Relations between the branches Flashcards
Key word:
What is the Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the UK, responsible for hearing the most important legal cases and making final decisions on legal matters.
It is the final court of appeal for civil and criminal cases.
Key word:
What is judicial independence?
Judicial independence means that judges are free from influence or pressure from the government, political parties, or other outside forces when making decisions.
This ensures fair and impartial rulings.
Key word:
What is judicial neutrality?
Judicial neutrality means that judges must remain impartial and not allow their personal opinions, beliefs, or biases to influence their decisions.
They should base their rulings solely on the law and evidence.
Key word:
What does ultra vires mean?
Ultra vires means “beyond the powers.” It refers to actions taken by an individual or organization (such as a government or company) that are outside the legal authority or powers granted to them by law or regulation.
Key word:
What does elective dictatorship mean?
Elective dictatorship refers to a situation where a government, often with a strong majority in Parliament, exercises excessive power, with little opposition or checks on its authority.
This can occur in systems where Parliament is dominated by one party, making it difficult to hold the government accountable.
Key word:
What does the EU mean?
A group of countries in Europe that work together on trade, laws, and policies to make things easier for their citizens.
Key word:
What does the four freedoms, what are they/what do they allow?
The four freedoms refer to the fundamental freedoms in the European Union (EU), which are:
The freedom of movement of goods
The freedom of movement of people
The freedom of movement of services
The freedom of movement of capital (money).
These freedoms allow the free flow of trade, people, services, and money within the EU.
Key word:
What does political sovereignty mean?
Political sovereignty refers to the power and authority of a government or state to make decisions and laws without interference from outside forces. It is the ultimate control over political decisions within a country.
Key word:
What does legal sovereignty mean?
Legal sovereignty refers to the authority of a legal body (like Parliament in the UK) to make and change laws. It is the power to create and alter legal norms and is typically vested in a national legislature or constitution.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
What are the roles of the supreme court? e.g. appeal (use an example)
Final Court of Appeal: It is the highest court in the UK, hearing the most serious cases and making final decisions on legal matters.
Miller v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2017) case, the Supreme Court decided that the government could not trigger Brexit without Parliament’s approval. This was the final decision, and no other court could overrule it.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
What are the roles of the supreme court? e.g. law (use an example)
Interprets the Law: It interprets laws and ensures they are applied correctly, especially in complex or constitutional issues.
Shindler v. Chancellor of the Exchequer (2016), the Supreme Court interpreted whether British citizens living abroad for more than 15 years could still vote in the EU referendum. The Court decided they could not, helping to clarify the law on voting rights.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
What are the roles of the supreme court? e.g. rights (use an example)
Protects Rights: It ensures that the law respects fundamental rights, including those enshrined in human rights laws.
McDonald v. UK (2014), the Supreme Court ruled that a woman’s right to live in safe, healthy housing was violated due to poor conditions. The Court said the government must improve housing to protect people’s rights to decent homes.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
What are the roles of the supreme court? e.g. government power (use an example)
Checks Government Power: It can rule on whether government actions or laws are legal, ensuring that the government does not exceed its powers (e.g., ruling on ultra vires actions).
R (Miller) v. Prime Minister (2019), the Supreme Court ruled that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks was unlawful. The Court checked the government’s power to make sure it followed the law.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
What are the roles of the supreme court? e.g. legal precedents (use an example)
Sets Legal Precedents: Its decisions often set legal precedents that lower courts must follow in future cases, shaping the law over time.
R v. R (1991), the Supreme Court ruled that a husband could be convicted of raping his wife, which had not been the case before. This decision set a precedent, making it clear that marital rape is a crime, and this ruling influenced all future cases involving the issue.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
What is the composition of the Supreme Court?
The UK Supreme Court is made up of 12 judges, known as Lords Justices of Appeal. The head of the court is the President, and the Deputy President is the second most senior judge.
Judges are appointed based on their legal expertise, and they serve until the age of 75. The court hears important cases that involve constitutional, legal, and public matters.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court independent? e.g. the appointment process (use two examples)
Appointment of Lady Hale as President of the Supreme Court (2017)
Lady Hale was appointed as the first female President of the Supreme Court in 2017 after being recommended by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC). Her appointment was based on her qualifications and legal experience, not political influence. Lady Hale’s appointment shows that the JAC selects justices based on merit, not politics, ensuring the independence of the judiciary.
Appointment of Lord Kerr (2009)
Lord Kerr was appointed to the UK Supreme Court in 2009, based on the recommendation of the JAC, which considered his legal expertise and experience. Lord Kerr’s appointment, free from political interference, demonstrates that the JAC ensures judicial independence by focusing on merit rather than political considerations.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court independent? e.g. security of position (use two examples)
R (Privacy International) v. Investigatory Powers Tribunal (2019)
Privacy International challenged the legal basis of mass surveillance programs used by the UK government, arguing that intelligence agencies were acting unlawfully under UK law. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Privacy International, finding that the Investigatory Powers Tribunal was subject to judicial review, even in matters involving national security. This decision, which involved the government’s surveillance powers, was politically sensitive, but the justices upheld the rule of law. Their lifetime tenure allowed them to rule independently, without concern for political backlash from the government.
Reference by the Scottish Government (2021)
The Scottish Government sought to hold a second referendum on independence, asking the Supreme Court whether it had the legal authority to do so. The Court ruled that the Scottish Parliament did not have the legal right to hold a second referendum without Westminster’s approval, asserting that it was a matter reserved to the UK Parliament.
