Essay Plans - Long Version

Question 1

Evaluate the view that the UK constitution should be codified and entrenched. [30 marks]

Introduction

Answer 1

• In the late 20th century there have been an array of constitutional reforms, (Ex: Entering the European Economic Committee in 1973 to the passage of the Human Rights Act in 1998)
• These reforms have unquestionably represented a step towards having a codified constitution
• Most key parts of the constitution are now written down and semi-entrenched
• The fundamental principle of Parliamentary sovereignty, first identified as one of the twin pillars by AV Dicey, is slowly being relaced with a constitution based upon the seperation of powers
• Define: Constitution - A document containing laws, rules and ideologies used to govern a nation
• Define: The UK have an uncodified and unentrenched constitution, meaning it can be changed by a simple act of Parliament
• Discuss:
• Many argue that the UK’s uncodified constitution is too easy to ammend - Some say a codified constitution is necessary to preventing the constitution being exploited for short-term political reasons - Some say codification would better protect people’s rights - Some say codification could also increase the power of judges - The Conservatives on the other hand, have argued that it allows power to be concentrated in elected representatives and that flexibility can have benefits

Question 2

Evaluate the view that the UK constitution should be codified and entrenched. [30 marks]

P1 - Flexibility

PEACEAE

Answer 2

Arguments for
* Uncodified and unentrenched means the British political system has been able to gradualy evolve and adapt to unusual and unforseen circumstances + Introduce reforms
* Labour introduced The House of Lords act 1999, which removed all but 92 Hereditary Peers - Introduced the Human Rights Act in 1998 - And they set up the Supreme Court through the 2005 Constitutional Reform Act
* These reforms delivered on Labour’s aims to reform the constitution in order to democratise, decentralise, modernise and protect human rights.
* Would’ve taken far longer in US for instance, (Codified Constitution) - Talk about backlash of 2nd Amendment letting thousands die in school shootings

Arguments against
* UK constitution is flexible, it leaves it open to exploitation for short-term political gains
* The Fixed Term Parliament Act, 2011 - Arguably passed for short-term gains in relation to the coalition, but could have had detrimental implications as it could have stop any government without a majority triggering an election
* Entrenchment, would protect the UK constitution from this short-term exploitation, as it would make it more likely for potential reforms to be debated before being enacted
Judgement
A codified constitution would ensure that reforms are more thought out and make the constitution more difficult to change - Not a good enough justification. Flexibility helps modernise political system.

Question 3

Evaluate the view that the UK constitution should be codified and entrenched. [30 marks]

P2 - Improvement of human rights

PEACAE

Answer 3

• P: If the Constitution was codified it would likely include the entrenchment of the Human Rights Act, creating a ‘British Bill of Rights’ - Would lead to a better protection of human rights, as they can currently by changed and potentially undermined by a simple majority in Parliament, which can put rights of minorities at risk
• E: 2001 - Rights of suspected terrorists and people of certain minority cultures were severely reduced by Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act as it allowed them to be detained without charge
• A: This act that was passed by Parliament, hindered the human rights of innocent minority citizens
• C: However, this was eventualy removed from the statute book, potentially showing the benefits of the Human Rights Act, as it strikes a good compromise between upholding Parliamentary sovereignty and protecting human rights - Flexible meaning changes can be made to uphold human rights - Could also be argued that Human Rights Act is partially entrenched and stands as a higher law as it cannot be impliedly repealed as it is a constitutional statute
• A: Every government bill is also scrutinised by the Joint Committee on Human Rights before it reaches the statute book and therefore ministers make sure they comply with the Human Rights Act
• E: Human Rights Act doesn’t provide complete protection, only because Parliament in theory could pass legislation that could hinder basic rights - Therefore, codifying the constitution would improve the protection of individual rights, however, the Human Rights Act does arguably provide sufficient protection

Question 4

Evaluate the view that the UK constitution should be codified and entrenched. [30 marks]

P3 - Seperation of powers

PCEAE

Answer 4

• P: Codification could help establish seperation of powers - Since the removal of the House of Lords’ veto over all legislation, apart from setting out how regularly general elections occur, there are arguably inssuficient checks and balances on the power of the government and Parliament - A codified constitution could also clarify the role of devolved bodies and different branches, by bringing reforms such as an elected House of Lords
• C: However, it can be argued that the executive is already held accountable, not by law but by public opinion
• E: There are also many conventions with rely on consent of people and hold different branches to account, such as the Sailsbury Convention, which when it was breached in 1945, resulted in the 1949 Parliament Act, further limiting the power of the upper house
• A: Although these conventions may not be entrenched, they are viewed in high regard, as evidenced by the backlash that occurs when they are broken
• E: Overall, governments are held to account well in the current political system, however, the threat of a government with a significant majority, overpowering the courts, Commons or Lords, to push through controversial legislation still remains

