[PAPER 2] UK Government

Question 1

What have been previous developments to the constitution?

Answer 1

• 1215 Magna Carta- increased rights and freedoms of people, reduced King’s power
• 1689 Bill of Rights- gave freedom of speech in Parliament, gave regular parliaments and free elections
• 1701 Act of Settlement- reduced power of King and unelected bodies, Parliament could determine line of succession to the throne
• 1707 Acts of Union- United the Kingdoms of Britain and joined Parliaments
• 1911 and 1949 Parliament acts- reduced power of House of Lords and increased power of House of Commons
• 1972 European Communities act- took Britain into the EEC, defined relationship with external bodies

Question 2

What is the nature of the UK constitution?

Answer 2

• uncodified- not one document, unlike the US constitution it has many sources
• unentrenched- it is not set in stone, US constitution is very hard to change, 2/3 of Congress support and 3/4 of states, UK constitution is easily changed by Parliament
• unitary- power is centralised in one place by Parliament unlike USA who has power split between President, Congress and Supreme Court
• Parliamentary sovereignty- Parliament has power to make, amend or abolish any law, laws passed by Parliament can’t be abolished by any other organisation but a Parliament’s decision isn’t binding, it can be changed by successive Parliaments. Constitution is unentrenched so can be changed by Parliament e.g 1972 the UK was taken into the EU and now Parliament is debating deals to leave
• Rule of law- everyone is treated equally before the law, no one is above it, everyone is allowed to fair trial and can’t be imprisoned without due process, judges are free from government control and apply the law as opposed to the wishes of powerful people

Question 3

What are the main sources of the UK constitution?

Answer 3

• Statute law: laws passed by Parliament e.g 1998 Human Rights act
• Common law: legal decisions made in court made by judges e.g ruled that the EU referendum had to go to Parliament first
• Conventions: customs that aren’t written down e.g the Queen is not allowed in the House of Commons
• Authoritative works: some rules of government are in books written about the constitution e.g Walter Bagehot was he Victorian author on the constitution- shows the constitution is uncodified
• Treaties: e.g the UK is in the EU so abides to their laws

Question 4

How did the constitution change under Labour 1997-2010?

Answer 4

• House of Lords was unelected so people saw it as unfair, Labour stopped hereditary peers and replaced them with life peers- however 96 hereditary peers were kept
• Devolution- Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland had their own government and had new electoral systems that were more proportional- devolution was limited, England still had Westminster as their Parliament and FPTP remained for Westminster elections despite criticism
• 1998 Human Rights act codified Human Rights, the European Convention of Human Rights was brought in- article 5 liberty and imprisonment was removed by Parliament to allow anti-terror laws
• Supreme Court formed in 2005- before 2005 the highest court was the House of Lords, in 2005 they separated the Law Lords into the Supreme Court- separates powers of Parliament

Question 5

How did the constitution change in 2010-2015?

Answer 5

• Conservative and Lib dem coalition with Nick Clegg and David Cameron
• House of Lords reform- Lib dems demanded an elected House of Lords but Conservatives refused it- no change
• House of Commons reform- Conservatives wanted to reduce 650 MPs to 600 due to cost, Lib dems opposes it because it would favour the Conservatives, Lib dem and Labour seats would be taken- no change
• 2011 Fixed term Parliaments act- established that a new Parliament must be elected at a fixed date every 5 years, however they can call early ‘snap’ elections, Theresa May called one in 2017
• 2011 Welsh referendum- proposed to give the Welsh assembly more power, gave them more law-making power without the need to consult Westminster
• 2012 Scotland act- Scottish parliament received more power, gave them the right to set their own income tax and control of landfill tax
• Electoral reform- Lib dems wanted to change FPTP, Conservatives negotiated an alternative vote referendum in 2011- there was a 68% ‘no’ vote, FPTP remained

Question 6

What other constitutional reforms have happened since 2015?

Answer 6

• 2015 EVEL- Conservative govt offered a solution to the West Lothian question with English Votes for English Laws- it meant that if there was a measure that only concerned England, it could only be voted for by English MPs
• Backbench business committee- was created and chooses topics for debate. The first debate was triggered by people seeking justice for those who died in the Hillsborough disaster
• 2015 Recall of MPs act- created as voters had no legal way to remove scandalous MPs who refused to resign their seats. It means that if an MP is sentenced for a crime or is suspended from the Commons for more than 21 days a by-election is triggered

Question 7

How does Scottish Parliament work and what powers do they have?

Answer 7

• has their own Parliament where 129 MSPs are elected every 4 years via AMS
• Scotland has had a strong nationalist government controlled by the SNP so Scottish Parliament has received more powers
• it has powers such as: the right to set a Scottish income tax rate and control of landfill tax, it has its own education such as free university tuition, regulation of air weapons and control over healthcare
• Scottish referendum held in 2014 with the aim for independence- didn’t get independence but led to further powers being transferred in 2015 and 2016 such as control over air passenger duty

Question 8

How does the Welsh Assembly work and what powers do they have?

Answer 8

• also uses AMS
• only has 60 members, much smaller than Scottish Parliament
• unlike Scotland, the Welsh Assembly does not have devolved powers of police and justice and has not gained powers of tax and borrowing
• the Assembly has 20 devolved areas and since a referendum in 2011, they have been able to pass laws in all 20 devolved areas including: education, environment, housing and healthcare

Question 9

How does the Northern Ireland Assembly work and what powers do they have?

Answer 9

• established following the 1998 Good Friday agreement which sought to bring together Nationalists and the Unionists, unionists linked to Protestantism and nationalists linked to Catholicism
• power-sharing executive so they don’t have a real leader- Arlene Foster is the leader of the DUP and Martin McGuinness is the leader of Sinn Fein
• the assembly has been suspended since 2017 due to break down in agreements
• consists of 90 Members of the Legislative Assembly and uses STV
• they have powers over: education, welfare & pensions, housing and environment

Question 10

Why should there be an English devolved Parliament?

Answer 10

• different regions of the UK have different interests- ‘Northern Powerhouse’ Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds want to challenge Westminster and want to have their own Parliaments
• EVEL undermines Scottish MPs as it prevents them voting on English laws and makes them second-class representatives at Westminster, this weakens unity of the UK and doesn’t really solve the West Lothian question, issue would be resolved if there was an English Parliament for English laws instead
• money- 1978 Barnett formula decides levels of public spending to devolved Parliament because there is no English Parliament, England receives less per person than other parts of the UK- a federal system would promote greater equality between different parts of the UK
• Irish, Welsh and Scottish people have their needs met but English people’s views are largely ignored
• national English identities e.g Cornwall has their own flag, are largely ignored, this can be basis for creating an English Parliament
• Liberalism- believe in greater representation and protection of human rights which suggests they would support English Parliament on the basis that English people would be better represented- believe govt should be based on consent from below
• FPTP in Westminster is not representative therefore isn’t very democratic, there should be new English Parliament based on proportional representation because this would be more democratic

Question 11

Why SHOULDN’T there be an English devolved Parliament?

Answer 11

• West Lothian question meant that English MPs couldn’t vote on Scottish laws but Scottish MPs could vote on English laws, EVEL (English Votes for English Laws) solved this as it meant that Scottish MPs could no longer vote on English laws, Scottish MPs dislike it but the introduction of it has not caused breakup to the UK so far
• England’s size and wealth means that it would dominate a federal structure, also it may not work in relation to Westminster e.g a separate English executive could clash with the UK government over handling of domestic English issues
• Westminster is seen as the English Parliament as most MPs are English, only 59 Scottish MPs in Westminster out of 650- therefore English Parliament not needed because English MPs already have their views represented, also most English people don’t make a distinction between England and Britain as a whole and see Westminster and their Parliament
• there has been elections for mayors using SV e.g Sadiq Khan is the Mayor of London- arguably there is enough devolution so we don’t need further devolution to an English Parliament
• Conservatism- believes in pragmatism and tradition so would reject changes, Westminster is the traditional source of sovereign power so we should respect that and reject new institutions

Question 12

To what extent should there be further individual reform?