Despite the highly political nature of the case and pressure from some quarters for a ruling in favor of Scottish independence, the Court made its decision based solely on constitutional law. The justices’ security of tenure allowed them to make this decision without fear of political consequences.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court not independent? e.g. political influence in appointments (use two examples)
Lord Neuberger 2012:
The appointment of Lord Neuberger as President in 2012 occurred under a Conservative government, raising questions about whether political factors influenced the appointment, despite the JAC’s independence.
While the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) recommends judges, the Prime Minister plays a central role in appointing the President and Deputy President of the Supreme Court. This involvement can lead to concerns about political influence in key judicial appointments showing that judges may not always be selected due to merit rather because of their connections
Lord Reed 2020:
The appointment of Lord Reed as President in 2020, during a Conservative government, led to concerns about political influence, given his involvement in Brexit-related decisions during a politically charged time. Although the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) recommends judges, the Prime Minister plays a key role in appointing the President and Deputy President of the Supreme Court, raising concerns about potential political influence.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court not independent? e.g. parliamentary sovereignty challenges judicial review (use two examples)
The Cherry/Miller Case (2019)
The UK Supreme Court ruled that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s advice to prorogue Parliament for five weeks was unlawful, as it interfered with the functioning of Parliament and democracy. The court found the prorogation unconstitutional. Despite the ruling, the government’s ability to continue its agenda, and Parliament’s potential to override judicial decisions, shows the limits of the court’s independence due to Parliamentary sovereignty.
The R (Jackson) v Attorney General Case (2005)
The Supreme Court (then House of Lords) ruled that Parliament had acted within its rights when using the Parliament Acts to bypass the House of Lords and pass the Hunting Act 2004. The Court could not challenge Parliament’s legislative authority. The case showed the Supreme Court’s limited ability to override or challenge Parliament’s legislative power, highlighting the constraints on the Court’s independence under Parliamentary sovereignty.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court neutral? e.g. impartial decision making (use two examples)
Judicial Ruling in the Miller (2017) Case
In R (Miller) v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not trigger Article 50 (Brexit) without parliamentary approval. The decision was based purely on constitutional law, focusing on parliamentary sovereignty. The Court made its decision based on legal principles, without considering the political consequences, reinforcing its impartiality in upholding the law.
Impartiality in the Miller (2019) Case
In the 2019 Miller case, the Supreme Court ruled that the government’s advice to prorogue Parliament was “unlawful, void, and of no effect.” Despite the politically charged nature of the case, the Court focused solely on legal reasoning.
The Court upheld the law, regardless of the political ramifications, demonstrating its commitment to impartiality and ensuring the government adhered to the law.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court neutral? e.g. separation from politics (use two examples)
The Fraser v University and College Union Case (2022)
In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled on whether the University and College Union’s suspension of an academic employee was lawful. Despite the case involving an employment dispute, the justices ruled based on legal principles related to the rights of employees under UK law, not on any political or ideological position. This case highlighted the Court’s focus on the law, keeping it separate from political agendas or views on industrial relations.
The R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor Case (2017)
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the government’s decision to introduce fees for employment tribunals was unlawful. The decision was based on principles of access to justice and fairness, not political concerns or ideologies. The Court’s ruling demonstrated its commitment to upholding the rule of law, independent of political pressures or the government’s agenda.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court not neutral? e.g. political sensitivity and public perception (use two examples)
R (Miller) v. Prime Minister (2019)
The government’s advice to prorogue Parliament for five weeks before Brexit was challenged. The Court ruled the prorogation was “unlawful, void, and of no effect,” as it restricted Parliament’s ability to scrutinize the government.
The decision was seen by some as politically motivated, going against the government during a political crisis. Critics argued the Court was overstepping its role in a deeply political matter.
R (Miller) v. Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2017).
Whether the government could trigger Article 50 to begin Brexit without Parliament’s approval. The Court ruled that Parliament’s approval was required to trigger Article 50, rejecting the government’s claim of using royal prerogative powers. The ruling was controversial, especially among pro-Brexit supporters, who argued that it undermined the will of the people from the 2016 referendum, leading to concerns about the neutrality of the justices.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
How is the UK Supreme Court not neutral? e.g. role of lord Chancellor (use two examples)
Dominic Raab as Lord Chancellor (2019)
Dominic Raab was appointed as Lord Chancellor in 2019 under Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Raab had previously been a prominent Conservative Party figure and a strong supporter of Brexit. His political background raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest, as his political affiliations might influence his decisions on judicial independence. As Lord Chancellor, he was responsible for ensuring the judiciary’s independence, but critics feared that his government ties could affect his impartiality, especially on politically sensitive issues like Brexit or judicial reforms.
Legal Aid Cuts (2013)
Chris Grayling, serving as Lord Chancellor in 2013, introduced significant cuts to legal aid as part of the government’s austerity measures. These cuts limited access to justice for low-income individuals, especially in cases involving employment, housing, and immigration. As Lord Chancellor, Grayling was expected to protect the judiciary’s independence, but his role as a government minister created concerns that the decision was politically motivated. Critics argued that these reforms undermined the judiciary’s ability to function effectively and harmed the rights of vulnerable individuals.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
In what ways does the Supreme Court limit the authority of the executive and Parliament? e.g. judicial review (use two examples)
The R (Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal (2019)
The Supreme Court ruled that decisions made by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) regarding surveillance powers could be subject to judicial review. This decision confirmed that even the executive’s use of secretive surveillance powers must be subject to scrutiny by the courts. The case showed the Court’s role in limiting the executive’s unchecked power, particularly in sensitive areas like national security and surveillance, where the executive’s decisions could be challenged by the judiciary.
