Week 2- Parliament

Question 1

What arguments are there in favour of reforming select committees?

Answer 1

• Utilising improved oral and technical measures of giving evidence by extending select committee usage when a bill starts in the House of Lords
• Select committees give a false sense of public involvement in bill drafting because they have no actual input on the legislative process, as well as committees often being made up of participants who don’t represent a wide enough range of views with relation to the bill. Ministers often get an easier ride in select committees because they often hand pick public participants.
• Calls for legislative standards committee to improve quality and scrutiny of legislation, especially improving the process of public evidence taking.

Question 2

What are the arguments in favour of the current select committees?

Answer 2

• 2004 introduced evidence taking allowing the public to contribute to the legislative process,
• House of Lords select committee believe the strength of select committees comes from their expertise and non-partisan involvement, especially in the House of Lords where members often have various areas of expertise which they can use to persuade members of the house, even if they play no physical role in the legislative process.
• There is a presumption among those who like select committees in their current form that MPs and Lords give adequate weight to evidence given at the committees, suggesting a legislative standard committee is unnecessary.

Question 3

What act fixes the date of the election and how long for?

Answer 3

Fixed term parliament act 2011

5 years

Question 4

What is the benefit of fixing the parliamentary term?

Answer 4

• Fixed term parliaments allow parties to plan for general elections, removing strategic action by the PM who could arbitrarily initiate an election whenever they pleased.
• Transfers power away from the executive to the commons

Question 5

What exceptions are there to parliament being in a fixed term?

Answer 5

A vote of no confidence will lead to an early general election if no government is founded within 14 days
-Only a simple majority is required in the vote, and if the opposition party call a vote of no confidence, convention says there will be time given to the debate.

Question 6

Do political parties make MPs more or less representative?

Answer 6

• An MP runs for its constituency under the name of their party. They often get voted in on the basis of their party rather than their own views or policies.
• Nicol argues that overtime MPs have become ‘advocates of specific policies’ therefore benefits from their parties name and status but not necessarily representing the party.
• However if the governments policies conflicts with an MP of the government, the MP must by convention support the policy, which might come at the cost of not representing their constituency.

Question 7

What arguments are there for the continuation of first past the post voting?

Answer 7

Proportional representation as the replacement for first past the post is much less likely to result in majority governments and therefore forming more coalitions, which can make decision making and voting less decisive.
-It would also break the link between MP and constituency

Question 8

What are the arguments against first past the post voting?

Answer 8

-Proportional representation may be viewed as more democratic, because the proportion of votes match up to the number of seats in parliament. This will reduce the amount of tactical voting in constituencies and benefit smaller parties who’s have a considerable number of votes but are thinly spread out across constituencies and therefore return no seats.

Question 9

What does Tomkins think about the way in which MPs vote?

Answer 9

Tomkins believes all MPs vote mindlessly with their parties rather than giving it independent consideration. He thinks that they vote in the direction of their party simply because they are party affiliated and by default must agree with all their ideas/

Question 10

What does Nicol think about the way in which MPs vote?

Answer 10

-Nicol believes that MPs are more independent and less willing to be told what to do, citing the increase in backbench cross voting between 1970 and 1984.

Question 11

What did the number of governmental defeats in both houses exceed between 1970 and 1984 and what does it tell us about how MPs vote and act?

Answer 11

• It exceeded 500
• It shows that over the 20th and 21st century the strength of party politics and collective power has been open to more opposition by individuals taking it upon themselves to express their own views or possible their constituencies view/

Question 12

What is Nicols view with regard to the “common good” and party voting?

Answer 12

• There is no single accepted perception of the common good or any fundamental rights, and parties approach these ideas with different views. They exist on a spectrum and so different parties attribute different meanings and levels of importance to differing rights, based on their own experiences.
• MPs are therefore likely to vote in accordance with their parties, not for the simple fact that they are a member of that party but because there involvement is likely to be justified because they share common views of the ‘common good’.

Question 13

What three things does Waldron and Nicol view as the merits of the legislature?

Answer 13

Its size, diversity and openness about disagreements.

Question 14

What is the problem with a more neutral parliament?

Answer 14

A more neutral parliament does not ensure democratic deliberation on legislating and therefore may not encompass as wide a range of views as our current party politics system does.
-Party politics are fundamental in allowing a wide range of views to be heard and considered, and a more neutral judicial-like parliament may be no better placed to make decisions on the common good just because of a lack of party affiliation.

Question 15

What role do government whips play? (HS2 v Secretary of State for transport)

Answer 15

Government whips are responsible for encouraging government ministers to attend important votes to ensure that the government get a majority. This includes detailing the programme to MPs at the next session to encourage their attendance.

Question 16

What might reduce the effective of government whips?