Question 5

Evaluate the view that the UK constitution should be codified and entrenched. [30 marks]

Conclusion

Answer 5

• The view that the UK constitution would function better if it were codified and entrenched cannot be justified
• The current constitution is flexible, meaning it can adapt, it allows power to be concentrated with elected representatives, rather than unelected judges and the process of codification would dominate politics for years, due to how polarised the UK political system currently is, which would distract away from other more pressing issues and policies
• Yes, human rights may be better protected if the constitution had an entrenched, ‘British Bill of Rights,’ however, the Human Rights Act still does a good job at protecting these rights and it cannot be impliedly repealed
• In conclusion, the UK constitution would benefit in some ways from codification, but not in enough ways to make the process of codification justifiable

Question 6

Evaluate the view that the constitutional reforms introduced by New Labour should be taken further. [30 marks]

Introduction

Answer 6

• After 18 years of being the opposition, Labour were elected in 1997
• New Labour were elected during a time where there was pressure for constitutional reform
• This was due to the fact that there was pressure for modernisation and also the fact that Conservatives had ruled from 1978-1997 and they were extremely against constitutional reform, which built up pressure in the UK, especially in Scotland, as the population felt ignored by a distant London government
• Define: New Labours reforms included, the House of Lords Reform, the Electoral Reform, Devolution, the Human Rights Act and the Creation of the Supreme Court
• Discuss: In this essay I will be exploring, the House of Lords reform, Devolution and the Human Rights Act

Question 7

Evaluate the view that the constitutional reforms introduced by New Labour should be taken further. [30 marks]

P1 - House of Lords Reform

REFORM + PEACEE FINAL E STANDS FOR EVALUATE

Answer 7

REFORM: 1999 House of Lords Act
* P: New Labours House of Lords reform was supposed to be two stages; however, stage one was never fully completed, as 92 hereditary peers still remained - It can be argued that further reform should take place; an elected House of Lords
* E: The idea of an elected House of Lords is a view that Keir Starmer supports - In December of 2022, he even announced plans to abolish the house and replace it with a democratically elected second chamber; further plans outlined in their next manifesto
* A: It can be argued that an elected second chamber would result in more effective scrutiny - This is because the unelected nature of the Lords limits its ability to scrutinise - Also members of the Lords occasionally fail to play an active role, as according to the Byline Times; 13% of peers rarely or ever attend the House of Lords - If a new chamber was elected through proportional representation, then it likely wouldn’t have a majority and would be able to therefore more effectively challenge the current dominance of the House of Commons
* C: Current appointed nature of the House of Lords can be seen as an advantage, as life peers have a lot of expertise in different areas and can therefore provide effective scrutiny
* E: Baroness Brown of Cambridge Julia Elizabeth King is an engineer and a crossbencher, who is the current chair of the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology
* E: House of Lords doesn’t require further reform - House of Lords, although undemocratic, is professional and effective at scrutinising government legislation and it provides an effective power balance with Commons. This balance would be distrupted if Lords was elected

Question 8

Evaluate the view that the constitutional reforms introduced by New Labour should be taken further. [30 marks]

P2 - Devolution

PA + ALTERNATIVE + CEAEE - FINAL E MEANING EVALUATION

Answer 8

• P: Devolution could be taken further by introducing further Devolution into England, as the key problem with the current system is that devolution is asymmetric, with England lacking the level of democratic representation as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland + An English Parliament could be a way to continue these reforms as it would the system of devolution would be symmetrical
• A: This would allow for policy preferences of the English people to be represented, as it has been shown in Scotland; Ex: The Scottish population are more left wing than the rest of the UK, which has been reflected in Scottish policies such as free tuition fees and higher income tax

ALTERNATIVE: If an English Parliament wasn’t introduced, devolution could be further reformed by using more regional assemblies to cover the whole of England. This would be a positive reform, as it would give regions like Cornwell and Yorkshire, who have a strong sense of regional identity, the power to handle their own regional issues

