed to poll only 18% of the potential vote
...


Assess the strengths and weakness of the UK constitution
It leads to a responsible and democratic government; changes to
the constitution often come about because of democratic pressure,
through power in Parliament
...
Strong and effective government and executive
dominance allows government to act quickly and decisively to pass laws
...

Flexibility- it is flexible and easy to change
...
Eg: The introduction of devolution was a response to the
rising nationalism in Scotland and Wales
...
Eg: UK constitution has
existed for a long period and evolved from absolute to modern
democracy without revolution
...
Eg: Thatcher’s programme of privatisation in the 1980's
or Cameron’s privatisation of the NHS
...
Eg: Anti-terrorism laws of 2001 have been
used to increase pre-charge detention
...
Eg:
The Prime Minister can use the Royal Prerogative to go to war
without the consent of Parliament, as seen in the Iraq War
...
For example this
is due to occur under this new government as Justice Secretary
Michael Gove is preparing legislation for a Bill of Rights
...
Eg: How
serious does a mistake have to be for a minister to resign?

The UK should adopt a codified constitution or Bill of Rights
Codification would provide a counter-balance to the power of the
executive
...
Increasingly, much of what we have
taken our constitution to entail, such as Cabinet government has
been washed away
...
Greater checks and
balances are therefore necessary
...

Codification would strengthen rights protection, and help guard the
citizen against an over mighty state
...
That civil liberties receive little
protection which was evident in the Belmarsh prisoners case where
government detained multiple terrorist suspects without trail
...
This
means that citizens rely on government to play by largely unwritten
rules
...
This would have an educative benefit, enhance trust
by the electorate, and help to protect democracy
...

Codification would redress this
...
Opinion polls might show that the latter
are overwhelmingly in favour of a written constitution, but the issue is of
very low importance
...


Consensus about what should be included in a written constitution seems
remote given the inability of our political classes to agree on how they
should be funded, or what remuneration MPs should receive
...
Arguments about the constitution would take
forever, but even if the convention managed to come to agreement about
the constitution’s contents, and a referendum was held for its
entrenchment, a low turnout would surely undermine the whole process
...
Britain has not undergone the kind of
constitutional crises that have precipitated the drafting of written
constitutions in countries like the Germany and Japan after WWII
...
Most inhabitants of these islands are
broadly satisfied that the nature of government is legitimate
...


To what extent have constitutional reforms in recent years made the UK more democratic or What effect have constitutional reforms had on government power (
Devolution was the first of many constitutional reforms which was
However, constitutionally parliament still remains the sovereign
introduced by the Labour government in 1997 for Scotland and 1998 for
body so therefore all powers handed down to devolved bodies can
Wales
...
The West Lothian question can also be
Parliament has the ability to make law on matters which have been
raised with regards to devolution, ‘Why should Scottish MP’s vote
devolved from Westminster while the Welsh assembly has recently got
on English only issues’
...
It also means areas like
change which can be seen as undemocratic and counteracts
Scotland and Wales who have about 5% Tory support aren’t fully
devolution is the transfer of sovereignty upwards to the EU
...
This has led to a more centralised government in
tuition is still free while in the rest of the UK it got trebled to £9000
...

Reform of the Judiciary; the HRA and the FOI has made the judiciary
Judges remain unelected, the Human Rights Act does not bind the
more active in a way which challenges parliamentary sovereignty, and the UK Parliament, ‘declarations’ have rarely been made that is, the
power of the executive making it a more effective check and balance of
courts have rarely challenged legislation using the HRA – by May
government power
...
Freedom of Information is too weak, the
the Supreme Court, which establishes a clearer separation of powers
reform doesn’t go far enough to prevent public authorities from
than was previously the case
...
Parliament itself was extremely
now more able to protect individuals rights and control excessive
reluctant to divulge the information that led to the MPs expenses
government power, for example the Belmarsh prisoners case where the
scandals
...

commercial confidentiality or national security
...
In 2000 an
truly separating powers in the UK and therefore making it more
Independent Appointments Commission was set up which appoints peers democratic
...
For example in abandoned
...

Overall reforms have generally structured checks and balance by decentralising power, the House of Lords has more legitimacy , this is almost certainly the case following the House of Lords
Act (1999) which removed nearly 600 hereditary peers
...


To what extent has the location of sovereignty in the UK changed in recent years

The legal sovereignty of parliament is mainly challenged by the EU
...
The often quoted
example of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) striking down an Act of
Parliament is the Factortame case in 1990 whereby a Spanish fishing
company was successful in arguing they were being illegally denied
access to UK waters
...


