UK Paper 2: Prime Minister and Executive

Question 1

what is the executive?

Answer 1

the branch of the government that is responsible for the implementation of laws and policies made by parliament.

Question 2

what is patronage?

Answer 2

the power to appoint and dismiss members of the government and other significant appointments. the PM has this power

Question 3

what are cabinet committees?

Answer 3

groups of ministers that can take decisions that are binding and are designed to reduce the burden on the full cabinet by allowing smaller groups of ministers to take decisions on specific policy areas.

Question 4

what is secondary legislation?

Answer 4

powers given to the executive by parliament to make changes to the law within certain specific rules.

Question 5

what is the cabinet?

Answer 5

the group of leading ministers which is empowered to make official government policy

Question 6

what is the inner cabinet?

Answer 6

a loose and informal group of policy advisers consulted bu the PM outside the formal cabinet, including senior ministers, officials and special advisers (SPADs)

Question 7

what is a minister?

Answer 7

an MP or member of the HoL appointed to a position in the government, usually exercising specific responsibilities in a department

Question 8

what is a government department?

Answer 8

a part of the executive, usually with specific responsibility over an area such as education, health or defence.

Question 9

what are “big beasts”?

Answer 9

highly significant members of the cabinet including pm and often including home/foreign sec, chancellor, and any other MPs with large following/media presence

Question 10

positives of parliament fulfilling legislative function, in terms of local representation?

Answer 10

each constituency has a clear representative, who constituents can approach to talk about local concerns - they are largely easily contactable. constituencies are becoming more even as a result of boundary reform

Question 11

negatives of parliament fulfilling legislative function, in terms of local representation?

Answer 11

very hard for an MP to represent all their constituents with such a broad political spectrum - eg in lewes most people voted against brexit, however the MP voted fo leave. FPTP means that the local MP doesn’t need a majority to win the seat, meaning that in swing seats many constituents may not feel represented. belfast south in 2015 saw an MP be elected that had 25% support from constituents.

Question 12

positives of parliament fulfilling legislative function, in terms of representation in the HoC?

Answer 12

constituents can have their views represented by MPs in the HoC - eg Caroline Lucas repeatedly stood up to the secratary of state for transport in the commons to voice complaints by constituents, about the performance of southern rail.
MPs may also ignore the whip in order to properly represent constituents. 10 FB labour MPs ignored kier starmer’s wishes and voted in favour of a ceasefire in gaza in nov 2023, including jess phillips

Question 13

negatives of parliament fulfilling legislative function, in terms of representation in the HoC?

Answer 13

MPs may ignore wishes of constituents in order to toe the party line - eg more members of the public are now in favour of gaza ceasefire compared to those opposed, yet many MPs are still reluctant to openly support this

Question 14

positives of parliament fulfilling legislative function, in terms of descriptive representation?

Answer 14

parliament is now more representative than ever before; after 2019 election there are now 59 openly gay MPs - record number of women/minority MPs, eg in 2010 there were only 142 women MPs, number much higher now

Question 15

negatives of parliament fulfilling legislative function, in terms of descriptive representation?

Answer 15

still objectively is not representative of UK population demographics - as of feburary 2024 there were 226 women MPs out of 650 total - 34% compared to women being 51% of UK population. following 2019 election, 10% of MPs came from non-white minority, compared to 18% of population

Question 16

positives of parliament fulfilling scrutiny function, in terms of debate in the commons?

Answer 16

debates allow parliament to challenge the government and potentially change their views - may’s brexit bill was defeated by 230 votes forcing her to withdraw the bill. this happened during the occupation of a minority government, when scrutiny is often much higher. select committees have the specific role of scrutinising government policy, spending and admin. they make evidence based suggestions on how the government can improve. since the wright reforms, SC leaders are elected by secret ballot, meaning MPs voting are not bound by party whips. this increases the legitimacy and effectviveness of SCs. 40% of SC recommendations are accepted. in dec 2023 sunak faced an in depth examination of the consrevatives’ gaza policy

Question 17

negatives of parliament fulfilling scrutiny function, in terms of debate in the commons?

Answer 17

debates and divisions often amount to nothing, especially in cases where a majority government is in power (which is most of the time), as they can simply ensure their MPs vote with the party line using whips, thereby winning every vote. eg blair’s government did not lose a vote in the HoC between 1997 and 2006. more recent eg is with the rwanda bill, despite fierce opposition and some rebellion from conservative backbenchers.
select committees are only advisory - of the 40% of recommendations taken onboard, most do not meaningfully alter govt policy. 60% of recommendations are rejected outright.