Answer 16

MPs may be forced to choose between voting along party lines (corresponding with the demand of their whips) and their constituencies opinions on a matter. Due to the convention of collective cabinet responsibility, cabinet members must vote in accordance with their whips, even if they disagree on the matter. Failure to do so may result in political sanction, including loss of office (they become an independent part member).

Question 17

What does Waldron say with regards to phrases such as ‘the people have spoken’ and ‘the will of the people’?

Answer 17

Such phrases which are normally associated with democratic society must be approached with scepticism, because our electoral system may only consist of individual votes on which a political outcome is given rather than cohesion between different persons’ wills.

Question 18

What does Waldron believe democratic societies should opt towards and go against?

Answer 18

Opt towards a sense of justice for the community ie ordinary people are involved in the running of the country

Go against- ‘experts’ or a small group of individuals trusted with making decisions on behalf of the electorate; this would suggest that the opinions of ordinary people are subordinate to that of the small group of experts.

Question 19

How does JS Mill criticise parliament?

Answer 19

MPs may give consideration to the ‘working man’ but does not go far enough to give consideration to the issue through the perspective of the working man, only what the MP believes the working man might hold to be true or important.

Question 20

Why might our parliament be effective in comparison to direct democracy (Waldron)

Answer 20

• Direct democracy involving 10s of millions of people is logistical impossible and too informal to be effective.
• Deliberation between all citizens in the hope of reaching an agreement also impossible
• Through the constituency model, discussions and debates on issues by ordinary people can be channelled by their MP into a more formal argument, which feeds into the more organised structure of parliamentary debate. A decision can then be drawn from a vote in which the majority of MPs have voted for.

Question 21

How does first past the post work?

Answer 21

In each constituency the MP with the most votes will get that constituencies seat in parliament. No matter how many votes the other MPs from different parties get, this bears no impact on the make-up of parliament
-A party may get the most seats in parliament but have proportionally fewer votes than they have seats

Question 22

What % of seats did labour get in 2005 with what % of the vote?

Answer 22

56% of the seats with only 35% of the vote.

Question 23

What is a bicameral system?

Answer 23

A bicameral system is one with two chambers of parliament, as opposed to one chamber in a unicameral parliament.

Question 24

What was Benthams view on bicameralism?

Answer 24

Bentham argues that any features of the second house which were through to be important for serious and responsible legislation should just be incorporated into the first house instead.
-He calls the second chamber redundant as he feels they effectively do the same job over a longer period of time (impeding efficiency)

Question 25

What are considered the benefits of Bicameralism by people like Waldron?

Answer 25

• The strengths of the House of Lords is distinct from that of the commons and therefore they do not do the same job as the commons
• Two chambers representing people in two different ways, elected in different ways and on different criteria, is surely better than one chamber ‘sampling the spirit of the country’ through only one plane.
• The two houses take different approached to legislation, with the House of Lords ensuring that the commons is subject to additional scrutiny of their proposed legislation

Question 26

What are the differences in approaches by each house to legislation?

Answer 26

The House of Commons takes a more generalist approach to legislation, ensuring that the practicalities of the bill if enacted would operate effectively and with purpose.
The Lords takes a more technical approach by scrutinising the bill line by line, focusing more finely on the detail of the contents of the bill

Question 27

What does JS Mill say about the importance of a bicameral parliament?

Answer 27

“The consideration which tells most … in favour of two Chambers … is the evil effect produced upon the mind of any holder of power, whether an individual or an assembly, by the consciousness of having only themselves to consult”

• What this means is that neither an elected or unelected chamber should have the freedom to proceed as a legislature without conflict or approval from another.
• The increased time for which it takes for bills to be passed is a small price to pay for making sure that no one group in parliament goes unopposed, as this can make them blind to flaws in their goals and reasoning otherwise.

Question 28

Why is it important that a second chamber is independent of the government?

Answer 28

• So that the second chamber is not merely an extension of people operating under the same mandate of the government
• Their impartiality ensures that external factors of politics do not impede on their ability to carry out genuine legislative debate.

Question 29

How does the House of Lords hold the executive to account?

Answer 29

• Question time of ministers

- Debating of key issues

Question 30

What two ways does the procedure of the commons and lords differ with regards to debating legislation?

Answer 30

• A time limit is placed on the work of the commons whereas the Lords have a reasonably unlimited amount of time to scrutinise bills compared to the commons.
• The Lords can also make amendments at third reading of the bill unlike the commons

Question 31

What does Russell regard as the merits of a recently reformed second chamber?

Answer 31

• The House of Lords has reformed massively away from an elitist, hereditary chamber and towards being more representative of the people in terms of race, gender, religion etc.
• The social support that the House of Lords has, with most accepting the composition of the Lords, means that it can operate alongside the elected house of commons as a complementary subordinate

Question 32

Whats the difference between life peers and hereditary peers?