Answer 12

Devolution: it has modified the UK’s constitution by giving more power to local people,

• in N. Ireland devolution has helped end violence between the nationalists and unionists
• in Scotland although independence was rejected in the 2014 referendum, the SNP has called for another independence referendum after Scotland voted to remain in the EU while the rest of Britain voted to leave
• devolution gives different levels of power to different regions, a federal solution like the USA has would give more uniformity

Electoral reform: FPTP is used in Westminster elections, it gives a strong government but isn’t very proportional and majority of votes are ignored

• more proportional systems are used in devolved parliaments e.g Scotland and Wales use AMS while N.Ireland uses STV
• changing the electoral system would give more representation to small parties and would give a much more proportional vote

House of Lords reform: now mainly based on merit and experience, hereditary peers were removed

• it holds the government to account so it can be argued that there shouldn’t be further reform to it, if the Lords were elected it would mirror the Commons and be dominated by politicians instead of experts
• however the Lords aren’t elected which isn’t very democratic, unusual in the modern age

Human Rights Act: brought the European Convention on Human Rights into national law, it protects people’s rights without threatening parliamentary sovereignty

• it is not entrenched so government can modify the way it works
• there is argument that the act should be strengthened because it can be modified or removed by a simple vote in parliament
• Conservative critics would like to see the act replaced with a British Bill of Rights, which would make the UK Supreme Court the final judge of citizen’s rights

Question 13

Why should there be a codified constitution?

Answer 13

• it would educate the public about constitutional issues and promote greater respect for political institutions, people would understand their rights more, could lead to better and fairer electoral systems as people would understand what they are voting for and how the system works
• codified constitution is clearer and easier to understand than one with many sources. It would give clarity on certain issues such as circumstances in which ministers should resign and what to do in a hung Parliament e.g Erskine May wrote a book saying that to re-introduce a deal, there would have to be significant changes- Theresa May needs to change her Brexit deal in order to introduce it a third time- codified constitution would prevent this as it would be a lot clearer, no one knew about this authorative work before because the constitution has many sources
• codified constitution would give more power and authority to the judiciary, in the UK judges don’t have the power to remove legislation but in countries that have a codified constitution e.g USA, the Supreme Court has power to re-interpret the constitution
• codified constitution means people’s rights are strongly protected, 1998 Human Rights act outlines rights and liberties but can be easily changed or removed by a simple majority in Parliament e.g 2005 Prevention of Terrorism act was introduced and allowed control orders preventing suspected terrorists the right to a fair trial
• Liberalism- believe individuals are rational and there should be a man made set of rules for govt to follow (consent from below), human rights should be better protected through entrenchment

Question 14

Why SHOULDN’T there be a codified constitution?

Answer 14

• uncodified is easier to adapt and gives greater flexibility to change it to fit modern society e.g with the EU referendum, the constitution could have been changed regardless of whether we voted to leave or remain in the EU. there is this problem with codified constitutions e.g in the USA gun rights are protected by the constitution so Presidents and Congress can’t really change gun laws, this is an issue as the USA has a lot of shootings
• rights are already protected with the Human Rights act so we don’t need to change it as it already works- Conservatism has the principle of pragmatism which reflects this, also if Parliament decided to try and change human rights it would likely fail as no one would vote to potentially remove human rights e.g David Cameron wanted to remove the Human Rights act and instead entrench rights with a British Bill of Rights, never went though
• there hasn’t been a great demand for changing the constitution so we should just leave it how it is e.g 2011 referendum on electoral reform showed that majority of people did not want to change the electoral system therefore they don’t want to change the constitution
• many codified constitutions are vague and require extensive interpretation from the Supreme Court e.g this happens in the USA, it would put a lot of power into the hands of unelected, unaccountable judges who don’t represent public opinion
• Conservatism- believe in tradition and pragmatism, also organic society which evolves over time, wisdom of ancestors is in an uncodified constitution therefore we shouldn’t change it if it isn’t necessary

Question 15

What is the structure of the House of Commons?

Answer 15

• 650 MPs
• all MPs elected in general elections and by-elections
• 2011 Fixed Term Parliaments mean there is a new Parliament every 5 years
• Snap election can be called with 2/3 of Parliamentary vote, Theresa May did this in 2017
• vote of no confidence can happen when MPs don’t agree with the PM
• frontbenchers are members of the government, shadow ministers are members of the opposition
• majority, 3/4, of Parliament are backbenchers who represent their constituencies and support the leaders of their respective parties

Question 16

What is the structure of the House of Lords?

Answer 16

• around 800 Lords
• they are appointed not elected
• majority are life peers- only members of the Lords until they die
• most lords are experts in particular areas e.g ex-politicians, vice chancellors, businesspeople
• some are hereditary peers who took on the roles from their parents, last of the hereditary peers because they were removed after House of Lords reform
• around 20 ‘Lords Spiritual’, archbishops and bishops who sit in the Lords for historical reasons
• Law lords were taken out and moved to the Supreme Court

Question 17

How does Parliament pass legislation?

Answer 17

• Parliament is sovereign and decides everything
• majority of laws are proposed by government, there is limited opportunity for backbenchers to propose measures of their own. Parliament will vote on whether to pass it or not, Parliamentary vote is called a division. Defeating a govt bill requires solid opposition e.g David Cameron’s defeat in March 2016 on plans to extend Sunday trading was defeated when Labour and SNP joined with Conservative rebels to oppose it
• voting lobbies, “aye and no”, MPs vote is counted as they pass through, they can abstain by voting “aye and no” or they can agree with an MP on the other side to agree neither will vote
• whips keep discipline by telling MPs how to vote, they can recommend MPs for job promotions and can give better offices if they vote with their party
• 3 line whips- id there is an important vote coming up there will be 3 lines underneath the schedule which means the MP has to vote with and obey the party
• all laws passed by Parliament become law and then it is signed by the Queen
• the Lords can delay voting on a law they don’t agree on for up to 2 years
• governments can push through legislation in an emergency or where it is overridingly necessary e.g 2005 Prevention of Terrorism act introduced control orders for individuals suspected of terrorism, it completed all stages in just 18 days

Question 18

How does Parliament scrutinise government?

Answer 18

• the opposition seeks to hold the govt to account and expose its errors
• ministers have a duty to explain and defend their policies in Parliament

ways it is carried out:
- questions to ministers and Prime Minister every Wednesday in the Commons (PMQs)

• select committees: committees of MPs that look at different subjects question ministers
• debates- Backbench business committee has given MPs power to choose the topic for debate one day a week

Question 19

How does Parliament provide ministers?

Answer 19

• Parliament acts as a recruiting ground for future ministers, govt is accountable to Parliament so ministers have to come from Parliament
• whips make recommendations to the PM on suitable candidates for promotion- PM has patronage
• PM can award peerage to secure services of a particular person e.g Gordon Brown appointed Peter Mandelson a Lord so he could serve as business secretary

Question 20

How does the Commons represent the electorate?

Answer 20

• Commons has a representative function as it is elected
• the Lords contains a wide range of professional backgrounds but it is not very representative, more than half are over 70, 3/4 are male and around 5% are ethnic minorities, some Lords are appointed for other reasons e.g Baroness Lawrence is the mother of Stephen Lawrence, a black man who was killed
• FPTP system means there is a strong link between MP and constituency, MPs are expected to respond to issues raised by constituents e.g 44 MPs who voted against plans for the London to Birmingham high speed rail were representing constituencies who would be affected by it

Question 21

How does Parliament effectively carry out its functions?