The R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board (2015)
The Court ruled that the government’s regulation of legal services through the Legal Services Board, which would impose restrictions on clients’ access to justice, was unlawful under European Union law. This decision limited the government’s ability to impose restrictions on legal services, showing that the executive cannot introduce policies that violate European principles of access to justice, highlighting the Court’s role in protecting individual rights.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
In what ways does the Supreme Court not limit the authority of the executive and Parliament? e.g. gov can pass legislation that bypass Court’s intervention (Parliamentary sovereignty) (use two examples)
The R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (2017).
Although the ruling limited the executive’s ability to act Parliament’s supremacy meant the government could still pass legislation that would bypass the Court’s intervention, thus limiting judicial power. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the UK government needed parliamentary approval before triggering Article 50 to start Brexit negotiations. However, Parliament could still make laws to override the ruling.
The R (Evans) v Attorney General (2015)
The ruling limited the Attorney General’s powers, but Parliament could still legislate to modify the law governing freedom of information, showing that the judiciary cannot fully override Parliament’s legislative power. The Supreme Court ruled that the Attorney General’s decision to veto the release of government papers was unlawful, yet the Court’s ruling was still subject to potential parliamentary action.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
In what ways does the Supreme Court limit the authority of the executive and Parliament? e.g. protection of human rights (use two examples)
UK Supreme Court limits the authority of the executive and Parliament through the protection of individual rights:
R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor (2017)
The Supreme Court ruled that the government’s introduction of employment tribunal fees was unlawful because it obstructed access to justice. The Court found that the fees were disproportionate and violated the right to a fair hearing. This decision limited the executive’s ability to impose financial barriers that restricted citizens’ access to legal remedies, reinforcing the importance of ensuring individuals’ legal rights.
R (Google Inc) v Vidal-Hall (2015)
The Supreme Court ruled that claimants could bring cases for misuse of private information under the Data Protection Act, even if they had not suffered any financial loss. The Court protected individuals’ right to privacy and ensured that individuals could hold powerful corporations accountable for breaches of their personal data, limiting corporate and executive influence over personal rights.
The role and composition of the Supreme Court:
In what ways does the Supreme Court not limit the authority of the executive and Parliament? e.g. judicial restraint (national security) (use two examples)
The UK Supreme Court exercises judicial restraint by deferring to the executive’s authority in cases involving national security or foreign policy.
R (Bancoult) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (2008)
The Court upheld the UK government’s decision to expel the Chagos Islanders from their homeland, despite claims of human rights violations. The Court refrained from intervening in the government’s decisions, citing national security considerations and the executive’s discretion in foreign policy.
R (Secretaries of State for the Home Department) v Rehman (2001)
The Supreme Court upheld the government’s decision to deport an individual based on national security grounds, despite the individual’s claim that it violated their human rights. The Court deferred to the government’s assessment of the national security risk and exercised judicial restraint in matters concerning security threats.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Commons hold the executive to account e.g. votes of no confidence (use two examples)
Theresa May’s Government and the Brexit Deal (2018)
In 2018, Prime Minister Theresa May faced a vote of no confidence after her Brexit deal was repeatedly rejected by MPs. While her government narrowly survived the vote, the deal’s rejection highlighted the lack of support for May’s Brexit strategy. Although May’s government survived, the vote significantly weakened her position and forced her to revise her approach to Brexit. It showed that Parliament could limit the executive’s progress on major issues, particularly when it did not have broad support.
Boris Johnson’s Government and Prorogation of Parliament (2019)
In 2019, Boris Johnson faced multiple votes of no confidence over his decision to prorogue Parliament ahead of Brexit, which many saw as a tactic to limit parliamentary scrutiny. The Supreme Court later ruled the prorogation unlawful. Although Johnson’s government survived the votes, the legal challenge and ruling demonstrated the role Parliament can play in holding the government accountable, especially on constitutional matters. It also highlighted that the executive’s actions could be checked, even if the government had a parliamentary majority.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Commons hold the executive to account e.g. select committees (use two examples)
Public Accounts Committee and the COVID-19 Furlough Scheme (2021)
The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) investigated the UK government’s handling of the COVID-19 furlough scheme. The committee raised concerns about the speed of fund distribution and potential fraud risks. Their inquiry into the scheme’s effectiveness led to recommendations for stronger oversight and more transparent reporting. The committee’s scrutiny helped push for greater accountability and transparency in government spending during the pandemic, showing how Select Committees can challenge executive actions and ensure that public money is used appropriately.
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee and Post-Brexit Agricultural Policy (2021)
The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee examined the government’s approach to post-Brexit agricultural policy, specifically regarding subsidies for farmers. The committee criticized the government’s lack of clear guidance on support and environmental standards, urging for more clarity and planning. The committee’s findings influenced public debate and added pressure on the government to provide better support and policies for farmers, demonstrating how Select Committees can directly impact policy decisions.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Commons not hold the executive to account e.g. Party loyalty/majority control (use two examples)
Brexit and Boris Johnson’s Government (2019)
During the debates on Brexit and the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement, despite widespread opposition to some aspects of the government’s approach, the Conservative Party, with its majority in the House of Commons, was able to push through the deal. MPs from the ruling party largely followed party lines, with little dissent, ensuring the government’s proposals prevailed despite significant concerns from opposition parties.