Answer 32

Life peers are those appointed by the House of Lords appointment commission whereas Hereditary peers are grounded in the landed gentry and passed down overtime.

Question 33

What did the House of Lords act 1999 do?

Answer 33

-Hereditary peers no longer entitled to membership- 92 hereditary peers remained

Question 34

What was the problem with the hereditary dominated House of Lords prior to 1999 and what benefits did the act give?

Answer 34

-As the two chambers became more similar on a social level, after 1999, the Lords have been more successful in challenging the governments, as well as reducing the partisan nature of the chamber that was previously dominated by the conservatives. The problem prior to 1999 was that the conservatives mainly had the support of the hereditary peers who dominated the chamber, whilst labour governments struggled against this conservative majority in the lords. The reform meant that the two main parties were more similarly balanced in the lords

Question 35

What are the main arguments against a non-elected House of Lords

Answer 35

-The main argument that opposes the house of lords is that they are not accountable to the public and can choose to remain in seats for a lifetime; they are able to vote on legislation but are not subject to political repercussions.

Question 36

What happens at first and second readings in the

houses?

Answer 36

First reading- long reading of the bills title

Second reading- first debate between MPs or Lords. Voted on to see if it can move to the next stage

Question 37

What happens at committee stage?

Answer 37

Detailed examination of the bill takes place by a select committee of MPs, experts, and some public evidence taking too.

Question 38

What happens at report stage and third reading in the two houses?

Answer 38

Report stage= Returns bill to parliament and allows MPs or Lords to consider amendments brought up at committee stage

Third reading= The Commons are unable to make amendments at third reading whereas the Lords can, but both houses debate the final content on the bill

Question 39

What is ‘ping pong’ and royal assent?

Answer 39

Ping Pong- the bill shifts back and forth between the two houses until they reach an agreement

Royal assent is the formal monarch agreement to make the proposed bill an act of parliament.

Question 40

what does Miller v SS for exiting EU say about referenda?

Answer 40

As the legislation of the referendum has not stipulated legal change given the outcome, the law can only be changed in the normal way, through the normal parliamentary process and an act of parliament.
-Therefore this referendum was political only, and until a withdrawal bill went through parliament, notice could not be given as a result of the referendum through prerogative powers.

Question 41

What does Trueblood argue are the dangers of the current referendum process?

Answer 41

They are too political and provide too much power to the government of the day, to exercise discretion and arbitrariness in the use of referenda, rather than conforming to a legislative standard

Question 42

What does Dicey refer to referenda as and what does it say about proposed modern day reforms?

Answer 42

‘Peoples veto’
Post-legislative referenda can be more effective than just pre-legislative referenda because it gives a retrospective limit on governmental power and allows voters to see the practical implications of constitutional change, allowing a more informed decision

Question 43

What 3 things does true blood recommend referendum legislation should clarify?

Answer 43

1) Legal implications of the voting stage (outcome)
2) The process and role they play in constitutional change
3) Questions suitable for a referendum.

Question 44

What is the recall of MPS act 2015 and in what situations can it be used?

Answer 44

It allows the standards committee in the commons to initiate a petition for MPs to be removed from parliament by their constituency, if 10% of their constituency vote for it.

• Recall can only be used if the MP is guilty of the serious wrongdoings of
  1) misleading parliament about expenses (as in 2009)
  2) Custodial sentence of less than a year
  3) House suspension for 10 days or more.

Question 45

What does Wright argue to be the issue with MPs accountability to the electorate?

Answer 45

The electorate only have general elections to truly hold MPs accountable through the democratic process. However, the electorate obviously give more weight to the name of the party and their respective policies rather than the conduct of their chosen MP.
-Its likely that the majority of constituents do not vote for their elected MP and yet they cannot hold their MP accountable for their decisions or policies, only through the democratic process can they hope to do so, but first past the post often prohibits this, especially in ‘safe seat’ areas.

Question 46

In what two different ways are MPs accountable and how do they differ?

Answer 46

1) the electorate through the democratic process. Recall now provides further accountability to the electorate but only in very remote circumstances. There is plenty of conduct which the MPs can operate under without a recall being called by the standards committee, namely the MP who took part in a Nazi-themed party.
2) MPs can also be more fatally accountable to their party, who can much more easily hold the MP accountable for their conduct through suspension or removal from the party. Unlike the democratic process under the fixed term parliament act 2011, there is no time limit faced by the MP for when they actually become accountable, their actions throughout service to the party remains open to retaliation

Question 47

What does Norton regard as the 3 functions of parliament instead of the presumed role as ‘law maker’?