• C: There is little demand for an English Parliament and it would potentially create more problems than it would solve
• E: Little Demand: In a 2012 referendum on whether Birmingham should have an elected mayor recieved support from only 27.67% of voters - Only 58% turnout
• A: More regional assemblies could create tensions with local councils, as these assemblies would cover larger populations + There would be a risk of urban interests drowning out rural interests + It can also be argued that devlovled bodies have failed to be effective
• E: Northern Irish Parliament is frequently suspended due to tensions and lack of compromise between Sin Fein and the DUP
• E: Devolution reforms shouldn’t be taken further + Neither English Parliament or more regional assemblies provides a popular/logical reform + Whilst existing bodies have failed to provide enough success to justify reform

Question 9

Evaluate the view that the constitutional reforms introduced by New Labour should be taken further. [30 marks]

P3 - Human Rights Act 1998

REFORM + PEACEE - Second to last E stands for Example and final E stands for Evaluation

Answer 9

REFORM: In 1998, New Labour enshrined the European Convention on Human Rights into UK Law, meaning that rights could be defended in UK courts rather than having to go to Strasbourg, (European Court of Human Rights)
* P: Could be reformed further by entrenching HRA; therefore creating ‘British Bill of Rights’ + As due to Parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament can make or unmake any law, which could potentially undermine human rights
* E: 2001 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act, stated that suspected terrorists could be detained without charge. This posed a risk to minority groups; due to prejudice assumptions
* A: This Act that was passed hindered human rights of innocent citizens - If we had a, ‘British Bill of Rights,’ that was entrenched, then it would be more difficult to pass acts like this
* C: This reform doesn’t need to be taken further, because due to the uncodified and unentrenched nature of the HRA, Parliament are able to pass laws to adapt to human rights
* E: The 2001 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act was removed in 2004 + Another example of how Parliamentary sovereignty allows the UK constitution to be flexible is the fact that Equality Act 2010 was introduced, which protect characteristics; which helped prevent workplace discrimination - This would have been much more difficult with an entrenched, ‘British Bill of Rights’
* E: Reform shouldn’t be taken any further - Although a, ‘British Bill of Rights,’ may help to further protect human rights, it’s entrenched nature can cause controvercies down the line and therefore having a strong HRA, that strikes a perfect balance between parliamentary sovereignty and protecting human rights is imperative + HRA allows us to adapt to situations and improve human rights

An example to potentially talk about for how an entrenched Bill of Rights may cause controvercies is the Second Ammendment in the US; Right to bare arms, which is seen today to be uneccessary; as thousands of children have died in school shootings

Question 10

Evaluate the view that the constitutional reforms introduced by New Labour should be taken further. [30 marks]

Conclusion

Answer 10

• Reforms shouldn’t be taken further
• The reforms had positive impacts on the UK constitution + They helped modernise Parliament and improve democracy
• However, potential further reforms, such as having an English Parliament or having more regional assemblies, may create more problems than they would solve
• Also, there may be further unforseen unintended consequences, (Robert K Merton)
• Further reforms may also change certain elements of our constitution to being entrenched, (such as a, ‘British Bill of Rights), however, there are advantages to having an unentrenched constitution
• Ex: In America, the ammendments are all contained in the Bill of Rights, which is entrenched, due to the codified nature of their constitution - This has led to controversies as the second ammendment; right to bear arms, has led to thousands of children dying in school shootings + It is deemed to no longer be a necessary ammendment - Yet if their constitution was unentrenched, like ours, they could modernise it, preventing these controversies from occuring
• Also having elements of our constitution being entrenched, undermines one of the twin pillars, (AV Dicey), Parliamentary sovereignty, however, current reforms such as HRA, strike a perfect balance between maintaining the principles of our constitution and doing their job effectively

Question 11

Evaluate the view that constitutional reforms since 2010 have had a significant impact on the UK constitution. [30]

Introduction

Answer 11

• Since 2010, the coalition and later on the Conservative party have made a number of constitutional reforms
• Define: The UK’s constitution is uncodified and unentrenched, meaning; not contained in a single document, built on the twin pillars of Parliamentary sovereignty and rule of law
• Discuss: Main reforms since 2010 have been Brexit, further devolution to certain devolved bodies and various Parliamentary reforms
• Direction: Exploring these three main reforms, will allow me to conclude whether or not reforms since 2010, really have had a significant impact on the UK constitution

