To what extent is the House of Commons outdated and in need of reform?

Question 1

LoA

Answer 1

in need of reform

Question 2

para 1 theme

Answer 2

executive domination

Question 3

para 2 theme

Answer 3

accountability

Question 4

para 3 theme

Answer 4

legislation and MPs

Question 5

para 1 - executive domination

Answer 5

• The executive dominates. Government majorities render the House of Commons useless. Boris Johnson has a majority of 80 and so the only way he will lose a vote is if his own party vote against him, which given the strong whip system in place is unlikely to happen.
  Possible reforms to resolve this could be a change in the electoral system, which might improve the House of Common’s operation. Using a system of PR would lead to more even representation and not continue the domination of the Conservatives and Labour by FPTP. For example, in 2019 the conservatives got 43% of the vote but 56% of the seats and in 2010 they got 36.8% of the vote and 50.8% of the seats

Question 6

para 1 - however

Answer 6

The use of FPTP ensures strong governments and effective legislation, this is one of the key benefits of the Commons. Tony Blair secured majorities of, 1997 - 179, 2001 - 167, 2005 - 66, meaning he was able to pass large amounts of legislation. This would not be achievable with a systme of PR

Question 7

para 1 - rebuttal

Answer 7

The fact is that the commons is unrepresentative and ensures the duopoly of the major parties, and so reform is necessary. Blair won 355 seats in 2005, but on 35.2% of the vote, the smallest of any majority gov in history. Furthemrore, with his majority, Blair introduced some large amounts of questionable legislation like the Control Orders in 2005.

Question 8

para 2 - accountability

Answer 8

• PMQs is political theatre rather than proper scrutiny. The Speaker often has to intervene to address the behaviour of MPs. For example, Dennis Skinner had to be removed from the Commons for calling David Cameron dodgy Dave.
  Too many questions are from ‘friendly’ gov backbenchers
• PMQs has become an exercise in point scoring. It is ‘punch and judy’ politics, with jeering and shouting in a highly childish manner
• Sir Kaufman labelled PMQs as “an exchange of pointless and useless declamations” (2015)
  It has been suggested that a reform to PMQs is desired and there needs to be an increase in the regularity of the Liaison Committee

Question 9

para 2 - however

Answer 9

• Parliament requires that ministers, including the PM, answer questions by backbenchers in the commons
  
  • PMQs forces the PM to be well informed about policy and the wider new agenda e.g. Boris has had to be well informed about COVID
  • The opportunity to regularly question the PM is significant and quite unique. While not always entirely civilised, PMQs is still important opportunity for the Commons to challenge the PM. In 2017, Corbyn used PMQs to effectively overturn the premier-rate number used to call universal credit.
    The speaker can raise ‘urgent questions’, which allows the Commons to demand the attendance of the relevant minister so they can answer questions and face criticism

Question 10

para 2 - rebuttal

Answer 10

With the increasing usage of television and the live coverage of PMQs, It has simply become about the PM putting on a performance, as seen by the usage of PMQs by individuals like Cameron and Johnson.

Question 11

para 3 - legislation and MPs

Answer 11

• MPs have little control over legislation. Despite the creation of the BBB committee, this remains a problem.
  
  • Most private member bills fail because of insufficient parliamentary time being made available for them. There were only 7 private members bills passed through between 2019-21.
  • The government’s increasing use of secondary (delegated) legislation to change laws has negatively impacted on MPs’ legislative function.
  • Although MPs can initiate debates and vote in favour of e-petitions, this does not mean that the government has got to act on or support these proposals. For example, Sarah Champion gained support for her suggestion to change the law around first time paedophile offenders, but nothing ever came of her recommendations
    In times of large parliamentary majority, which is often the case given the FPTP system of voting, backbenchers are incredibly limited in what they are able to do.

Question 12

para 3 - however

Answer 12

• Backbenchers can introduce private members bills. Some of the such as Dan Byles’ House of Lords reform act 2014, can be very significant.
  
  • MPs can make amendments to legislation on Public Bills Committees
  • If the government is not confident it has the support of enough backbenchers it can drop legislation, In 2005, having lost a Commons vote when 49 Labour MPs disobeyed a three line whip, the Blair government abandoned proposals to allow terrorist suspects to be held for 90 days without charge.
    By March 2019, backbenchers had defeated Theresa May’s Brexit deal three times. MPs also voted to reject a no-deal Brexit, as well as temporarily taking control of the Brexit agenda to see if they could agree on a way forward

Question 13

para 3 - rebuttal

Answer 13

The fact is that backbench legislation is only significant on very rare occasions, and more often than not, they will fail to pass legislation