The COVID-19 Furlough Scheme (2020)
The government introduced the furlough scheme to support workers during the pandemic. While some MPs, especially from opposition parties, raised concerns about the scheme’s flaws (e.g., gaps in coverage for certain workers), the Conservative Party majority in the House of Commons largely supported the government’s handling of the crisis. The Labour Party and other opposition MPs struggled to push through amendments, despite concerns about fairness in the scheme.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Commons not hold the executive to account e.g. no consequences for executive failures (use two examples)
Lack of Effective Consequences for Executive Failures
The Windrush Scandal (2018)
Despite the Windrush scandal, in which many members of the Windrush Generation were wrongfully detained, denied legal rights, and threatened with deportation by the UK Home Office, the government’s response was largely insufficient. While the Home Secretary resigned, the government did not face significant consequences or a substantial policy overhaul, and much of the wrongdoing was not fully addressed.
Universal Credit Rollout (2018-2020)
The Universal Credit rollout faced significant criticism from MPs, charities, and recipients themselves due to delays, errors, and its impact on vulnerable individuals. Despite widespread concern in the House of Commons and media coverage, the Conservative government continued with the rollout with limited changes, demonstrating the lack of significant consequences for executive decisions that negatively impacted citizens.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Lords hold the executive to account e.g. committees/reports (use two examples)
The Constitution Committee’s Report on COVID-19 Emergency Powers (2020)
The Constitution Committee of the House of Lords scrutinized the government’s use of emergency powers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The committee raised concerns about the broad and undefined powers granted to ministers under the Coronavirus Act 2020, calling for clearer safeguards and regular reviews of the powers.
The Communications and Digital Committee’s Report on Online Harm (2021)
The Communications and Digital Committee in the House of Lords conducted an inquiry into the government’s approach to tackling online harm. It produced a report urging the government to strengthen the proposed Online Safety Bill, calling for stronger regulations on tech companies and improved protections for users. This inquiry led to increased government attention to online safety issues.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Lords hold the executive to account e.g. scrutinising ministers (use two examples)
Brexit Transition Period and Government’s Preparedness (2020)
During debates in the House of Lords over the government’s preparedness for the end of the Brexit transition period, Lords scrutinized the government’s readiness for changes in trade, immigration, and legal arrangements. They raised questions about the government’s failure to adequately prepare for border controls and the impact on businesses, forcing ministers to respond and provide clarifications.
COVID-19 Response and Vaccination Rollout (2021)
The House of Lords questioned the government extensively about its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly regarding the vaccination rollout. The Lords raised concerns about distribution, speed, and fairness. Their questions and reports pressured the government to improve communication and ensure greater transparency about the vaccine rollout strategy.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Lords not hold the executive to account e.g. blocking legislation (use two examples)
Limited Power to Block Legislation
The Internal Market Bill (2020)
The House of Lords proposed numerous amendments to the Internal Market Bill due to concerns about its implications for the Good Friday Agreement and devolution. However, the government, with a majority in the House of Commons, ultimately passed the bill without accepting the Lords’ amendments. This demonstrated that, although the Lords can delay and amend legislation, they cannot ultimately prevent legislation they oppose if the government controls the House of Commons.
The Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts Bill (2021)
Despite the House of Lords raising significant concerns about the Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts Bill—particularly around its provisions to limit protest rights—the government was able to push the bill through with minimal changes. While the Lords made amendments, most were overturned in the House of Commons, demonstrating the limits of the Lords’ power to block or significantly alter government proposals.
ALSO COME UNDER THE SALISBURY CONVENTION WHERE LORDS CAN ONLY BLOCK LEGILSATION FOR A YEAR!!! LIMITS POWER!!!
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
How effectively does the House of Lords not hold the executive to account e.g. government majority (use two examples)
Government Majority in the House of Commons Overruling Lords’ Decisions
Brexit Withdrawal Agreement (2020)
The House of Lords raised numerous concerns about the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement, especially regarding the Northern Ireland Protocol and its impact on trade. However, the government, with a Conservative majority in the House of Commons, was able to pass the deal despite the Lords’ objections. The Lords’ amendments, although notable, were ultimately overridden by the elected chamber, highlighting the limits of the Lords’ power to influence the government’s actions.
The Nationality and Borders Bill (2021)
The House of Lords attempted to amend the Nationality and Borders Bill in response to concerns about its provisions that could criminalize asylum seekers and violate international refugee laws. However, after the bill was returned to the House of Commons, the government’s majority overruled the amendments, underscoring the Lords’ inability to hold the executive fully to account when the House of Commons supports the government’s position.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
In what ways has the ability of Parliament to control government increased in recent years? e.g. media and public pressure (use two examples)
Increased Media and Public Pressure Leading to Parliamentary Action
The Windrush Compensation Scheme (2020)
Following public outcry and scrutiny of the government’s treatment of the Windrush Generation, Parliament played a role in holding the executive accountable. MPs and the Home Affairs Committee pressed the government for a more comprehensive compensation scheme for the victims of the Windrush scandal. Public and parliamentary pressure led to the creation of a Windrush Compensation Scheme to address the injustice, illustrating how Parliament can respond to public pressure to influence executive policies.
The Environmental Bill (2020-2021)
As part of growing environmental concerns, there was increasing parliamentary scrutiny on the Environment Bill. The House of Lords made a series of amendments calling for stronger commitments on air quality and biodiversity. These amendments were debated in the Commons and were partially accepted, showing how Parliament increasingly controls government action on critical issues like the environment, driven by public demand for stronger policies.
Key word:
What does executive action mean?
Decisions or measures taken by the government or Prime Minister without needing approval from Parliament.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
In what ways has the ability of Parliament to control government increased in recent years? e.g. scrutiny (use two examples)
Strengthened Scrutiny of Executive Actions
The Fixed-term Parliaments Act (2011) and Parliament’s Role in Calling Elections (2019)
The Fixed-term Parliaments Act established that general elections should occur every five years, but in recent years, Parliament has played an increasingly active role in controlling the timing of elections. In 2019, Parliament voted against calling an early general election despite the government’s desire to do so. This showed that Parliament could block the executive’s power to call early elections, enhancing parliamentary control over the government’s agenda.