Question 12

Evaluate the view that constitutional reforms since 2010 have had a significant impact on the UK constitution. [30]

P1 - Brexit

PEAECAE - Final E stands for Evaluation

Answer 12

• P: UK is built on the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty - Ever since constitutional supremacy was transferred to Parliament after signing the Bill of Rights in 1689 - When the UK joined the EU, they accepted the supremacy of EU laws over UK laws - EU laws are sovereign - If Parliament passed an act that contradicted a piece of EU legislation - Then the European Court of Justice and Supreme Court, could strike it down forcing Parliament to amend their legislation
• E: 1990 Factortame case - In 1988 the Merchant Shipping Act, stated that UK registered ships had to have a majority of British owners, however, they were forced to unmake the law, as it contradicted EU legislation
• A: Reform to leave the EU, means there is no higher court to strike down laws passed by UK Parliament, which means Parliamentary sovereignty has been regained in the UK Political system
• E: Illegal Immigration Bill March 2023, is a good example of the kinds of policies the UK now can now make, that would have normally been significantly controlled by the EU
• C: EU was only sovereign to a limited extent, as they only really made policies about trade, tarrifs, immigration and competition policies
• A: This means that altoguh the UK Palriament now has the power to make laws in these areas; EU laws didn’t impact enough areas to justify giving up the benefits of being in the EU
• E: Brexit has had a very significant impact on the UK constitution, as it restored Parliamentary sovereignty, especially relating to issues usually controlled by the EU - Represents a shift in power within the constitution

Question 13

Evaluate the view that constitutional reforms since 2010 have had a significant impact on the UK constitution. [30]

P2 - Further Devolution to Scotland and Wales

Answer 13

• P: Following a 2011 referendum, which 64% voted in favour for, Wales gained primary legislative control over devolved areas, similar to what Scotland was initially given + This led to the coalition setting up the Silk Commision to consider further devolution + Leading to 2014 Government of Wales Act, which renamed the Welsh Executive the Welsh Government + This also gave them control over 20 policy areas that had been devoled to it, without needing to consult Westminster
• A: This can be seen as a significant reform, as it resulted in a further decentralisation of power and sovereignty away from the UK Parliament, as they no longer had to consult Westminster + It gave Wales the same level of powers originally devolved to Scotland and Northern Ierland
• P: In 2014, Scottish independednce referendum saw Scotland gain more powers which were given to them to try and disincentivise independence including control over tax raising
• A: This can be seen as fiscal devolution, which also reduced the sovereingty of Parliament and moves them closer to devo-max + This increases the strength and importance of the West Lothian question
• C: These reforms had minor impact on UK constitution, as the true changes Devolution caused to the UK constitution had already occurred
• A: The true constitutional change can be seen as being the initial Devolution reforms by new Labour in 1998
• E: Further devolution has increased the powers of the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments, however, the overall constituional impact is minor, as the true point of constitutional change occured in 1998, when New Labour first incorperated devolution into the constitution

Question 14

Evaluate the view that constitutional reforms since 2010 have had a significant impact on the UK constitution. [30]

P3 - Parliamentary Reforms

P - REFORM 1 - REFORM 2 + E - CE - FINAL E STANDING FOR EVALUATION

Answer 14

• P: Two key Parliamentary reforms have occured since 2010, which can be argued to have had a significant impact on the constitution:
  1. Fixed Term Parliament Act
  2. English Votes for English Laws

The Fixed Term Parliament Act - Introduced by coalition government in 2011 - It removed the power of PM to call a snap election when it suited them - It now required a 2/3 majority of Parliament to support a snap election before it was called
* Helped the Lib Dems as it reassured them that Cameron wouldn’t call a snap election when it suited the Conservatives, which prevented him from being distracted from governing effecitvely
* Siginificant constitutional importance as it removed the perogative power of PM to call a snap election, limits power of PM

English Votes for English Laws - Aims to answer West Lothian question, which questions why Scottish MPs can vote on English matters in the UK Parliament, when English MPs can’t do the same in Scottish Parliament
* These laws allowed English MPs to veto any legislation affecting England only from being passed
* It can be seen as having significant constitutional impacts as it tackled the West Lothian question and introduced a small aspect of English Devolution
* E: This was used in 1/3 of bills in 2015-2017 Parliament