Answer 21

Legislation: laws should be fair and effective, legislation is required by people

Scrutiny: Parliament is able to hold government to account- questions are given to find out about govt conduct, means govt is not corrupt

Choosing ministers: skilled, able, dedicated ministers are chosen for government- they have expertise and can scrutinise govt more effectively

Representation: representative Parliament- women, different races, different social classes, different ages, regions, sexuality etc

• 2017 there were 45 LGBT MPs- good
• race- 52 MPs are non-white (8%) but there is 10% non-white people in the population- not representative
• gender- 208 MPs (32%) are women
• disability- 5 MPs (0.7%) compared to 2.5% of population
• class- 47% went to private or grammar schools, 51% went to comprehensives- actually around 90% of people go to comprehensives
• 2015 average age of MP is 50- doesn’t represent young people

Question 22

What exclusive powers does the House of Commons have?

Answer 22

• has authority to give consent to taxation and public expenditure
• Lords debates money bills but it cannot interfere with them so Chancellor of Exchequer sits in the Commons to present the budget
• Commons has power of confidence and supply- can occur in minority govts where the governing party does not join a formal coalition but relies on a limited agreement with another party to keep itself in office e.g Theresa May has an agreement with the DUP which enabled her to gain a small majority, DUP agreed to support the government
• it is less flexible (and less stable) than a formal coalition
• when there are disagreements between Commons and Lords, the government can make use of its majority in the Commons to overturn Lords’ amendments e.g in 2012 the coalition govt rejected several amendments to its Welfare Reform and Work bill, arguing only the Commons was entitled to decisions with large financial implications
• Parliamentary ‘ping pong’- a bill can go back and forth between the two Houses e.g there was debate between the two Houses on the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Bill, had a sitting of 30 hours. Lords wanted a ‘sunset clause’ which would mean it would expire after a year, eventually backed down after a compromise
• government can use the Parliament Act to force a bill through, was used by Tony Blair to: change the voting system for European Parliament elections 1999, equalise age of consent for gay and straight people 2000 and to ban hunting with dogs 2004

Question 23

What exclusive powers does the House of Lords have?

Answer 23

• the Lords is more limited than the Commons, they cannot delay money bills and can only delay bills for two years, can’t block or veto legislation
• Salisbury convention- the Lords cannot block or delay any legislation that was included in a government’s manifesto
• acts as a revising chamber- proposes amendments to govt legislation, it is up to govt to accept or reject
• can delay non-financial legislation for one year
• can only veto legislation if government were to attempt to extend Parliament beyond its fixed term of 5 years
• end of hereditary peers means that the Lords is no longer dominated by Conservatives, now no party has control so careful management of the Lords is now more important- Conservatives might be more easily defeated by Lords
• cross-bench peers play a more important role in holding govt to account- they are neutral and are more likely to assess a bill on its merits than to support the govt because they are in the same party e.g cross-bench peer Lord Owen, a former doctor, opposed the coalition government’s controversial Health and Social Care bill

Question 24

What are different types of bills?

Answer 24

Government/Public bills: produced by govt for Parliament to pass/reject

Private bill: affects a few people or an organisation e.g Transport for London Act

Hybrid bill: a mix of public and private bills e.g HS2 railway link from London to Birmingham and Manchester to Leeds

Private members’ bill: when an MP has the opportunity to ask Parliament to pass a law e.g private members’ bill created the 1967 Abortion Act and abolition of the death penalty

Question 25

How does a bill become law?

Answer 25

Origin: may originate as a Green paper (sets out options for legislation and debate) or a White paper (more detailed statement of govt’s intentions)

First reading: first compulsory stage, the bill is made available to MPs

Second reading: principle of the bill is debated and a vote may be taken

Committee stage: bill is scrutinised in detail by a public bill committee (its membership reflects strength of parties in the Commons), amendments may be made at this stage if govt is willing to accept

Report stage: the whole House considers amendments, may accept or reject

Third reading: amended bill is debated and voted on by the whole House

House of Lords stages: bill goes through the same stages in the Lords, with exception of the committee stage, Lords can propose amendments which the Commons will accept or reject, bill can go back and forth between the two Houses for up to a year before it becomes law (Parliamentary ping pong)

Royal assent: monarch signs the bill into law, it is a formality as the monarch doesn’t actually get involved in the political process

Question 26

How EFFECTIVE are backbench MPs?

Answer 26

• 2010 Backbench Business Committee- the committee chooses issues that Parliament will debate, many e-petitions are debated e.g petition against Donald Trump’s state visit- leads to debates on topics which may not have otherwise been chosen, they respond to proposals that command cross-party support- incentive for MPs to work together
• Backbench rebellions- number of rebellions against govt has increased despite number of MPs taking part decreasing e.g coalition MPs rebelled in 35% of the division in 2010-15 compared to 28% of MPs in 2005-10, if a government is not certain of getting its laws through it may choose not to proceed rather than risk defeat from backbenchers e.g coalition dropped 2013 House of Lords Reform bill due to risk of defeat
• Urgent questions- allows an MP to raise an important matter requiring an immediate answer from a govt minister, the speaker allows questions, John Bercow allowed 3547 urgent questions 2009-13 whereas the past speaker only allowed 1234 in a longer period e.g 2017 Work and Pensions Secretary Damian Green was summoned to answer an urgent question regarding Personal Independence Payment

Question 27

How are backbench MPs INEFFECTIVE?

Answer 27

• lack of legislative power- they can draw attention to issues they are interested in but they might not succeed in any action being taken e.g adjournment debate- after the official business of the House is over, there is opportunity to raise an issue and a minister will reply, 10 minute rule- allows MPs to speak for 10 minutes on their chosen subject before the beginning of an official debate HOWEVER the only result is likely to be an airing of the MPs concern rather than starting a debate
• public bill committees- propose amendments to legislation HOWEVER govt has majority on these committees and uses its strength to introduce its own amendments rather than listening to proposals from MPs
• whips- power of loyalty and patronage is reinforced by whips, important and tell MPs what to do, can force MPs to vote along with the government
• aren’t effective because they aren’t representative- most MPs are white, male, middle age etc so they don’t represent people affected by the issues they bring up
• MPs follow the manifesto of their party and their party policy so can’t affectively challenge government on all issues
• MPs/parties are often influenced by pressure groups so they can’t bring forward their own criticisms of govt
• Liberalism- MPs are to represent individuals in society and protect their civil rights, can’t do this if they aren’t representative of the people

Question 28

How EFFECTIVE are select committees?

Answer 28

• represent each govt department e.g Liason committee- consists of heads of the other committees, Public Accounts committee- examines govt expenditure
• committee chairs are now elected by fellow MPs rather than chosen by party whips- democratic and represents voters because MPs have stong connection with constituents
• their work is evidence-based, hearings are televised and reported to the media which increases their influence e.g Transport select committee held Transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin to account for controversy over 2012 West Coast Main Line rail franchise
• can scrutinise legislation e.g Treasury Select Committee has the right to veto the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s choice for head of the Office for Budget Responsibility- they are powerful
• long-serving members can accumulate more knowledge of a particular area than ministers, some experienced chairs have become public figures e.g Margaret Hodge, chair of Public Accounts Select Committee said she had more influence than when she was an MP
• have direct influence on govt policy e.g 2014 Home Office took the Passport Office back under ministerial control after criticisms

Question 29

How are select committees INEFFECTIVE?