Brexit Votes (2019-2020)
During the Brexit process, particularly in 2019, Parliament repeatedly voted on critical aspects of the government’s approach, such as the Brexit deal and the no-deal Brexit scenario. MPs used their power to demand votes on key issues, with Parliament actively controlling the process and forcing the executive to reconsider its stance. This increased parliamentary influence over executive decisions during a time of national crisis.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
In what ways hasn’t the ability of Parliament to control government not increased in recent years? e.g. gov control agenda (use two examples)
Government’s Control of Parliamentary Agenda
Brexit and the Prorogation Controversy (2019)
While Parliament did play a significant role in scrutinizing the government during the Brexit process, Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government used its control of the House of Commons to override parliamentary opposition. In 2019, the government attempted to prorogue Parliament for five weeks to prevent MPs from blocking a no-deal Brexit, a move that led to the Miller prorogation case. Even though the Supreme Court ruled the prorogation unlawful, the government’s ability to bypass Parliament and push through a controversial agenda highlights the limits of parliamentary control when the executive has significant leverage over parliamentary procedures and time.
The Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts Bill (2021)
The government introduced the Police, Crime, Sentencing, and Courts Bill, which faced significant opposition in Parliament, particularly around provisions that could limit the right to protest. However, the government majority in the House of Commons enabled the executive to push through the bill, overriding most of the concerns raised by MPs and the House of Lords. The executive’s control over parliamentary time, combined with party loyalty, demonstrates how the government can circumvent or limit parliamentary control over key legislation.
The relationship between the executive and Parliament:
In what ways hasn’t the ability of Parliament to control government not increased in recent years? e.g. Parliament cannot force executive accountability (use two examples)
Parliament’s Inability to Force Executive Accountability
The Windrush Compensation Scheme
While the Home Affairs Committee in the House of Commons and the public raised concerns about the Windrush scandal, Parliament’s ability to force meaningful changes was limited. The government’s response was slow, and there was little direct action from Parliament to force ministers to implement a more comprehensive compensation scheme for those affected. Despite parliamentary inquiries, the Home Office was able to delay action, and the government was not held fully accountable for the scale of the injustice.
Universal Credit Rollout (2019-2020)
Despite significant criticism in Parliament, particularly from opposition parties and select committees, the government continued with the controversial rollout of Universal Credit. MPs raised concerns about delays and the negative impact on vulnerable groups, but the Conservative government maintained its position, citing the need for welfare reform. The executive’s ability to continue with the policy, despite significant parliamentary opposition and public concern, showed the limits of parliamentary control when the government maintains a majority and is determined to push through its agenda.
The European Union:
What are the aims of the EU? e.g. promote peace and stability
The EU was founded to prevent future conflicts in Europe after World War II. For example, the EU’s role in helping to bring peace to the Balkans in the 1990s is a demonstration of this aim.
The European Union:
What are the aims of the EU? e.g. Create a single market
The EU allows for the free movement of goods, services, people, and capital. For instance, a French company can sell products in Germany without facing customs duties, and EU citizens can work and live in any member state.
The European Union:
What are the aims of the EU? e.g. Protect human rights
The EU has strong laws that protect citizens’ rights, like the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. An example is the EU’s commitment to gender equality, which has led to policies ensuring equal pay for equal work.
The European Union:
How has the EU deepened ? e.g. Increased Political and Policy Cooperation (use two examples)
Formalized in 1993 under the Maastricht Treaty, the EU has coordinated foreign policy. An example is the sanctions imposed on Russia in 2014 after its annexation of Crimea.
European Defence Cooperation: In 2017, the EU launched the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), which promotes defense collaboration among EU states. For instance, member states like Spain and France have cooperated on joint military projects.
The European Union:
How has the EU deepened ? e.g. Economic and Monetary Integration (use two examples)
The Eurozone: Introduced in 1999 (with physical banknotes and coins coming in 2002), 19 EU countries use the euro. For example, Greece, Italy, and Portugal share the euro, simplifying trade and economic coordination.
EU Budget and Funding: The EU’s budget has expanded over time, with a notable increase in funding from the 2014-2020 period. For example, the EU’s Trans-European Networks (TEN-T) initiative, started in the 1990s, has helped build a unified infrastructure network across member states.
The European Union:
How has the EU deepened ? e.g. Expansion of the Single Market (use two examples)
Free Movement of People: Introduced in 1993 with the Maastricht Treaty, EU citizens can live, work, and study in any EU country. For example, a Portuguese citizen can move to Germany or work in Sweden
Customs Union: Established in 1968, the customs union allows goods to be traded freely between EU countries without tariffs or customs checks. For example, a German company can export products to France without facing extra charges.
The institutions of the EU:
What are the main institutions of the EU? e.g. European Commission
The EU’s executive body, responsible for proposing laws, implementing policies, and managing the day-to-day work of the Union. It plays a central role in shaping EU legislation and policy.
The institutions of the EU:
What are the main institutions of the EU? e.g. European Parliament
Represents EU citizens, and works with the Council to adopt or reject laws proposed by the Commission. It has the power to approve the EU budget and hold the Commission accountable.