• C: Both of these Parliamentary reforms; although significant; had little impact on the constitution - The Fixed Terms Parliaments Act was argued to have limited significance and was scrapped by Boris Johnson’s government in 2022 - Boris Johnson was able to successfully call a snap election in 2017 and 2019 by effectively shaming the opposition to vote for an election - Which they would never block as it would make them seem week to the public - English Votes For English Laws, can be said to have simply added complications to legislative process and wasn’t effective, hence why Johnson’s government scrapped it in 2021
• E: Little impact on the Constitution - Both reforms were later scrapped by Johnson’s government

Question 15

Evaluate the view that constitutional reforms since 2010 have had a significant impact on the UK constitution. [30]

Conclusion

Answer 15

• Few constitutional reforms since 2010 that have had a significant impact on the UK’s constitution
• Brexit did as it restored Parliamentary sovereignty, which is one of the twin pillars of the UK’s uncodified and unentrenched constitution
• Devolution reforms were significant, as they gave more powers to Scotland and Wales, however, the major constitutional changes regarding Devolution took place in the late 1990s, specifically 1997-1998
• Parliamentary reforms had limited success and also had a limited impact on the constitution, as they were later scrapped by Boris Johnson’s government
• Overall, most reforms haven’t had an impact on the UK’s constitution; however, Brexit did have a significant impact

Question 16

Evaulate the view that Devolution reforms haven’t gone far enough. [30]

Introduction

Answer 16

• Devolution reforms were first established by New Labour in the late 1990s, (specifically 1997/1998): Scotland Act, Government of Wales Act and Northern Ierland Act, (All passed in 1998)
• Define: Devolution refers to the dispersal of power, but not sovereignty in a political system
• Discuss: This essay will be exploring whether or not there should be an English Parliament, more regional devolution in England and also whether more powers should be devoled to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ierland
• Direction: Exploring these three topic areas will allow me to conclude whether or not, Devolution reforms have or haven’t gone far enough

Question 17

Evaulate the view that Devolution reforms haven’t gone far enough. [30]

P1 - English Parliament

Answer 17

• P: An English Parliament would represent and decide on important issues that just affect England, (in the same way the Scottish Parliament does) - This would make the system of devolution more symmetrical, solving the problem of asymmetry - An English Parliament would complete the system and grant the English population the same level of representation as the rest of the UK
• E: This would allow policy of English People to be represented as it has in Scotland. The Scottish population are more left wing than the rest of the UK, which is reflected in their policies, such as free tuition fees for Scottish students attending Scottish Universities and higher income tax - Income/Wealth Distribution
• A: An English Parliament would create a more coherent system of Devolution - This would involve Westminster controlling UK wide issues, such as defecne and macroeconomic policy - However, devolved Parliament’s can control issues like health, education and transport

IMPORTANT NOTE: This also helps solve the West Lothian question, which refers to why Scottish MPs can vote in Westminster, regarding issues that only effect England. But the English MPs can’t do the same in the Scottish Parliament. This also gives England a more prominent identity, allowing our interests and identity to be reflected in Politics

• C: There is little demand for an English Parliament and it would potentially create more problems than it would solve
• A: Could also create tensions as the UK Population is largely based in England, meaning that an English Parliament may have more power than other devolved bodies - Exploitation
• E: Issues with current system. English Parliament would not solve it. It would be impractical. Add an extra layer to the system. Limited support.

Question 18

Evaulate the view that Devolution reforms haven’t gone far enough. [30]

P2 - Regional Devolution in England

Answer 18

• P: Regional assemblies covering all of England is potentially a more realistic reform. This reform would deliver greater representation of local interests, whilst not distrupting the UK Parliament and creating tensions with other devolved bodies. This would also improve democracy as each areas have different opinions. Which are easier to meet, using regional assemblies
• E: The Greater Manchester City Region, (which has elected a Mayor), has been effective in in gaining significant administrative control, including over healthcare + This has led to modest increases in life expectancy and has allowed the region to be democratic and prioritise mental and physical health
• A: This can be extremely beneficial to areas all across England, especially those with a strong sense of regional identity, like Cornwall and Yorkshire - These different assemblies would allow experimentation with different policies and can allow them to learn from each other, in the same way the number of policies first introduced in Scotland has been adopted throughout the UK
• C: There is little demand/support for a regional layer of Government in England
• E: Little Demand: In a 2012 referendum on whether Birmingham should have an elected mayor recieved support from only 27.67% of voters - Only 58% turnout
• A: If this reform were to take place, then there may be tensions with local councils, as regional assemblies cover larger populations - More viewpoints, from different areas, could lead to tension - Some regions would benefit from these assemblies, as they have a strong sense of regional identity. However, regions that don’t would receive little support.
• E: Regional assemblies can be effective at delivering greater local representation and ensuring democracy. However, this further reform should only occur if there is support from the English population - This can be in the form of referendums