Question 18

positives of parliament fulfilling scrutiny function, in terms of function of the lords?

Answer 18

lords acts as a second body to scrutinise the work of the commons. can delay most legislation for a year, if considered appropriate. most lords are appointed based on life experience and expertise, adding legitimacy to their scrutiny. lords has become a more legitimate scrutinising body since the HoL reform act, where many remaining hereditary peers were removed.
lords voted 214-171 to delay PM’s flagship UK-Rwanda immigration treaty over safety concerns.

Question 19

negatives of parliament fulfilling scrutiny function, in terms of function of the lords?

Answer 19

lords are unelected - arguably problematic considering they are scrutinising elected representatives on legislation. as a result it is not necessarily in their interests to serve the public in the same way the commons are incentivised to (i.e. if they don’t they will likely be voted out). hereditary peers remain in the lords, point about experience legitimising doesn’t stand up if there are members who are only present due to having important family members.
lords can be overriden by the commons using the 1949 parliament act. they are obviously a second chamber, and subversive to the commons.

Question 20

positives of parliament fulfilling scrutiny function, in terms of PMQs and MQs?

Answer 20

allow effective scrutiny by forcing the PM or ministers to answer questions in a highly public setting.
Sunak has repeatedly been questioned about the govt response to cost of living crisis/immigration crisis.

Question 21

negatives of parliament fulfilling scrutiny function, in terms of PMQs and MQs?

Answer 21

PMQs are often theatrical and more about points scoring than actual scrutiny.
Keir starmer called Sunak inaction man, Sunak criticised for making a jibe about trans people (“99% of a U-turn”)
purpose of PMQs and MQs is arguably for the government and opposition to further their own interests rather than practically and meaningfully scrutinise the government.

Question 22

arguments for HoL reform, in terms of hereditary peers?

Answer 22

hereditary peers still exist and any appointed chamber lacks legitmacy as the appointment process is flawed.
peerages can be offered as part of patronage - clear statistical link between large donors and nomination to the Lords is evidence that rich donors are being rewarded by becoming peers - i.e. repeated cash for honours scandals, thus distorting the membership of the lords.
eg in 2021, peter crudas was made a lord and within 3 days he gave the conservative party £500,000. he has given £3m since 2010. johnson faces a legal challenge over this appointment.

Question 23

arguments against HoL reform, in terms of hereditary peers?

Answer 23

legitimacy was increased with changes to hereditary peers.
removal of HPs in 1999 and replacement with life peers led to increased legitimacy.
the independent HoL appointments commission, established in 2000, vets all nominations to the lords and has helped to introduce more experts to the chamber. this produces a more expert membership than the commons, helping the lords to fulfil its roles.

Question 24

arguments for HoL reform, in terms of weakness of the chamber?

Answer 24

the chamber is too weak. the current system lacks the legitimacy of the system of electing MPs and produces a legislature which lacks the authority or power to do its job as a revising chamber that scrutinises legislation, and challenges actions of the government.
eg: peers voted overwhelmingly to remove a section of the Internal Markets Bill that would allow ministers to break international law - by 433 votes to 165. the govt was not happy and simply threatened to reintroduce the bill in the commons. the section that was rejected went on to be passed and included in legislation, suggesting the Lord is ineffective at its fundamental roles.

Question 25

arguments against HoL reform, in terms of weakness of the chamber?

Answer 25

it does not need reforming - while it has less power than the commons, its powers are limited appropriately, and used well.
could be argued that due to its unelected nature, its role as a revising chamber works. the govt is regularly defeated in the lords, eg with the rwanda bill - showing that the lords can do its job effectively. since 2019 there have been 114 defeats in the lords where the cons don’t have an overall majority. this lack of a majority allows for more effective scrutiny than in the commons. with the previous internal markets bill example, the initial rejection from the lords forced the government to rethink some details of the bill, so a revised version was eventually agreed upon.
arguably the ability to delay legislation for a year, as was done with the hunting act, is appropriate for the type of chamber the HoL is.

Question 26

arguments for HoL reform, in terms of representation?

Answer 26

average age of the lords is 70, just over a quarter are women and 6% are ethnic minorities, compared to 10% in the commons and 18% of the UK population. educational and class background of the lords is very skewed.
in 2018, the electoral reform society found taht 54% of the 564 peers whose residence is known live in Greater London, the South East or the East of england.

Question 27

arguments against HoL reform, in terms of representation