Codified benifits Flashcards
Codified benefits:
- Executive power is checked by a clearer separation of the branches of government. (Unlike UKs fusion of powers which makes accountability hard, BoJo is in exec and legislature)
- A codified constitution would more adequately protect civil rights and liberties.
- The UK’s constitution is out of date on the global stage.
- A codified constitution forces prospective governments to follow a coherent plan for constitutional reform. (FTPA repealed by BoJo without contest)
- Would cement conventions like military action
Uncodified benefits:
- The organic development of the UK’s constitution reflects British history, strengthening people’s identification with it.
- Executive power is strengthened during times of crisis through the royal prerogative. (Gov passed acts to increase powers of health officials and police in to prevent covid allowing holding)
- The UK constitution can be amended easily to reflect changing realities.(Lack of entrenchment, double edged sword)
- Judges, and their appointments, are not politicised, therefore more adequately protecting civil rights and liberties.
Abu Qatada and the UK constitution
Strengths
Due process was followed, i.e. justice was carried out.
The rights of an asylum seeker were protected.
The power of the executive/government was checked by the ECHR/Human Rights Act.
The courts demonstrated they were willing, and able, to stand up to the government.
Abu Qatada and the UK constitution
Weaknesses
The entire process lasted 21 years.
The cost to the UK taxpayer was estimated at £1.8 million.
The government argued that an issue of national security was delayed.
The media, right-wing press in particular, politicised the issue.
House of Lords
Is effective/powerful/good
Independence from party whips allows for better scrutiny of legislation 2004 Fox Hunting Act
Forces government to rethink legislation to protect interest of public 2013 it defeated gov plans to cut legal aid
Can delay legislation for a year, demanding amendments (- Money/manifesto matters)
Reform has seen the increase of expert Lords like Alan Sugar who vote with experience on topical matters
1999 Hol Act removed majority of Hered peers, allowing better replacements
House of Lords
Is not effective/powerful
Lords are unelected, making their contributions undemocratic
They cannot block legislation
Salisbury convention bars lords from voting on matters from the Government’s manifesto
Any lord amendments that are defeated 3 times become ineffective. 2012 Welfare reform act amendments defeated.
Parliamentary scrutiny
Good questioning:
PMQs force the PM to be well informed
Blair admitted at final 2007 appearance “he always feared the commons”
PMQs give transparent on debates and government matters
Urgent questions can be raised, requiring all relevant ministers present to face questioning.
PMQs are broadcast for the public
Parliamentary scrutiny
Bad questioning:
PMQs are political theater rather than actual accountability
Boris party deflection
Friendly backbenchers ask useless questions
Point scoring with the public between leaders.
Good select committees:
Following the wright report, the PM no longer controls membership of SCs
Members are more willing to hold government to account through investigative questioning
Chairs of committees are paid well and elected via secret ballot
Public Accounts Committee 2013 held google and amazon to account for paying limited tax
Detailed reports are published publicly and the government must respond to them
Bad select committees:
Many committees have government majority
Advice from committees is just that, advice
Ministers can avoid questioning as Georgo Osbourne did in 2010 on budget cuts, instead talking about the deficit, blaming labour.
Conclusions can often take time to form and come after they are needed.
Legislative committees good:
Public bill committees were strengthened in 2007 and allowed to bring in external speakers as evidence
They serve as specialized legislation scrutiny
Legislative committees bad:
Far less independent than select committees as they are managed by party whips
Amendments contrary to the government are rarely entertained
Extra scrutiny
In extreme circumstances, votes of no confidence can be called
Opposition can highlight weaknesses in government through suggestions/complaints
Cabinet important:
Required for policy approval
Makes key decisions for the government (2017 election call)
Support the PM and exert influence (May type of brexit)
Only place where ministers can settle disagreements
Under coalition, differences between the governments are settled
COBRA crises (Covid, emergency planning)
Cabinet committees of refined ministers for specific purpose, more gets done (National security council)
Cabinet not important/good:
Sofa politics/cabinet committees exclude many - Blair
Only rubber stamping decions made elsewhere.
PMs power of patronage allows them to fill with who works for them, least resistance. (Boris many cabinet reshuffles)
Special advisors are used more for policy advice
Collective responsibility allows PM to silence opposition in cabinet
Cabinet committees are decided by the PM
A united cabinet gives the PM enormous power