Answer 29

• majority of select committee members will be drawn from the governing party, there is tradition that MPs from the govt side chair the Treasury, foreign affairs and defence committees- means they aren’t effective at scrutinising govt as they won’t want to go against their party
• although resources available have increased, committees can only cover a limited range of topics in depth and there is tendency to avoid long term investigations- means they can’t be fully effective, may miss out on some topics they could scrutinise govt with
• high turnover rate for membership, some MPs do not attend committees regularly- can’t be fully effective if members do not attend the committee
• govt accepts around 40% of select committee recommendations, rarely involves major changes of policy- not very effective in practice, parties don’t drastically change policies they want to make
• committees can summon witnesses but they can be blocked e.g Theresa May blocked the Home Affairs committee from interviewing the head of MI5,Andrew Parker
• aren’t effective because they aren’t representative- most MPs are white, male, middle age etc so they don’t represent people affected by the issues they bring up
• MPs follow the manifesto of their party and their party policy so can’t affectively challenge government on all issues
• MPs/parties are often influenced by pressure groups so they can’t bring forward their own criticisms of govt
• Liberalism- MPs are to represent individuals in society and protect their civil rights, can’t do this if they aren’t representative of the people

Question 30

How EFFECTIVE is the role of the opposition?

Answer 30

• opposition parties are given 20 days a year to propose subjects for debate, 17 are given to the leader of the official party ad the other 3 are given to the second largest opposition e.g in 2015 SNP used them to debate the Trident nuclear defence system which they strongly opposed- gives them opportunity to give their views on govt policy
• opposition is stronger and more powerful when the govt is small (minority)
• opposition is given Short money- compensates for the fact that they don’t have access to the civil service, usually spent on policy research and salaries of staff that work for the opposition
• opposition has opportunity to challenge all govt policies and offers alternatives, can be used to potentially remove legislation they don’t agree with
• PMQs held every Wednesday- gives opportunity for leader of the opposition to scrutinise the PM and for them to gain publicity by appearing as the alternate leader

Question 31

How is the role of the opposition INEFFECTIVE?

Answer 31

• debates are limited- govt ministers can have a counter motion to support government policy, opposition can talk about issues in debates but govt will stop votes against their policy going through, little can be done about this
• short money is limited- government has more resources of the state and civil service to back them up, opposition don’t really have this, short money was cut after 2015 as part of general austerity cuts
• opposition can appear negative and complaining with no clear counter argument to govt, may not appear statesmanlike which doesn’t appeal to voters
• can be argued that PMQs are less about policy, more about statesmanship, it is all about performance of the leaders rather than scrutinising govt e.g David Cameron attacked Jeremy Corbyn over his appearance- not about Corbyn’s policy
• aren’t effective because they aren’t representative- most MPs are white, male, middle age etc so they don’t represent people affected by the issues they bring up
• MPs follow the manifesto of their party and their party policy so can’t affectively challenge government on all issues
• MPs/parties are often influenced by pressure groups so they can’t bring forward their own criticisms of govt
• Liberalism- MPs are to represent individuals in society and protect their civil rights, can’t do this if they aren’t representative of the people

Question 32

How EFFECTIVE are PMQs?

Answer 32

• every Wednesday, attracts considerable TV and press attention
• obliges PM to engage with the opposition on a range of topics- may not have been discussed otherwise, means that topics the public voted for are being discussed
• PMQs give the opposition opportunity to question individual ministers e.g Jeremy Corbyn recently questioned Theresa May on how Brexit was being carried out, he accused May of ‘incompetence’ and ‘failure’
• ministers answer questions about their own departments which can be used to better scrutinise govt, ministers are given a notice about the questions that will be asked and have opportunity to prepare their answers with help of civil servants- allows opposition MPs to inform themselves about govt policy and individual MPs can raise concerns of their constituents which can scrutinise govt

Question 33

How are PMQs INEFFECTIVE?

Answer 33

• questions are given in advance, government ministers and PM can plan their answer- means that PMQs may not be as effective in scrutinising/getting answers from ministers because they have time to plan and could avoid questions- Theresa May has been criticised for not directly answering the questions she is asked e.g when in 2016, Jeremy Corbyn asked if any ministers agreed with her stance on grammar schools, she replied that education has been improving with “1.4 million more children in good or outstanding schools”
• ‘planted’ questions- arranged usually by MPs which are the same party as govt, asked to make government look good e.g in 2012 Cameron’s parliamentary private secretary revealed he had asked Conservative MPs to create a ‘protective wall of sound’ around the PM- PMQs can be manipulated so aren’t very effective at scrutinising govt
• ministers get civil servants’ help to plan answers to questions they will be asked, can even submit answers civil servants wrote for them- means govt policies may not be fully revealed and govt can’t be effectively scrutinised
• aren’t effective because they aren’t representative- most MPs are white, male, middle age etc so they don’t represent people affected by the issues they bring up
• MPs follow the manifesto of their party and their party policy so can’t effectively challenge government on all issues
• MPs/parties are often influenced by pressure groups so they can’t bring forward their own criticisms of govt
• Liberalism- MPs are to represent individuals in society and protect their civil rights, can’t do this if they aren’t representative of the people

Question 34

What is the structure of the executive?

Answer 34

Prime Minister: head of govt, Chairs the cabinet and leads the agenda, hires and fires politicians, decides to create/remove departments

Cabinet: decides the policy of the govt e.g secretary of state for Health Matt Hancock, secretary of foreign affairs, leader of the House of Commons, chief whip- most important ministers in govt, 20-23 top ministers

Govt departments: there are departments responsible for each area of govt e.g department of health, education, defence- has secretaries of state, ministers, parliamentary undersecretaries and lords, cabinet ministers lead the department and there are also junior ministers

Executive agencies: semi-independent govt organisations, overseen by govt departments e.g the DVLA is overseen by Department for Transport

Civil service: administration of the govt, does not change when the govt changes

Question 35

What are the main roles of the executive?

Answer 35

Proposing legislation: executive pass new laws, Queen’s speech at the start of every new Parliament details the laws the govt wants passed e.g in 2017 it proposed Brexit, laws on electric cars and an increased living wage

• manifesto and doctor’s mandate- laws that govt want to introduce are in the manifesto, not all laws come from the manifesto because unforeseeable things happen e.g Grenfell Tower proposing new building laws, doctor’s mandate is permission from the people for govt to pass laws which aren’t in the manifesto
• consultation with other groups- executive proposes other laws in consultation with other groups- pressure groups and the wider population e.g for animal welfare they discuss with RSPCA

Proposing the budget: November budget- the money to be raised and spent by the govt in a year

• Chancellor of the Exchequer creates it in consultation with the PM
• newly elected govt can implement a budget at any time, even if the previous govt has recently introduced one e.g 2010 George Osbourne delivered an ‘emergency budget’ only 90 days after the previous Labour govt’s budget

Policy decisions: they consider and come up with new ideas for laws e.g universal credit which gave the same benefits to people and free schools which can have any focus

Question 36

What powers does the executive have?

Answer 36

Royal prerogative: old power of the monarch, now taken on by the PM
means they can: sign treaties, declare war and authorise use of armed forces, grant legal pardons, award honours, take action to maintain order in case of emergency, appoint ministers and other senior officeholders and can grant and withdraw passports
- some prerogative powers have been removed or reformed: 2011 Fixed Term Parliaments act removed the power to determine when there would be an election- now has to be every 5 years BUT PM can call a snap election with enough support from MPs e.g Theresa May in 2017, govt has accepted that parliamentary approval is required to declare war and take military action- after the 2013 debate on airstrikes and 2003 Iraq War BUT govt still has the power to deploy troops in case of emergency

Initiating legislation: govt can ask Parliament to pass laws

• if govt has majority they can rely on whipping power to push through its agenda, rebellions can happen but are rare because MPs don’t want to risk losing jobs
• guillotine motions/programming motions- government can limit debates on legislation and set time limits for each stage in the passage of a bill- means govt legislation can be passed more effectively

Secondary legislation: statutory instruments enable a govt to modify or repeal existing legislation without introducing a new bill- sometimes it takes too much time to re-introduce changes to laws, instead the law can be amended without Parliament consultation

• concerns that it could be used to make controversial changes- 2016 they were used to abolish maintenance grants for university students and to allow fracking in national parks
• can be rejected by parliament but around 2/3 become law without being put forward by MPs

Question 37

What is individual ministerial responsibility?