The institutions of the EU:
What are the main institutions of the EU? e.g. Council of the European Union
Made up of ministers from each member state, it works with the European Parliament to pass laws and coordinate policies across member states. It plays a key role in decision-making within the EU.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
How has the EU benefitted the UK e.g. Trade and Economic Benefits (use two examples)
Automotive Industry – Tariff-Free Access to the Single Market:
As an EU member, the UK’s automotive sector benefited from tariff-free access to the EU Single Market, a key advantage for companies like Jaguar Land Rover, Nissan, and Mini, which produced vehicles in the UK for European consumption. This arrangement allowed for the smooth and cost-effective export of UK-made vehicles to the EU, ensuring that British manufacturers remained competitive. Without these trade benefits, companies would have faced potential tariffs, additional paperwork, and logistical delays, significantly increasing costs and reducing market access.
Foreign Direct Investment in Financial Services:
The UK’s financial sector, particularly in London, flourished as the EU provided a platform for “passporting” rights, which allowed UK banks, insurance companies, and financial institutions to operate freely across EU member states without facing additional regulatory barriers. For example, Barclays and HSBC could offer banking services throughout the EU, benefiting from access to over 500 million consumers and businesses. This openness attracted large amounts of foreign direct investment into the UK financial services industry, keeping the city of London at the forefront of global finance.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
How has the EU benefitted the UK e.g. Security and Diplomacy (use two examples)
European Arrest Warrant (EAW) – Efficient Extradition:
The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) enabled the UK to expedite the extradition of individuals accused of serious crimes within the EU, bypassing the slow and bureaucratic processes associated with extradition from non-EU countries. A notable case in 2012 saw the UK use the EAW to swiftly extradite hacker Gary McKinnon from Spain to face charges for breaching US government computers. The EAW system allowed for greater cooperation between EU law enforcement agencies, making it easier to address cross-border crime and terrorism within the EU, ensuring public safety and justice.
EU Foreign Policy – Iranian Nuclear Deal:
The UK’s participation in the EU’s collective foreign policy efforts contributed significantly to global diplomatic initiatives, such as the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action). Through the EU’s framework, the UK worked alongside other world powers, including the US, Germany, France, and China, to negotiate terms with Iran, securing limits on its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. This collaborative approach strengthened the UK’s global diplomatic influence and underscored the importance of working within EU structures to achieve significant international agreements that benefited regional and global security.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
How has the EU not benefitted the UK e.g. Sovereignty and National Control (use two examples)
Laws and Regulations Imposed by EU Bureaucracy:
As a member of the EU, the UK was required to adhere to EU laws and regulations, many of which were created by institutions over which the UK had limited influence. For example, EU regulations on environmental standards and agriculture affected UK industries, even though they did not always align with the country’s priorities. This situation led to concerns about the loss of national sovereignty, as the UK had to comply with decisions made by institutions like the European Commission, over which it had no direct control after leaving the decision-making process.
Restrictions on Immigration Policy:
EU membership required the UK to abide by the principle of free movement, which allowed citizens from EU countries to live and work in the UK without restrictions. While this brought economic benefits, it also led to concerns about the pressure on public services, housing, and wages, particularly in areas with high immigration levels. Critics argued that the UK could not fully control its immigration policies as it was bound by EU rules that did not allow for stricter border controls, contributing to a sense of diminishing national control.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
How has the EU not benefitted the UK e.g. economic costs (use two examples)
Contributions to the EU Budget:
As a member of the EU, the UK was required to contribute a significant amount of money to the EU budget each year. In 2019, the UK’s gross contribution was around £20 billion, with the government only receiving about £10 billion in return in the form of EU spending. Many critics argued that the UK’s financial contribution was not a good return on investment, especially when compared to the economic benefits, leading to growing dissatisfaction with what some saw as an unfair economic burden.
Agricultural and Fisheries Policy Restrictions:
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) imposed restrictions on the UK’s farming and fishing industries. Under CAP, UK farmers were required to follow EU-wide agricultural regulations, which sometimes led to inefficient allocation of subsidies, and the UK lost control over how agricultural support was distributed. Similarly, the CFP dictated fishing quotas that limited UK fishermen’s ability to exploit local waters fully, with overfishing by EU countries under these shared policies hurting the UK’s fishing industry. These limitations were viewed as damaging to specific sectors of the UK economy.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
Arguments for the membership of the EU e.g. Economic Benefits (use two examples)
Access to the Single Market:
The EU’s Single Market was one of the UK’s primary economic advantages, offering tariff-free access to a consumer base of over 500 million people across 27 countries. This free flow of goods, services, capital, and people facilitated seamless trade, reducing barriers and enabling British businesses to expand easily within the EU. For example, the UK automotive and pharmaceutical industries were able to export products without facing costly tariffs, which kept prices competitive and supported industry growth.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI):
As an EU member, the UK became an attractive destination for global investors seeking to access the European market. The EU’s stable legal framework, regulatory environment, and trade deals meant that foreign companies could establish their European headquarters in the UK to reach the broader EU market. This boosted the UK economy significantly, particularly in cities like London, where global financial institutions were drawn by the opportunity to operate seamlessly within the EU, contributing to the creation of high-paying jobs and economic development.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
Arguments for the membership of the EU e.g. Political and Diplomatic Influence (use two examples)
Influence in Global Negotiations:
The UK, as a part of the EU, was able to leverage the collective strength of the Union in global trade and diplomatic negotiations, securing favorable terms for British businesses. For example, the EU’s trade deals with countries like South Korea, Canada, and Japan opened new markets to UK companies, which would have been more difficult for the UK to secure on its own. The political influence of the EU allowed the UK to participate in multilateral negotiations that shaped global economic policies and regulations, ensuring the country’s interests were represented on the world stage.
