Central Government and Accountability Flashcards
(12 cards)
What is meant by individual ministerial responsibility?
A. A minister is accountable for both their personal conduct and their department’s actions
B. A minister must support all government decisions made by Cabinet
C. A minister cannot be questioned about departmental errors
D. A minister shares responsibility with Parliament
A. A minister is accountable for both their personal conduct and their department’s actions
Explanation: This constitutional convention means ministers must answer for everything their department does, even if they weren’t directly involved.
What is the role of select committees in the UK Parliament?
A. To provide independent scrutiny of ministerial decisions and policy implementation
B. To rule on the legality of executive actions
C. To conduct judicial inquiries into public conduct
D. To replace ministers found to have breached collective responsibility
A. To provide independent scrutiny of ministerial decisions and policy implementation
Explanation: Select committees hold ministers accountable through fact-finding, reports, and questioning, but do not enforce legal compliance.
A minister remains in post despite a scandal in their department. What principle is being challenged?
A. Rule of law
B. Collective ministerial responsibility
C. Parliamentary sovereignty
D. Individual ministerial responsibility
D. Individual ministerial responsibility
Explanation: The convention requires resignation for serious errors. Failure to do so may reflect a breakdown in political accountability.
What is the main legal mechanism used by courts to scrutinise executive action?
A. Judicial review
B. Select committee inquiry
C. Freedom of Information requests
D. Votes of no confidence
A. Judicial review
Explanation: Judicial review checks whether ministers or departments have acted lawfully under their statutory or prerogative powers.
A Cabinet minister publicly opposes government policy. What principle are they breaching?
A. Individual responsibility
B. Ministerial discretion
C. Judicial independence
D. Collective ministerial responsibility
D. Collective ministerial responsibility
Explanation: Ministers must publicly support Cabinet decisions or resign if they disagree — this protects unified government.
Which of the following would best demonstrate legal accountability in practice?
A. A minister being questioned by a select committee
B. A court quashing a government decision through judicial review
C. A backbench MP raising concerns in debate
D. A civil servant advising against a policy decision
B. A court quashing a government decision through judicial review
Explanation: Judicial review is a legal check, ensuring executive actions are within the law and procedurally fair.
A minister refuses to answer a select committee’s questions. What is the most likely consequence?
A. Legal punishment
B. Political criticism and reputational damage
C. Dismissal by the judiciary
D. Disqualification from Parliament
B. Political criticism and reputational damage
Explanation: There’s no legal requirement to answer, but refusal often results in media scrutiny and political fallout.
Which of the following is NOT a legally enforceable way to hold the Executive accountable?
A. Judicial review
B. Human Rights Act claims
C. Ministerial questions in the Commons
D. Declarations of incompatibility under the HRA
C. Ministerial questions in the Commons
Explanation: Parliamentary questions are politically important, but not legally binding or enforceable.
What best describes the constitutional role of civil servants?
A. To act impartially and ensure legal compliance in implementing government policy
B. To vote on government policy in the House of Lords
C. To select ministers for Cabinet
D. To supervise judicial appointments
A. To act impartially and ensure legal compliance in implementing government policy
Explanation: Civil servants must follow the law, support ministers neutrally, and provide objective advice.
Which principle is most directly upheld when courts intervene to stop unlawful government action?
A. Parliamentary privilege
B. Rule of law
C. Sovereignty of the executive
D. Collective responsibility
B. Rule of law
Explanation: Courts enforcing legal limits on government powers is a core demonstration of the rule of law in action.
Why might political accountability be weakened despite strong legal rules?
A. Parliament cannot question ministers
B. The executive is unelected
C. A government with a large majority may dominate scrutiny processes
D. Courts no longer hear public law claims
C. A government with a large majority may dominate scrutiny processes
Explanation: A dominant party can limit effective opposition, reducing the real-world effectiveness of political accountability.
A court declines to hear a case involving government foreign policy. What principle is guiding that decision?
A. Prerogative immunity
B. Constitutional sovereignty
C. Non-justiciability of political questions
D. Collective responsibility
C. Non-justiciability of political questions
Explanation: Courts may refuse to adjudicate issues that are purely political, such as foreign relations, unless clear legal breaches exist.
