the commons, lords and executive/ scrutiny of gov.

Question 1

what are the features of the house of commons?

Answer 1

-elected by FPTP
-chaired by the speaker - currently sir lindsay hoyle
-organised by party whips
-the primary chamber
-enjoys parliamentary privilege e.g. can’t be sued for anything said in a debate
-regulates its own affairs

Question 2

what are party whips?

Answer 2

they whip the party into line so that they vote with the government

Question 3

what’s a 3 line whip?

Answer 3

you have to vote with your party, if you don’t you’re labelled a rebel and the party won’t support you

Question 4

what are the features of the house of lords?

Answer 4

-unelected
-chaired by the lord speaker
-composed of hereditary, life and spiritual peers e.g. the archbishop of canterbury
-less controlled by whips
-not dominated by a single party, because it’s not structured on party lines (as the HoC is)

Question 5

what are the functions of the house of commons?

Answer 5

-debate
-decide on laws
-scrutinse the government
-represent the public

Question 6

what are the functions of the house of lords?

Answer 6

-check government
-shape laws
-investigate issues

Question 7

what is scrutiny of the executive?

Answer 7

the process by which the legislative examine the government’s legislative proposals whilst also maintaining a general scrutiny and oversight role

Question 8

what is individual ministerial responsiblity?

Answer 8

ministers and accountable to parliament, they must explain and justify their policies and actions to parliament

Question 9

method of scrutinisation: PMQs - advantages

Answer 9

-can give positive publicity to the questioner/opposition parties e.g. in 1997 blair accused PM john major of being ‘weak, weak, weak’
-allow unwelcoming questions to be asked of the PM and their ministers, and can expose weaknesses
-keep PMs and ministers on their toes
-on rare occasions, even members of their own party have criticised the PM during PMQs e.g. David Davis said ‘in the name if god, go’ referring to johnson in the height of ‘partygate; in 2022

Question 10

method of scrutinisation: PMQs - disadvantages

Answer 10

-they can convey and image of rowdiness and theatricals - punch and judy politics
-more about style over substance, therefore no one really listens to what they have to say
-most questions are designed to either catch out the opposition or praise one’s own party, rather than change opinions/policies

Question 11

recent developments regarding debates:

Answer 11

-the backbench business committee (2010) has the right to schedule parliamentary debates one day a week
-westminster hall debates are held 4 days a week
-any MP may attend (after applying and then being allocated by a ballot)
-mondays are reserved for discussion of petitions and e-petitions

Question 12

method of scrutinisation: parliamentary debates - advantages

Answer 12

-allow free expression of views and opinions about the issues of the say
-give MPs the chance to raise their opinions or concerns
-can force the government to change their mind
-e.g. debate on whether UK war planes should undertake air strikes on syria in 2015 - decided against invading syria even though the government initially wanted to
-they are televised, which allows the public to be informed, hence improving the accessibility and transparency of parliament

Question 13

method of scrutinisation: parliamentary debates - disadvantages

Answer 13

-most debates are pre-planned so MPs usually adopt the party line
-many use their speeches to impress their party leadership
-few minds and votes are changed by what is said during parliamentary debates
-said to be ‘punch and judy’ politics
-often poorly attended

Question 14

what are public bill committees?

Answer 14

-standing committees that scrutinise proposed bills in the committee stage of the legislative process
-they are temporary and only last the lifetime of the bill

Question 15

method of scrutinsation: public bill committees - advantages

Answer 15

-they allow backbenchers to scrutinise legislation in more detail
-they have joint chairs, one for government and one for opposition
-they can make effective changes to bills
-they allow pressure groups to put forward their views as outside evidence
-expert witnesses can be called e.g. in the 2019-2021 environmental bill committee, environmental activist george mombiot gave evidence

Question 16

method of scrutinsation: public bill committees - disadvantages

Answer 16

-the government ensures it has a majority of loyal MPs on each public bill committee, which means it’s unlikely to suggest major changes to a bill - only 0.5% if opposition amendments are accepted
-membership is decided in proportion to party strength in the commons
-membership is temporary, so there’s no built-up expertise

Question 17

what are select committees?

Answer 17

-they are small groups of MPs or members of the HoL that scrutinise government policy by shadowing the work of major government departments
-they are permanent and have a brief to provide wider oversight of government departments and actions, so DON’T scrutinise individual pieces of legislation
-they do this by carrying out inquiries, writing reports, carrying out Q+A sessions and asking to see gov. papers

Question 18

method of scrutinisation: select committees - advantages

Answer 18

-less partisan and confrontational than debates in the main chamber
-they are often chaired by MPs from the opposition e.g. Yvette cooper (labour) chairs the home affairs select committee
-they can call witnesses from both government and outside westminster to give evidence
-if inaccurate evidence is provided by a minister, they can be forced to resign e.g. amber rudd had accidentally misled the home affairs select committee over the windrush scandal in april 2018
-reports are often hard hitting and influential e.g. in may 2018 the health select committee recommended measures to tackle childhood obesity, which led to the government introducing these measures

Question 19

method of scrutinisation: select committees - disadvantages

Answer 19

-the governing party always has a majority on each committee
-government can ignore findings in select committee reports, as they only have to respond to and not enact recommendations e.g. in 2021 the gov. rejected most of the recommendations regarding universal credit made by the work and pensions select committee

Question 20

what are house of lords committees?

Answer 20

-they don’t shadow gov. departments, but instead specialise in policy areas, taking advantages of the breadth of expertise especially within the life peers e.g. alan sugar
-they are probably the least significant parliamentary committee because lords have less political power than commoms

Question 21

what are the permanent lords committees?

Answer 21

-science and technology
-communications
-constitution
-economic affairs
-international relations

Question 22

what’s the lords liason committee?

Answer 22

it coordinates the work of other committees and decides whether there should be any ad hoc committees, e.g. they established a covid-19 committee during the pandemic

Question 23

what’s the role of house of lords committees?
+example for one of the roles

Answer 23

-conduct enquiries
-take evidence from witnesses
-produce reports with recommendations - e.g. leveson enquiry (chaired by lord leveson) investigated the ethics and practices of the british press following the news international phone tapping scandal in 2011

Question 24

arguments FOR the house of lords committee system effectively scrutinising government:

Answer 24

-the ability to create ad hoc committees allows for the scrutiny of current affairs
-lords have expertise and experience on their topic
-lords liason committee ensures other committees work effectively
-government doesn’t necessarily have a majority on the committee, so scrutiny is more effective
-the composition of the committees reflects the proportion of parties in the house of lords

Question 25

arguments AGAINST the house of lords committee system effectively scrutinising government:

Answer 25

-not very democratic as lords aren’t elected
-they don’t shadow gov. departments, so they are less political
-gov. is more likely to listen to select committees than lords committees
-their recommendations don’t have to be followed by government