Security Cooperation:
EU membership allowed the UK to participate in cross-border security and law enforcement collaborations that enhanced national security. Key programs like the European Arrest Warrant made it easier for the UK to track and extradite criminals across borders, while Europol provided critical intelligence-sharing resources to combat organized crime and terrorism. This cooperation was vital in addressing complex, transnational threats such as human trafficking, cybercrime, and terrorism, which required joint efforts between EU member states to prevent and respond effectively.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
Arguments against the membership of the EU e.g. economic disadvantages (use two examples)
Loss of Control Over Trade Policy:
As a member of the EU, the UK had to accept EU-wide trade agreements and could not negotiate independent deals with non-EU countries. For example, UK farmers were subject to the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which included subsidies but also strict rules that restricted their ability to export freely outside the EU. Many agricultural businesses found these restrictions limiting, as they couldn’t tailor their trade agreements to the growing markets outside the EU, like in Asia or the Americas, where rules and tariffs were often more favourable to them.
EU Membership Fees:
The UK contributed approximately £13 billion annually to the EU budget, though a portion of this was returned as regional development aid and agricultural subsidies. However, critics argued that the net financial contribution — roughly £5 billion per year — was excessive considering the economic benefits the UK received. For example, while the UK benefited from EU trade agreements, some sectors, such as manufacturing and fishing, felt that the financial contributions to the EU far outweighed the limited return in terms of direct financial benefits to local industries, particularly when compared to the growing costs of EU membership.
The impact of the EU on the UK:
Arguments against the membership of the EU e.g. Political and Sovereignty Concerns (use two examples)
Loss of National Sovereignty:
While the UK had influence in EU decision-making, it still had to comply with EU laws, even if they conflicted with national priorities. For instance, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) had the authority to override UK law in certain legal matters, such as employment rights or environmental protection. A notable example was the ECJ’s ruling in 2014 that required the UK to extend paid holiday rights to part-time and temporary workers, something that UK lawmakers had resisted. This decision highlighted the tension between EU rulings and national sovereignty, where the UK was required to implement policies not always supported by local governments.
Immigration and Border Control:
As part of the EU’s Single Market, the UK was obligated to accept free movement of people from other EU member states. Between 2004 and 2016, over 3 million people from EU countries moved to the UK, leading to concerns about overstretched public services and housing shortages. For example, cities like London experienced rapid population growth, which put pressure on local schools, hospitals, and the housing market. Critics argued that the UK should have the right to control immigration independently, tailoring policies to its economic needs and resources, which would have been impossible under the EU’s free movement rules.
The impact of the Brexit on the UK:
How has Brexit had a positive impact on the UK? e.g. Control Over Immigration Policy (use two examples)
Control Over Immigration Policy:
After Brexit, the UK implemented a points-based immigration system to control the flow of workers into the country. For instance, in 2021, the UK introduced this system that evaluates potential immigrants based on factors like skills, qualifications, and salary levels, reducing the ability of low-skilled workers from the EU to enter the UK. This system aims to give the UK greater control over its labor market and prevent issues related to overpopulation and strain on public services, particularly in areas like healthcare and housing.
Regulatory Autonomy in Fisheries:
The UK now controls its fishing waters, something that was governed by EU rules under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). For example, after Brexit, the UK signed a new fishing agreement with the EU that allowed the UK to gradually regain control over its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), giving British fishermen exclusive access to a portion of the waters. This has provided an opportunity for the UK to implement sustainable fishing policies that are more aligned with local interests, potentially benefiting domestic industries and preserving local ecosystems.
The impact of the Brexit on the UK:
How has Brexit had a positive impact on the UK? e.g. UK-Japan Free Trade Agreement (FTA)
UK-Japan Free Trade Agreement (FTA):
Following Brexit, the UK secured a Free Trade Agreement with Japan in October 2020, which was the first major post-Brexit trade deal. The deal removed tariffs on goods like cars and food, benefiting key UK industries like automotive and agriculture. The agreement was seen as an opportunity for the UK to strengthen its trade ties with Asia and establish itself as a global trade player outside the EU, enabling British businesses to expand into the Japanese market with fewer restrictions.
Access to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP):
The UK officially joined the CPTPP in 2021, a trade bloc that includes Australia, Japan, and Canada, among others. This agreement allows the UK to access some of the world’s fastest-growing markets, such as Vietnam and Malaysia, in addition to strengthening its trade with established economies like Japan. By becoming a member, the UK is expected to increase its exports in sectors like services, finance, and technology, opening up new opportunities for UK businesses in dynamic global markets beyond the EU.
The impact of the Brexit on the UK:
How has Brexit had a negative impact on the UK? e.g. economic impact
Trade Barriers and Customs Delays:
After leaving the EU, the UK faced new customs checks and paperwork for trade between the UK and EU, which increased delays and costs for businesses. For instance, small and medium-sized businesses that previously exported goods to the EU found it harder to meet new compliance requirements, resulting in disruptions to supply chains. The UK’s export industry, particularly in areas like food, was hit hard by these changes, with reports of trucks being delayed at ports, perishable goods being discarded, and additional tariffs increasing costs.
Labor Shortages in Key Sectors:
The end of free movement between the UK and EU significantly reduced the flow of workers into the UK. For example, sectors such as agriculture, hospitality, and healthcare have been experiencing severe labor shortages. In 2021, the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) struggled to fill vacancies due to reduced immigration from the EU, impacting the delivery of services, especially in rural areas. Similarly, the agriculture industry faced difficulties in recruiting seasonal workers for harvesting, contributing to food shortages and higher prices.