Answer 37

• ministers are responsible for their personal conduct and for their departments
• it is set out in a document called ‘the Ministerial Code’ which states that “Ministers have a duty to hold parliament to account, to be held to account for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments and agencies”
• it is widely accepted that a minister cannot be expected to know everything about what goes on in their department because govt is so large and complex- they won’t be expected to resign over minor issues
• the fate of individual ministers depends on: how serious the issue is perceived to be, the level of criticism from parliament and the media and even the attitude of the PM on the day
• factors which stop MPs resigning: they can put the blame onto executive agencies e.g the DVLA for traffic issues, civil servants can be held responsible for departmental errors instead of ministers e.g in 2012 the Transport Secretary admitted to mistakes that had been made in deciding companies to run a train line- 3 civil servants were suspended- personal misconduct is a more common cause for resignations rather that failures of policy e.g in 2017 Damian Green was sacked as Secretary of State over allegations of sexual content on his computer

Question 38

What is collective ministerial responsibility?

Answer 38

• all ministers should support government decisions or they have to resign, e.g 2003 Robin Cook resigned because he did not agree with Blair’ decision to go to war in Iraq- means govt are responsible as a group to parliament and to the people, if defeated in a vote of no confidence the whole govt resigns
• recently there have been many resignations over Brexit with ministers not agreeing with Theresa May e.g Brexit secretary David Davis resigned in 2018 because he did not believe in May’s deal and said it was unlikely Britain would leave the EU
• clear resignations on the ground of disagreement is quite rare because it can lead to the end of a minister’s political career, ministers tend to have a ‘grumble from within’, often leaking to the media their disagreement rather than taking a public stand
  exceptions: in order to form a coalition govt in 2010 and find a compromise between Lib Dems and Conservatives, Liberal Democrat minsters were not to be bound by collective responsibility, in 2016 David Cameron reluctantly suspended collective responsibility on the issue of the EU, five anti-EU cabinet minsters took the side of Boris Johnson, while Cameron took charge of the remain campaign

Question 39

How does the PM have control over the cabinet?

Answer 39

• establishing leadership- the new PM has authority to decide who will be in their cabinet, can get rid of people who supported their predecessor e.g Theresa May sacked George Osbourne as he was an ally of David Cameron
• PM can reward allies with ministerial positions e.g Theresa May made Amber Rudd Home Secretary, Damian Green became minister for the cabinet office and Chris Grayling became minister for Transport
• PM is chairman of the cabinet- sets the agenda for the meeting and chairs the meetings, also sets the length of meetings- cabinet only meets once a week, ministers are reluctant to challenge the PM in fear of demotion or are too immersed in their own departments to effectively scrutinise the PM
• cabinet committees- cabinet decisions are made by smaller, cabinet committees and then the rest of the cabinet are informed e.g the Brexit committee is made up of 16 MPs who make decisions about it, PM decides who is on what committee and chairs all of the committees- PM has more influence over cabinet decisions, committees can be allies of the PM e.g 2010-2015 coalition govt had a quad cabinet committee of David Cameron, Nick Clegg, George Osbourne and Danny Alexander
• PM has a large amount of resources to help them e.g spin doctors, media offices which control the media and put out the PM’s viewpoint, policy advisors and civil servants
• the media focus heavily on the PM e.g TV debates in 2010 and 2015, modern PMs tend to project themselves as national leaders, separate from the govt and with a personal mandate from the people
• Parliamentary majority and success- if PM has a majority e.g Margaret Thatcher, they can be more successful HOWEVER Theresa May has a minority govt and isn’t successful- even 10 MPs rebelling could harm her government so she has to accept the views of MPs/cabinet ministers

Question 40

How is the PM’s control over the cabinet LIMITED?

Cabinet has more power

Answer 40

• has to include experienced politicians, PM can’t just get rid of everyone they don’t agree with e.g Theresa May had to keep Michael Gove because he had experience
• PM sometimes has to appoint rivals e.g Theresa May appointed rivals Liam Fox and Andrea Leadsom who went against her in the leadership HOWEVER this my give the PM more power because they are including experienced people who ran against them, collective responsibility means they have to agree with the PM so the PM does have some control over them
• PM has to unite the party so may have to include ministers they don’t agree with, they need to include people from different factions of the party e.g for Brexit, May has to include people who voted leave and remain- might cause divisions in the party and PM has to include those who don’t agree with their personal view
• Diversity has become an important issue, PM may have to include some ministers of different race/gender/sexuality etc, it became an issue ever since John Major had no women in his cabinet which he was criticised for
• if the PM has a minority govt e.g Theresa May, they have a lot less power- a few MPs rebelling or cabinet ministers resigning can be very damaging for the PM, in a minority govt the opposition and backbenchers can also have a lot more influence
• PM has to include people that disagree with them in their cabinet, Theresa May has to include both remain and leave MPs even though she voted to remain, if they don’t it could bring them down e.g Margaret Thatcher in 1990 got rid of influential politicians from her cabinet and had all of her supporters in her cabinet- influential people outside the cabinet brought her down
• PM recognises the need for cabinet support on important issues- e.g after negotiating UK’s EU membership in 2016, David Cameron presented the deal to a full cabinet meeting, the cabinet is also very useful in times of a national crisis e.g Falklands War in 1982, there may be decisions made by a ‘War Cabinet’ which report decisions to the main cabinet
• the UK does not have a Presidential system even if there are characteristics of one, PM still has to keep the support of the cabinet in order to stay in power e.g fall of Margaret Thatcher demonstrates importance of keeping support of the Cabinet

Question 41

How did John Major have CONTROL over policy?

Answer 41

• replaced the unpopular poll tax with the less-controversial council tax, remains the system of local govt finance today- helped distance his govt from the confrontational and ‘uncaring’ reputation of his predecessor Margaret Thatcher, the speed in which the system was put in helped Major win the re-election in 1992
• Major allowed more discussion in his cabinet and deliberately acted in an inclusive way, his lack of ideological commitments were seen as attractive HOWEVER colleagues did not respect him when things started to go wrong as they did with Thatcher and some doubted Major had firm beliefs on issues that mattered

Question 42

How did John Major have CONTROL over events?

Answer 42

• Major was regarded as handling the 1991 Gulf War effectively, the war was fought to remove Iraq’s dictator Saddham Hussein from Kuwait after he invaded before Major took office, Major worked effectively with UK’s allies the USA led by George Bush Sr, was praised for dealing with British forces and the British public opinion- enhanced Major’s standing as a national leader
• there was progress towards a peace deal in N.Ireland, there had been conflict for over two decades between the nationalists and unionists, Major managed to establish trust with both sides e.g in his 1993 Downing Street Declaration he ruled out a united Ireland which was against wishes of the unionists but he showed respect for both the nationalist and unionist communities, there was a return to violence in Major’s final year as PM but Major laid foundations for Blair

Question 43

How was Major LIMITED over policy?