Answer 47

1) Assenting to public policy
2) Debate of issues of public policy
3) Providing a voice for those directly affected by its decisions (the electorate)

Question 48

What are departmental select committees and why can they be beneficial?

Answer 48

Select committees comprised of experts related to different departments of government, allowing them to better scrutinise the work of each department because they have a better understanding of the intricacies and implications of bills

Question 49

What constitutional changes does Norton think has limited the ability of parliament to effectively legislate on behalf of the people?

Answer 49

• HRA 1998 as it transferred political matters of human rights to matters for the courts
• EU membership which provided overriding authority to EU law, effectively binding parliament until its repeal under the 2017 withdrawal bill.
• The use of referendums (although it only initiates legal change if the provisions of the referendum bill dictate this)

Question 50

what changes have been made to allow parliament to better scrutinise the executive (Norton)

Answer 50

• Select committee reforms included a joint committee on human rights in 2001
• The election of chairs of these select committees (therefore those elected by the house were respected candidates with the backing of the house).
• Also, membership of committees required backbench MP support to elect them as members. Therefore, governmental whips had their powers transferred towards MPs as a whole, rather than executive domination.

Question 51

What changes to the debating process have been made (Norton)

Answer 51

• 2010 house agreed to creation of backbench business committee. This committee removed the power to set debate topics from the executive and have it to the house as a whole. Notable benefits to have come from this committee include the release of Hillsborough disaster papers and freezing fuel duty.
• . The petitions committee from 2015 began to deal with these petitions and could either pursue the debate themselves or refer it to the relevant investigative select committee. This can help to improve the publics role in initiating the legislative process for public policy areas which have been missed by parliament.

Question 52

What changes to parliaments legislative scrutiny of the executive have been made (Norton)

Answer 52

-Parliaments role to play in the withdrawal from the EU in comparison the executive helped to dispel ideas that parliament was subject to the will of the executive rather than exercising its own separate legislative functions. The fact that legislation was used rather than prerogative powers, due to the fact that withdrawal would nullify citizen’s rights, showed that the executive were not dictating our withdrawal in the way which they wanted to.

Question 53

What was significant in Miller about the relationship between the government and the executive?

Answer 53

• The decision showed that such a great constitutional change was not possible without going through the parliamentary process, rather than under prerogative powers
• It has wider implications of parliament strengthening its role in legislative scrutiny and involvement, rather than the executive alone exercising its own legislative ability and parliament being subject to its will.

Question 54

How can Lords members be removed and why is it different to the commons?

Answer 54

• The House of Lords Reform Act 2014 made provision for members’ resignation from the House, removal for non-attendance, and automatic expulsion upon conviction for a serious criminal offence (if resulting in a jail sentence of at least one year). In June 2015, under the House of Lords (Expulsion and Suspension) Act 2015, the House’s Standing Orders may provide for the expulsion or suspension of a member upon a resolution of the House.
• The Lords therefore aren’t subject to the will of the electorate and are not accountable in the same way as MPs

Question 55

what authors do I need to remember for this topic?

Answer 55

Trueblood- favours more guidelines for referendum use
Norton- 3 functions of parliament
Bentham and Waldron- disagree over bicameral system
JS Mill- classic text on criticism of parliament.
Nicol- House of mavericks, party politics and disputing Tomkins

Question 56

What were the two possible outcomes for the 2011 alternative vote referendum, and how did it differ from the 2016 Brexit referendum?

Answer 56

• A majority yes vote would instigate legal change and ensure that a bill was passed initiating the change, whereas a majority no would bring about an order repealing the act.
• In comparison, the Brexit referendum legislation made no provision for the legal outcome, with some ministers arguing the outcome was advisory whereas some argued it was conclusive and had to be honoured.

Question 57

What is the difference between pre-legislative and post-legislative referenda?

Answer 57

Pre-legislative referenda are currently used, to provide a vote on the bill before the electorate can experience its practical implications
-Post-legislative referenda provide more clarity for voters as to what they are voting for (but are not always possible)

Question 58

What areas did the House of Lords constitutional committee suggest could be the subject for referenda? (not exhaustive list)

Answer 58

• to abolish the monarchy;
• to leave the EU; *P.L. 53
• for any of the nations of the UK to secede from the Union;
• to abolish either House of Parliament;
• to change the electoral system for the House of Commons;
• to adopt a written constitution; and
• to change the UK’s system of currency.

Question 59

What downsides does Trueblood recognise with her recommendations of legislative framework for referenda?

Answer 59

-That legislation provides a more rigid framework than the current relevant legislation, and if it is not fit for purpose, it becomes more difficult to amend, in comparison to the open ended provisions currently governing the use of referenda.