HOLDING GOVERNMENT TO ACCOUNT

Question 1

3 para points

Answer 1

Prime Ministers Question Time (PMQT)
Select Committees
House of Lords

Question 2

PMQT 3 points

Answer 2

-PMQT can become embarrassing for the prime minister if their opposition is strong and uses impactful examples.
-However, PMQT is only once a week, each Wednesday and it only lasts for 30 minutes.
-It is also ineffective because a prime minister can anticipate certain questions and fully prepare themself with statistics and facts to help them answer fully.

Question 3

PMQT (embarrassing) example

Answer 3

Keir Starmer in 2023 was questioning former prime minister Rishi Sunak on ambulance waiting times and he used an example of a 26 year old dying while waiting for an ambulance.

Question 4

Analyse PMQT (embarrassing)

Answer 4

This is effective as it can cause the prime minister to stumble and be unable to answer the difficult questions. This could turn the government party MPs to turn against their leader as they do not appear strong enough compared to their opposition.

Question 5

Evaluate PMQT (embarrasing)

Answer 5

This means it is an effective way of scrutinising as it can cause the leader to backtrack or change their policies if put under enough pressure.

Question 6

Analyse negatives of PMQT

Answer 6

-This is not a lot of time to fully question every area of government and so a lot of issues within the government get missed. This means they can not be totally criticised and can sometimes get away with other mistakes.
-This can mean that they can have a strong defence and not be fully held to account as they can ensure they do not look silly.

Question 7

Select committees 3 points

Answer 7

-Committees can call government ministers to meetings which can allow them to answer questions from MPs as they scrutinise ideas and hold them to account of their mistakes.
-Specialist advisers can be appointed and they are typically academics to support the clerk.
-Select committees can write reports and make recommendations to the government. However, the government can refuse to accept the recommendations and so therefore are not held fully accountable.

Question 8

Example select committees (gov ministers)

Answer 8

Suella Baverman struggled to reply to Tim Loghton on refugee legal routes in a committee session.

Question 9

Example select committees (reject)

Answer 9

In April 2024, the conservative government rejected the public administration and constitutional affairs committees recommendation for greater scrutiny of international Treaties.

Question 10

Analyse select committees (gov ministers)

Answer 10

This means that government ministers and officials are made to answer in depth which can be difficult if they are being heavily scrutinised. This suggests that they are held accountable for mistakes and bills that people disagree with

Question 11

Analyse select committees (specialist advisers)

Answer 11

This means committees can gather evidence from experts in their sphere. This means they can create a strong argument to oppose the government and so hold them to account in a powerful manner which makes the government more likely to take their ideas on board.

Question 12

Analyse select committees (reject)

Answer 12

This means that the government does not have to take on board any advice and so scrutiny may not lead to a change in bills and policies.

Question 13

House of lords 3 points

Answer 13

-The lords ensure that the government does not always have their way as they aim to protect minorities who may be disregarded by the government.
-Also the Lords are all typically experts in specific areas.
-However, the government does not have to accept amendments from the house of lords.

Question 14

Example HOL (amend laws)

Answer 14

Lords persuaded the government to make policy changes on smoking in cars with children.

Question 15

Example HOL (experts)

Answer 15

Baroness Beckett of Labour is a specialist in national security.

Question 16

Analyse HOL (amend laws)

Answer 16

They can do this through voting against bills, improving bills and debating key issues. The lords ensure that the government does not always have their way as they aim to protect minorities who may be disregarded by the government. They can do this through voting against bills, improving bills and debating key issues.

Question 17

Evaluate HOL (amend laws)

Answer 17

This can lead them to persuade the government to change specific bills. This is an effective way of scrutinising the government as it can make a change to laws in the country. Since the Lords hold so much power they can change the governments minds on their policies and so they are fully held to account and the Lords can make change.

Question 18

Analyse HOL (experts)

Answer 18

This means they are very knowledgeable and the house of lords has different types of intelligence and views. This means that the bills are inspected completely with expertise, time and with lots of different opinions being input.

Question 19

Evaluate HOL (experts)

Answer 19

This ultimately suggests that the bills are more likely to be heard and recognised as intelligent specialists have inspected the bills and so are likely to have good ideas for the government to take in mind.

Question 20

Analyse HOL (negative)

Answer 20

This means that not every recommendation they make will be listened to. Since there is no rule, if the government does not agree with them, they will not be affected or held fully to account.