Answer 43

• 1990 when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, he persuaded Thatcher to join the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), on ‘Black Wednesday’ in 1992 market pressure forced the pound out of the ERM and govt frantically raised interest rates to uphold its place in the exchange limits- damaged Major’s reputation for economic competence and although the economy recovered, Major received no credit with the public, Labour controlled by Gordon Brown and Tony Blair were distancing themselves from the ‘tax and spend’ image of the party so they seemed more responsible and competent than Major to potentially manage the economy
• cabinet meetings were leaked which showed disagreement in govt and undermined Major’s authority
• Major’s control over his party and cabinet was seriously undermined in his second term, there was conflict over the EU and his party had many ‘eurosceptic’ backbenchers who saw the EU as a threat to the UK’s sovereignty, they were particularly hostile to the Maastricht Treaty, Major secured opt-outs for Britain from joining the Euro and from the ‘Social Chapter’ that increased EU intervention in social policy but this was not enough for Conservative MPs, backbench rebellions meant that Major secured the passing of the Treaty by just one vote- Major dealt with a very divided cabinet, he tried to balance pro and anti-EU MPs but came across as a weak leader and was ridiculed by Parliament and the media
• introduced ‘The Citizen’s Charter’ which was an attempt to lay down expectations for the performance of schools, hospitals and other bodies- failed to capture the public imagination
• rail privatisation was consistent with Thatcher to reduce role of the state but the way Major went about it received a lot of criticism, especially the decision to separate responsibility from the running of train services

Question 44

How was Major LIMITED on events?

Answer 44

• Major spent a lot of time on crisis management, trying to cope with divisions over Europe and coping with a series of financial and sexual scandals involving junior ministers and backbenchers- Major seemed to be always reacting to events rather than driving forward a clear and popular agenda
• Major never received credit for his positive achievements e.g working towards peace in N. Ireland or the beginnings of economic recovery

Question 45

How did Tony Blair have CONTROL over policy?

Answer 45

• Blair placed strong emphasis on strengthening the centre of UK govt in order to tackle problems in a more ‘joined up’ matter across departments, the PM’s chief of staff Johnathan Powell borrowed from the USA’s Presidential system in which cabinet ministers would have less power than they had in the past, Blair had cabinet meetings with collective decision-making, Blair’s preference for informal meetings bypassed established committee structures- increased PM’s power to direct events
• Blair put through a range of constitutional reforms that modernised the political system- hereditary peers were removed from the House of Lords which ended the Conservative party’s control, devolution was granted to Scotland and Wales which used proportional systems but Blair avoided a referendum on electoral reform for Westminster elections
• Blair had success in introducing reforms to improve delivery of education and health, self-governing academies began to replace failing state schools- later govts developed this model, foundation hospitals whose managers were given extra powers and funding broke away from the Labour model of uniform health provision, university fees were also hiked up against the wishes of Labour backbenchers, national minimum wage was introduced along with free nursery places and Sure Start centres to help families in deprived areas-helped close the gap between the rich and poor , there was also introduction of civil partnerships for same sex couples

Question 46

How did Tony Blair have CONTROL over events?

Answer 46

• the way in which decisions were taken over the 2003 Iraq War gave more power to Blair, although Iraq featured on the Cabinet agenda there was little genuine discussion of it and ministers were denied access to many key documents HOWEVER this was criticised in 2004 by former Cabinet Secretary Lord Butler who said this method risked informed collective political judgement
• revived the peace process in N.Ireland- he showed skills as a negotiator to find just enough common ground between unionists and nationalists to create the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, although trust between the communities broke down more than once which led to direct rule from London for 5 years, Blair succeeded in restoring devolved govt shortly before he left office

Question 47

How was Blair LIMITED on policy?

Answer 47

• chancellor Gordon Brown significantly limited Blair’s power over the government- Brown believed Blair would eventually step down, allowing him to be PM but this didn’t happen so their relations deteriorated, Brown meant that Blair had to accept reduced powers over a number of policy areas e.g Brown effectively denied Blair his wish to take Britain into the Euro, there were conflicts from ‘Brownite’ and ‘Blairite’ factions of Labour MPs

Question 48

How was Blair LIMITED on events?

Answer 48

• issues of national security and foreign policy distracted Blair from reforming the way in which services were delivered, terrorist attacks of 9/11 in 2001 showed Blair’s ability to be a strong leader
• HOWEVER Blair’s committed support of Bush Sr’s ‘war on terror’ resulted in lengthy campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq- did not have a clean cut result, the Iraq war inflicted lasting damage on Blair’s reputation because although Saddham Hussein was removed order in the country disintegrated and British troops faced prolonged resistance from small groups inside the country, Blair took Britain to war based on claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and he also failed to formulate a plan with Bush Sr for the reconstruction of Iraq- severely limited Blair’s chances of leaving a positive legacy in other areas

Question 49

What is the appeal process of the Supreme Court and what have been key changes to the Supreme Court/key laws Supreme Court has passed?

Answer 49

appeal process:
Magistrates Court (e.g driving offences) > Crown Court (criminal offences with judge and jury) > The High Court (deals with family cases, business cases and personal injury cases) > Court of Appeal > (hears criminal and civil cases) > Supreme Court (highest court of appeal)

creation of Supreme Court: before 2005 the highest court of appeal was the House of Lords, law lords were in Parliament

• in 2005 the Constitutional Reform Act separated the House of Lords appeal court from Parliament, renamed the Supreme Court and moved outside the Parliament building, law lords moved into the court
• was done to make the highest court of appeal completely independent and unbiased
• Lord Chancellor (member of the cabinet) was no longer allowed to appoint judges- made it more independent, Supreme Court can challenge govt

1998 Human Rights act: created clear rules on rights of individuals- limits govt power

• gave terrorist laws to detain people
• gave right to vote but prisoners are denied it
• Supreme Court has to rule for or against- causes conflict with govt because Supreme Court can rule against govt

Question 50

What is the role and composition of the Supreme Court?

Answer 50

role:

• highest court of appeal in the UK
• makes important legal decisions regarding the constitution
• deals with issues of law with devolved Parliaments- there are 3 different systems of Supreme Court, one for England and Wales, one for Scotland and one for N.Ireland
• Supreme Court hears appeals on arguable points of law where public and constitutional importance are involved
• until UK leaves the EU the Supreme Court has responsibility to interpret law passed by the EU

composition: 12 Supreme Court judges- top judges in the UK
- the number of judges that take part demonstrates how important the issue is- usually 5 or 9 take part, 11 took part in 2016 when there was a review of the High Court ruling that Parliament rather than Government should initiate Brexit
- most senior figure is designated as the President- currently held by Lord Neuberger
- Supreme Court justices will usually have served as a senior judge for 2 years or been a lawyer for at least 15 years
- Selection Committee- has 5 members who put forward a name for the Supreme Court when there is a vacancy, agreed or rejected by the Lord Chancellor, then agreed by the PM and then the Queen- lawyers choose who is appointed to the Supreme Court

criticisms of membership:

• only two female Supreme Court judges- Lady Hale and Lady Black
• pre-dominantly white and middle class
• potential for a judge supporting govt to be selected- potentially biased

Question 51

What are the key principles of the Supreme Court?

