Parliament Flashcards
What are the differences between the membership and powers of the HoL and the HoC?
The House of Commons (HoC) is made up of elected MPs, has the final say on major decisions, like passing budgets. For example, the HoC approves government spending plans, such as funding for the NHS.
The House of Lords (HoL)is made up with appointed and hereditary members and reviews laws. If the Lords suggest changes to a law(like amending a bill on environmental policies) the Commons can accept, amend, or reject their suggestions, but the Lords cannot block the bill outright.
What are the functions HoC and how well does it fulfill them?
-Legislation: Debates and passes laws, though party politics can limit scrutiny.
-Scrutinising the Government: Holds the government accountable, but large majorities may weaken this.
-Representation: MPs represent constituents, though party loyalty can overshadow local interests.
-Budget Approval: Approves taxation and spending, but financial scrutiny can be limited.
-Debating Issues: Discusses national concerns, though action depends on government priorities.
What are the functions of the HoL and how well does it fulfill them?
-Legislative Review: Scrutinises and amends laws, offering expertise, but lacks final authority.
-Checking the Government: Questions and debates government decisions, though it can’t enforce changes.
-Deliberation: Debates important issues, providing informed perspectives, but with limited impact.
-Secondary Legislation Oversight: Reviews detailed regulations, though rarely blocks them.
Through what stages is a parliamentary bill enacted?
First Reading:
1) The bill is introduced, and its title and main objectives are read out. No debate occurs.
2)Second Reading:MPs or Lords debate the bill’s general principles and vote on whether it should proceed.
3)Committee Stage: A committee examines the bill in detail, considering amendments.In the House of Commons, this is usually done by a Public Bill Committee.
4)Report Stage:Further amendments are considered by the whole house.
5)Third Reading: A final debate and vote are held on the bill in its amended form.
6)The Other House: The bill moves to the other chamber (Lords or Commons) and goes through the same stages.If the second house amends the bill, it returns to the first for agreement.
7)Royal Assent: Once both houses agree, the monarch formally approves the bill, making it law.
What obstacles to success do private members bills encounter?
-Limited Time: PMBs are usually debated on Fridays, when attendance is low, and there is limited time to progress through all stages.
-Lack of Government Support: Without backing from the government, PMBs often fail to secure enough votes or resources.
-Complexity of Procedure: Navigating the legislative process requires skill and support, which some private members may lack.
-Low Priority: PMBs are less likely to succeed when they conflict with government priorities or lack cross-party support.
How effective is opposition to holding the government to account?
The opposition in the UK Parliament is effective at holding the government to account through Question Time, debates, and committees. It can put pressure on the government, raise public awareness, and investigate policies. However, its effectiveness is limited by a government majority, limited access to information, and internal divisions within opposition parties. While it can challenge the government, the opposition’s power is weaker when the government holds a strong majority. In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, Labour leader Keir Starmer frequently questioned Prime Minister Boris Johnson on the government’s handling of the crisis, especially regarding testing and lockdown measures.
How effective are select committees at holding the government to account?
Select committees are effective at scrutinising the government through detailed investigations, expert testimony, and cross-party input. They can uncover issues and make well-informed recommendations. However, their impact is limited by the government’s resistance to their findings, limited public attention, and resource constraints. While influential, committees often lack the power to enforce changes. An example of a select committee holding the government to account is the Health and Social Care Committee’s inquiry into the UK’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. The committee questioned government ministers and health experts, highlighting issues like delays in lockdown measures and testing capacity.
How effective are PMQT and MQT at holding the government to account?
PMQs and MQTs are effective at holding the government to account by providing opportunities for direct questioning. PMQs allow the opposition to challenge the Prime Minister publicly, but often focus more on political point-scoring than deep scrutiny. MQTs enable MPs to question individual ministers, but answers can be evasive, and the time is limited. Both sessions raise issues but are sometimes constrained by their performative nature and short timeframes. Windrush scandal, the Home Secretary was questioned by MPs about the mistreatment of the Windrush generation. Despite the pressure, the government’s responses were often seen as evasive, illustrating how limited the session’s impact can be despite raising important issues. During the Windrush scandal, the Home Secretary Amber Rudd was questioned by MPs about the mistreatment of the Windrush generation.
How effective are parliamentary backbenchers at holding the government to account?
Parliamentary backbenchers are effective at holding the government to account by raising issues, participating in debates, and serving on select committees. They often bring new perspectives and highlight concerns that may be overlooked. However, their impact is limited by their lack of formal power, party loyalty, and limited access to information, which can hinder their ability to force change. Several Conservative backbenchers, like Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke, challenged the government’s approach to Brexit, particularly its handling of the Withdrawal Agreement. They pushed for more parliamentary control over the process, forcing the government to make concessions on how Brexit would be negotiated and implemented.
How effective is debate at holding the government to account?
Debates in Parliament are effective at raising issues, questioning the government, and generating public awareness, but they often lack the power to directly change policies. While they can pressure the government, their effectiveness is limited by factors like government majorities and political point-scoring. Debates are more successful in generating public scrutiny than in forcing immediate policy changes. MPs during the COVID-19 pandemic regularly questioned the government on issues like testing, lockdown measures, and economic support. These debates brought attention to the government’s missteps and increased public pressure for change
How representative is the HoC?
The House of Commons is democratically elected, providing representation through MPs who are chosen by constituents. However, it faces challenges in diversity, with underrepresentation of women, ethnic minorities, and working-class individuals. The first-past-the-post electoral system and the dominance of major parties also lead to disproportionate representation, limiting the full range of political views and minority perspectives. An example of the House of Commons’ lack of diversity is the 2019 general election, where only 34% of MPs were women, despite women making up 51% of the population. Additionally, ethnic minorities were also underrepresented, with only 10% of MPs from ethnic minority backgrounds, compared to around 14% of the UK population.
How representative is the HoL?
The House of Lords is less representative than the House of Commons, as it is unelected and includes hereditary peers, which undermines its democratic legitimacy. While it offers expertise and diverse backgrounds among life peers, it is dominated by the elite and does not fully reflect the diversity of the UK population. Despite reforms in 1999, there are still 92 hereditary peers in the HoL, who hold seats by birth right, not public election.