The impact of the Brexit on the UK:
How has Brexit had a negative impact on the UK? e.g. International Relationships and Diplomacy (use two examples)
International Relationships and Diplomacy:
Tensions with the EU over Northern Ireland
One of the key issues following Brexit was the Northern Ireland Protocol, which created a de facto customs border in the Irish Sea. This was necessary to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland but has led to tensions between the UK and EU. For example, in 2021, Northern Ireland faced disruptions in the supply of goods from Great Britain, leading to protests and political instability. The UK government has had several rounds of talks with the EU over the Protocol, but tensions remain over the issue of trade barriers and sovereignty.
Deterioration of Diplomatic Relations with European Nations:
Brexit has strained the UK’s diplomatic relations with EU member states. A notable example is the UK’s exclusion from Horizon Europe, the EU’s flagship research and innovation program. Despite initial hopes for a cooperation agreement, the UK has been shut out from vital funding and collaborative projects, weakening its research community’s global position. Similarly, tensions have emerged over fishing rights, with the UK accusing France and other EU nations of not adhering to the post-Brexit fishing agreements, further escalating diplomatic tensions.
Sovereignty being moved between branches:
How has sovereignty moved between the branches? e.g. Sovereignty and the Judicial Branch (Judicial Review and Legal Interpretation) (use two examples)
The Supreme Court’s Ruling on Brexit (2016-2017):
One of the most significant recent examples of the judiciary asserting its influence over sovereignty was the Supreme Court ruling on Brexit. In 2017, the court ruled that the UK government could not trigger Article 50 (the formal process for leaving the EU) without first consulting Parliament. This ruling reaffirmed the principle that Parliament, not the executive branch, holds the sovereign power to make significant constitutional decisions. The court’s decision emphasized the separation of powers, asserting that the judiciary could hold the executive accountable and protect parliamentary sovereignty.
The Prorogation Case (2019):
In another high-profile case, the UK Supreme Court ruled in September 2019 that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament for five weeks was “unlawful.” The court stated that the advice had an extreme effect upon the fundamentals of democracy, denying Parliament the ability to scrutinize the executive during a crucial time in the Brexit process. This case demonstrated the judiciary’s role in limiting the power of the executive and reinforcing the sovereignty of Parliament.
Sovereignty being moved between branches:
How has sovereignty moved between the branches? e.g. Sovereignty and the Executive Branch (Government Control and Decision-Making) (use two examples)
Sovereignty and the Executive Branch (Government Control and Decision-Making)
The UK’s Control Over Immigration Post-Brexit (2020)
Following Brexit, the UK regained control over its immigration system, which had previously been governed by EU regulations on free movement. In January 2020, the UK government introduced a new points-based immigration system that prioritized skilled workers, a move that was seen as a reclamation of sovereignty over national borders. This shift marked a significant departure from EU immigration policies, where the UK was required to adhere to the EU’s freedom of movement rules. The government’s control over immigration became a key aspect of the “taking back control” argument put forward by pro-Brexit campaigners.
The Internal Market Act (2020):
The Internal Market Act, passed in December 2020, was another significant example of the executive asserting its sovereignty. The Act was introduced by the UK government to ensure the smooth functioning of the internal market after Brexit. However, it also granted ministers powers to override certain parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol (which had been agreed with the EU as part of the Brexit deal). This move was controversial because it challenged the terms of the Brexit agreement and effectively gave the government greater control over trade and regulatory policies in Northern Ireland, highlighting the executive branch’s growing influence over the application of the UK’s sovereignty.
Sovereignty being moved between branches:
How has sovereignty not moved between the branches? e.g. Sovereignty and the Judicial Branch (Judicial Review and Constitutional Decisions)
The Prorogation Case (2019):
A landmark moment for judicial sovereignty occurred when the UK Supreme Court ruled that Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s advice to the Queen to prorogue Parliament for five weeks was “unlawful.” In the judgment, the court asserted its authority over executive decisions, especially those related to Parliament’s ability to function. This was a key moment where judicial power appeared to override the executive’s authority, reinforcing the notion that the judiciary could protect Parliament’s sovereignty and intervene when the executive branch acted beyond its legal limits.
Brexit Case (2017):
The 2017 Supreme Court case regarding Article 50 further illustrated the growing power of the judiciary in the UK’s constitutional landscape. The court ruled that the UK government could not trigger Brexit without parliamentary approval, asserting that parliamentary sovereignty should not be bypassed by the executive. This case showed a shift in sovereignty, where the courts prevented the executive branch from unilaterally making significant constitutional changes, reaffirming Parliament’s central role.
Sovereignty being moved between branches:
How has sovereignty not moved between the branches? e.g. Sovereignty and the Legislative Branch (Parliamentary Influence) (use two examples)
The Brexit Withdrawal Agreement (2019):
The legislative branch, through Parliament, showed its growing role in controlling the political landscape during Brexit negotiations. In 2019, the government struggled to get its Brexit deal through Parliament, and MPs voted multiple times to reject the agreement, forcing the government to negotiate further with the EU. This period represented a shift in sovereignty away from the executive branch, as Parliament became the key force in shaping the final Brexit terms, emphasizing the importance of legislative control over decisions that significantly impacted the nation.
The Internal Market Bill (2020):
The Internal Market Bill, introduced by the government to ensure smooth internal trade after Brexit, became a flashpoint for debates over sovereignty. Parliament, despite the executive’s push for broader powers, actively scrutinized and amended the bill. Key clauses of the bill were even voted down by MPs, demonstrating Parliament’s sovereignty in overseeing the executive’s legislative actions. In this instance, Parliament exerted its authority to push back against the executive’s agenda, showcasing the legislative branch’s role in shaping policy and asserting control over key areas of the post-Brexit landscape.