Answer 51

Judicial Independence: Supreme Court has to be independent in order to control govt, all decisions are based on rule of law not govt policy, Supreme Court separates powers of govt and law

• Security of tenure- since 1830 the govt cannot sack judges so they are free to make decisions
• Subjudice- if govt try to influence the court, it is considered ‘a contempt of court’ (unfairly influencing a court case)
• judges cannot be removed from office unless they break the law, judges need to be confident they can make decisions without fear their career prospects will suffer
• judges’ salaries are paid from an independent budget, the ‘Consolidated fund’- stops possibility of manipulation by ministers

limitations of independence:

• Lord Chancellor is the head of the justice ministry- govt influence so Supreme Court can’t control govt as much
• media pressure in high profile cases for judges to give a harsh sentence e.g John Warboys case- Supreme Court is limited by public opinion
• PM has veto on appointments of senior judges but cannot continually refuse the same name- judicial appointments somehow limited by govt

Judicial Neutrality: there is no personal bias in any decision making

• no conflict of interest e.g judges should not be involved in any case linked to family/friends
• judges should not be involved with any organisation to benefit from a ruling
• judges can educate the public about the Supreme Court but they must avoid political activity to not compromise neutrality

limitations of neutrality:

• judges are predominantly white, male, middle aged and middle class- may tend to vote in their interests so aren’t completely neutral
• only one female member in the 2010 Radmacher v Granatino case- majority of justices upheld the principle that claims made in the event of divorce should be limited, Lady Hale went against this and said that the majority of people who would lose out as a result of the ruling would be women

Question 52

How does the judiciary influence the Executive and Parliament? (ultra vires and judicial review)

Answer 52

• judges use common law- based on tradition and judgement
• judges make decisions on Parliamentary law when the Parliamentary law is unsure what to do
• Parliamentary sovereignty means Supreme Court is unable to strike down legislation unlike the USA- there is no codified constitution against which the Supreme Court could challenge legislation
• judicial review- when a citizen challenges a law passed by Parliament/Government that they believe is against their rights e.g if a law has exceeded the power of govt, the Court decided whether the citizen is right under ‘the rule of law’
• Supreme Court must also examine whether the govt has acted ultra vires (beyond authority of the law)

examples:

• HS2 rail link- high speed rail link connecting the country- Supreme Court found that govt had illegally arranged inadequate compensation for people with houses along the route
• Hawke v Secretary of State for Justice- prisoner with a disabled wife was sent to a prison far away so his wife couldn’t visit him, Supreme Court moved him closer to his wife on principle of Human Rights
• Snowden Leak- GCHQ used US intelligence records to spy on British citizens, Supreme Court ruled that this infringed human rights
• Brexit- govt began to negotiate Brexit after the 2016 EU referendum, Gina MIller requested a judicial review and Supreme Court ruled that Parliament had to decide to leave the EU, not the people or the govt

Question 53

How is Parliament EFFECTIVE at holding executive to account?

Answer 53

• opposition can compel a PM to allow a free vote e.g in 2013 Cameron allowed one on the issue of same-sex marriage, even if many Conservative MPs were strongly against it- he won thanks to the support of the Labour party despite half his own MPs trying to block it
• normally govt can get passage of their legislation due to party discipline and loyalty, govt can also rely on opposition MP support e.g Blair won a vote on the renewal of the Trident nuclear weapon system in 2007 due to Conservative support
• House of Lords have become increasingly willing to oppose govt since the removal of hereditary peers and single party control in the House e.g they added the ‘sunset clause’ to the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act
• changes to select committee has allowed for more scrutiny of govt policy e.g 2010 decision to allow MPs to elect chairs of committees, long-serving chairs such as Andrew Tyrie (Treasury Select Committee) have a lot of expertise and have gained public standing, select committees can have pre-appointment hearings and scrutinise legislation- more effective that PMQs which are largely theatrical
• debates can occasionally lead to govt defeats-opposition parties are allocated 20 days to choose the topic for debate and the backbench business committee has scheduled debates on topics that the govt would not have chosen, works on a cross-party basis
• Parliament has ability to remove a govt using a vote of no confidence, this happened recently in January 2019 with Theresa May after she failed to negotiate a decent Brexit plan, shows that when there is division over a PM, opposition MPs can try and remove a govt

Question 54

How is Parliament INEFFECTIVE at holding executive to account?

Answer 54

• FPTP means that a single party govt is usually delivered, govt sometimes has large party majority so Parliament cannot effectively scrutinise them
• Whips and patronage- the whip system tells people how to vote and patronage (promotions/demotions) reinforces party discipline so means MPs don’t often vote against govt
• govt has domination of the legislative timetable- House of Lords cannot refuse legislation that is in a govt’s manifesto
• Salisbury convention and Parliament acts used to limit opposition to a govt’s programme- House of Lords cannot refuse legislation in govt manifesto and can only delay laws for 2 years, cannot delay money bills and have to pass them
• backbench rebellions are common but defeats are rare, especially in majority govt e.g Blair did not lose a vote in the Commons until after the 2005 election, his majority dropped by 100 but only after a combination of Labour rebels and opposition parties defeated his plans
• ministers can block the appearance of officials as witnesses in select committee hearings and although govts have to respond to select committee reports, they do not have to act on their recommendations, resources available to committees remain limited, PM appears only twice a year at the Liason Committee and the PM is likely to be treated leniently by committee chairs of their own party
• votes of no confidence aren’t always successful- last successful one was in 1979 to remove Labour govt led by James Callaghan, MPs won’t normally risk a general election in which they might lose their seats
• debates- govt defeats can be due to bad management by govt whips, therefore it is not due to Parliament

Question 55

Context: what are key events of UK with the EU, what are the main aims of the EU and what is the role of some EU institutions?

Answer 55

• joined the EEC (later EU) in 1973
• 1992 Maastricht Treaty meant a closer union of EEC members, renamed the EU
• 2016 UK votes to leave the EU in a referendum 52% to 48%

aims:
peace- attempted to end divisions and another conflict in Europe after the end of WW2

single market- trading freely between countries without paying taxes, 1986 Single European Act meant four freedoms of: movement by people, goods, services and money, 1995 Schengen agreement meant the end of all internal borders- UK never signed up for it, must show a passport to enter the UK, some EU states have temporary restrictions on immigration in response to the 2015 migrant crisis

monetary union- Economic Monetary Union (EMU) led to European Central Bank and the introduction of the Euro in 2002- intention was to promote cross-border travel and trade, UK did not join the Euro and there was a 2007/2008 economic crisis in Greece and Spain- required bailouts from EU funds

enlargement- in 2004, ten new members joined the EU, 500 million people in the EU, new states could not be accepted unless they had liberal democracies and functioning market economies

social policy- worker’s rights improved across the EU- aim to create a ‘level playing field’ for businesses across the EU, advances in worker’s rights have varied from one state to another, human rights were introduced (1998 for the UK)

political union- greater supranational control (control in the EU over other countries)- means decision-making power is transferred to a higher body which operates independently in nation states

institutions:
- European Commission (supranational)- enforces EU laws on member states, proposes EU laws, prepares EU budget

• European Council (intergovernmental)- consists of heads of govt from member states, takes key strategic decisions e.g admission of new members
• Council of the European Union (intergovernmental)- consists of ministers from the member states, takes decisions on whether to adopt legislation, working in co-operation with the European Parliament, discusses different policy e.g agriculture, trade or environmental
• European Parliament (supranational)- has a say in the adoption of the EU budget, only directly elected EU institution, can accept or reject nominations to the Commission, co-decides legislation with the Council of the European Union
• European Court of Justice (supranational)- resolves disputes between member states, enforces EU law

Question 56

What have been some recent changes to the EU and what is the role of the EU in policy making?

Answer 56

recent changes: European Council was given a permanent president serving a two and a half year term (Donald Tusk), a high representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security policy was appointed (one person), a system of double majority voting was introduced enabling legislation to be passed with 55% of the member states representing at least 65% of the population, incorporated Charter of Fundamental Rights e.g right to education and health care (UK refused to accept it as binding)

role:
European treaties- create and set out the powers of the EU e.g Lisbon treaty, Maastricht treaty
- European council (leaders of EU countries) negotiates treaties, European parliament vote on the treaty and it is ratified by individual parliaments in each country

• two main kinds of EU laws, directives and regulations, directives- outline policy decision, individual countries then create their own laws in order to achieve the directive e.g 1998 Working Time Regulations passed in the UK to gove effect to the Working Time Directive, regulations- an EU decision immediately binding for all EU member states e.g 2015 regulation on common safeguards on goods imported from outside the EU

Question 57

What has been impact of the EU on the UK?