Referendums are one way in which the location of Sovereignty has
changed in the UK
...
These popular votes take decision making
out of the hands of parliamentarians
...
In this way, popular
sovereignty gains the upper hand over parliamentary sovereignty
...

Devolution is another way power has being transferred out of
Westminster, the transfer of Westminster’s power to elected, subnational governments has led to a raft of different legislation emanating
from these new bodies
...
Wales has been granted more legislative
powers in 2011 and it too has sovereignty in many legislative area but
not as much as Scotland who are expected to be given even more
powers as part of a Devo-max deal following the Scottish referendum
...
If the British
people get fed up with the results of so much power given away,
Parliament could still take it back on their behalf
...
It could by
agreement or unilaterally renounce the EU Treaties
...
For example, a renegotiation of
powers is occurring under this government with the EU with a
referendum expected in before 2017
...
Parliament could ignore the
outcome of a referendum if it was decided by a narrow majority, or
turnout was abysmal, either of these are probable on, say, Lords reform
...
It is likely to be precisely for this
reason that a raft of constitutional changes have been ushered in without
recourse to referendums – the ejection of all but 92 peers in 1999 being
one such example
...

In de facto terms changes in the location of political power have
resulted in a quasi-federal landscape where policy differences continue
to multiply throughout Scotland and the capital
...
The UK retains its
unitary constitution, it is not a federal since the separate spheres of
authority are not legally enshrined
...


To what extent is the cabinet an effective body ?

YES CABINET IS EFFECTIVE = Government relies on support of
cabinet as a divided cabinet makes the government look weak
and therefore concessions have to be made to make decisions
more unanimous
...

YES CABINET IS EFFECTIVE = Coalition increased policy
coordination as Conservative have to work with the Lib Dems
...
This lead to a compromise of
the top rate of tax being reduced to 45% but strong measures
were also introduced to reduce tax avoidance by the wealthiest
...
g Health
vs Education, it is also a forum for debate and policy approval
...

Hague and Alexander
...
This leads to an effective cabinet as cabinet
members can be held to account for their actions =
...
The PM also controls the
agenda and he changed cabinet meetings to one a week instead of 2
...
Another example was the
Stamp Duty tax which was increased to 7% on homes above 2 million, all
members of the coalition had to defend this even though they disagreed
privately
...
Presidentialism is further reinforced in the UK
during elections as for example Cameron, Milliband and all other party
leaders or potential Prime Ministers had the focus on them as potential
leaders of the country during the leaders debate
...
sorry lol
Prime Minister is the person appointed by the Queen to govern over the UK and all the respective bodies under it
...
Previously, the current UK PM and leader of the Conservative party; David Cameron was in a coalition agreement with ex UK DPM and leader of the Lib Dems
...
This essay will argue that instead of limiting
the PM’s power, the coalition led to a more centralised government thereby increasing the PM’s power to dominate government, legislature and the electorate
...
The rise of the 10
ability to check PM power
...

against government policy
...
e
...
Also the cabinet manual published balance as 50:50 split
...
Spatial leadership as continued under coalition with the use of
balances to limit Prime Ministerial power as well has Nick Cleg having to be
members
...

frequently consulted on ministerial appointments
...

legislation or hold the PM to account
...
Unlike the strict separation of powers in the USA, the fused
backbenchers from the Conservatives and also the Anti-terrorism legislation partisan towards the government due to PM
governmental Parliamentary model in the UK means that the government
was blocked by the House of Lords under the labour government
...
This is because the executive will
PM has no authoritative power over the House of Lords, he is powerless
PM power over parliament
...
Furthermore, governmental ministers who also sit in the commons
Minsters power unaffected by the coalition
...

The PM is increasingly seen as the overriding leader of the government and
Coalition government reduces the PM’s mandate to rule alone in the eyes
Most convincing is the For side as the PM
country as a whole; Presidentialism
...
For example
has managed to maintain power over the
leaders themselves rather than individual MP’s meaning Prime Ministers are
Theresa May over Home Office border checks in 2012
...
PMQ’s are also a perfect stage for the
to appear as over dominating
...
A fall in the popularity of his counterwhen a Prime Minister is gifted in public speaking as David Cameron is, he is
the people for example the quad and the garden conference
...

able to call an election when he wants meaning his power to call elections
rule authoritatively
...
The coalition government has affected the Prime Ministers power over the
executive, parliament and the electorate but instead of seeing his power being shared across with his coalition partners which would have led to more of a cabinet government ruling
...




---