Answer 57

social policy: EU proposed a social chapter to protect worker’s rights- Major didn’t agree and said it would harm profits, Blair agreed to it, gave equal rights for full and part time and introduced parental leave, coalition govt said travelling was not part of working hours- disagreement between UK and the EU

agricultural policy: EU said any European country can fish in another country’s waters and imposed quotas on how many fish could be caught, UK reaction- British fishermen were out of business, Factortame ruling- was a Spanish boat, UK said they could not fish in UK waters, Supreme Court agreed with the Spanish which shows EU law is greater than UK law

impact on politics: PM has to attend European Council Meetings 4 times a year- PM profile raised, Theresa May’s profile has grown due to being involved with Brexit negotiations e.g meeting Jean Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk, other ministers attend meetings relevant to their department BUT minister’s influence is limited- all work done by civil servants of respective countries, ministers just ratify, Cabinet Committee on European Affairs has been set up to develop UK policy towards the EU- Parliament has responsibility to examine EU legislation and ministers should not agree to new laws unless it has been debated/reviewed by the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee

influence on govt policy: total control on EU policies- UK can’t trade with non-EU countries without EU regulation, there is partial EU control on policies e.g employment/agricultural/environmental policy but there is no EU control on defence/taxation/health/education

• devolution: there are areas of policy that are joint with EU and member state e.g agriculture, devolution gives these responsibilities to devolved Parliaments- UK has to negotiate with devolved govts before negotiating with the EU which makes it more complicated
• Brexit: new department- minister for exiting the EU is Stephen Barclay (was David Davis), minister for International Trade is Liam Fox- will negotiate new trade deals post-Brexit, thousands of new civil servants

Scottish referendum: Scotland voted to remain in the EU and the UK, Brexit could lead to a second referendum to leave the UK and remain in the EU

Brexit divisions: Conservatives still divided- issue of hard Brexit/soft Brexit, country divided on how they voted e.g older people tended to vote leave, younger people voted remain

• May’s Brexit deal is soft Brexit e.g allowing workers to still enter the UK, trade deal, single market- might still partially be controlled by EU
• many EU laws will become UK laws- no real change

Question 58

How ISN’T there Parliamentary sovereignty?

Answer 58

• arguably the people- UK has democracy where people decide e.g general elections, the people have political sovereignty- ultimate political power BUT the people delegate this power to Parliament

executive is sovereign: in large Parliamentary majorities the govt has more control e.g Blair only had 4 defeats

• whips tell people how to vote, usually for govt
• govt has control over the legislative timetable, can pass laws they want and dictate what is debated
• House of Lords can only delay bills for up t 2 years, cannot delay money bills, cannot block an bill in govt manifesto
• royal prerogative- royal powers are now taken by govt e.g power to declare war
• govt can call elections whenever it wants and so can end Parliament at any time

Human Rights Act is sovereign/Supreme Court is sovereign: HRA sets out what is legal and illegal with human rights, HRA has challenged acts of Parliament e.g holding of suspected terrorists

• Supreme Court challenges Parliamentary law
• House of Lords used to be highest court of the land (in Parliament), now is a separate branch

Devolved Parliaments are sovereign: there is a transfer of power to Scotland/N.Ireland/Wales
- devolved parliaments can make decisions on taxation, education, housing etc e.g in Scotland university fees are abolished but England still has them

EU is sovereign: EU directives and regulations control parliament
- decisions are made by council of European leaders, not Parliament

Referendums: Parliament is losing legal sovereignty and people are starting to lose their political sovereignty
- major constitutional issues have been decided by referendums e.g Brexit so Parliament does not have ultimate power

Question 59

How IS there Parliamentary sovereignty?

Answer 59

• remains the ultimate legal authority in the UK, has legal sovereignty which gives power to pass/abolish laws on any subject, power cannot be held over any future Parliament

counter to EXECUTIVE being sovereign: there is sometimes a minority govt which heavily limits their powers e.g Theresa May had 11 defeats

• backbench business committee has greater control of legislative timetable than govt
• military action needs Parliament approval e.g 2013 govt defeat over military action in Syria
• 2011 Fixed Term Parliaments act means 5 years are the maximum for a govt, before then govt requires 2/3 of Parliament to call a snap election
• Parliament can call vote of no confidence

counter to HRA/SUPREME COURT being sovereign: Parliament can ultimately get rid of HRA if they don’t like it so the transfer of sovereignty is temporary
- Parliament can get rid of Supreme Court since Parliament created it
example- 2005 European Court of Human Rights said prisoners should have rights, Parliament created a law to deny it so Parliament has more power
- judges may recommend laws for amendment that do not conform to the Human Rights Act but it is up to Parliament to decide whether to change them

counter to DEVOLVED PARLIAMENTS being sovereign: Parliament has right to abolish devolved bodies, the UK is not a federal state even if it has characteristics of one so devolution can be repealed BUT any abolition of popular devolved Parliaments e.g Scotland would be very difficult to do- Parliament has moved some sovereignty to devolved parliaments

counter to EU being sovereign:

• Parliament retained sovereignty when UK entered the EU because it voluntarily gave up some sovereignty in the 1972 European Communities Act which is why EU law takes principle over UK law e.g Factortame case, Parliament can repeal the 1972 act to end UK’s membership in the EU
• UK can opt out of EU regulations e.g Schengen agreement
• Brexit changes everything- end of any loss of sovereignty to the EU e.g immigration policy
• BUT there could be a soft Brexit meaning sovereignty may still be kept by EU

counter to REFERENDUMS: technically referendums are advisory not binding e.g Ginal Miller got a judicial review on the EU referendum which said Parliament had to decide not govt
- BUT to ignore a referendum result would lead to a very bad reputation, referendums may not be taking away Parliamentary sovereignty in law but it technically has

Question 60

How DOES ministerial responsibility still account for govt ministers?

Answer 60

• still collective responsibility especially recently over Brexit e.g David Davis and Boris Johnson resigned because they both disagreed with the Chequers agreement which was a softer Brexit keeping a lot of ties with the EU
• recent ministers still do take responsibility for mistakes e.g Amber Rudd and Windrush scandal, collective responsibility is still effective
• personal misconduct still a big factor which causes resignations e.g 2017 Damian Green, individual responsibility still works

Question 61

How does ministerial responsibility still NOT account for govt minsters?

Answer 61

• ministers leak dissatisfaction to the media and don’t resign so responsibility is not effective e.g Justice Secretary David Gauke, expressed his take on Brexit to the BBC, stating that Theresa May cannot ignore MPs if they vote for a softer Brexit- wouldn’t be satisfied with a hard Brexit but didn’t resign
• responsibilities delegated to other govt agencies, sometimes civil servants take responsibility instead e.g Patrick McLoughlin suspended three civil servants when there were mistakes with the West Coast Main Line- suggests ministerial responsibility does not hold ministers to account because blame for failures can be put on other people such as civil servants.
• govt departments expanded and ministers not expected to know everything so don’t resign over minor mistakes, depends on the situation e.g Alastair Campbell had a ‘golden rule’ that if a minister had a media storm over failure in policy or their own misconduct, they would have to resign but when asked about this he was unable to recall any rule- suggests individual responsibility is not adequate at holding ministers accountable because the government is not sure what warrants a resignation.