Question 19

Evaulate the view that Devolution reforms haven’t gone far enough. [30]

P3 - Further powers being granted to Scotland, Wales & Northern Ierland

Answer 19

• P: Further powers could be granted, as devolved bodies have shown that they ccan run public services effectively, (Ex: During COVID-19). Further reform, would allow devolved bodies to increase their ability to reflect local opinions and adress local issues
• E: Scotland, has been granted more powers in the realms of transport, welfare policy and taxation, allowing them to move closer to ‘Devomax’
• A: Brexit also allows room for a reform, (granting devolved bodies more power), as policies that used to be governed by the EU could be given to devolved bodies + Granting these further powers to devolved areas will give them more autonomy and potentially disincentivise them from voting for independence in the futuer - Therefore helping to keep the United Kingdom, united
• C: Further devolution is not necessary, as devolved bodies, to a certain extent, have failed to be effective, (and have also failed to reflect the economic and policy benefits of Devolution)
• E: The Northern Irish Parliament is frequently being suspended due to tensions and a lack of compromise btween Sinn Fein and the DUP
• E: Further Devolution should be granted to both Scotland and Wales but not Northern Ierland. In Scotland and Wales it would allow greater representation and disincentivise independence. However, the Northern Irish Parliament, has proven to be ineffective, (to a certain extent), meaning it does not make sense to grant a dysfunctional Parliament more powers

Question 20

Evaulate the view that Devolution reforms haven’t gone far enough. [30]

Conclusion

Answer 20

• Devolution hasn’t gone far enough and the UK population should be given the opportunity for further Devolution
• In England, this should be through local referendums and regional assemblies as an English Parliament would be more impractical, (it also raises issues, due to the size of the English population) - This reform should only be implemented if there is demand from the English population
• Further powers should be granted to both Scotland and Wales but not Northern Ierland. In Scotland and Wales, more powers would allow for greater representation and disincentivise independence. However, the Northern Irish Parliament, has proven to be ineffective, (to a certain extent), meaning it does not make sense to grant a dysfunctional Parliament more powers

Question 21

Evaluate the view that Devolution has been a success. [30]

Introduction

Answer 21

• Devolution reforms were first established by New Labour in the late 1990s - (specifically 1997/1998): Scotland Act, Government of Wales Act and Northern Ierland Act, (All passed in 1998) - Devolution was included in New Labour’s 1997 election manifesto
• Define: Devolution refers to the dispersal of power, but not sovereignty in a political system
• Discuss: In this essay I will be exploring the impact of devolution on democracy, the unity of the United Kingdom and the potential for further reforms that could enhance the success of the system
• Direction: Exploring these topic areas will allow me to determine whether or not Devolution has been a success

Question 22

Evaluate the view that Devolution has been a success. [30]

P1 - Democracy

P 2xE A 2xC E

Answer 22

• P: Greater democracy/local representation, with devolved bodies being able to respond to concerns of their electorates
• E: This can be seen in Scotland. The Scottish population are more left wing than the rest of the United Kingdom. This has led to the election of a left wing SNP government that has introduced new policies such as free tuition fees and a higher top rate of income tax - This was only made possible by the Scotland Act 1998, which granted Scottish Parliament control over education and health policy + The Scotland Act 2016, which granted them significant control over taxation
• E: This was also seen during COVID-19, as England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ierland all relaxed restrictions at different speeds
• A: This allows for the needs of the many to be met, as it gives more power to devolved bodies to make decisions based on the preferences of their own population, as opposed to the entire United Kingdom
• C: Although Devolution delivers greater local representation, this can create inequality in the United Kingdom, as citizens in Scotland will have different access to healthcare, education, etc, to a citizen in Wales + In addition to this, Parliamentary sovereignty, (A.V Dicey), is one of the twin pillars of the British Political system - Devolution undermines this by transferring power away from Parliament
• E: Devolution has been a success for democracy, as although some may argue it can cause inequality in the United Kingdom, it is ultimately positive as it represents the different parts of the UK and delivers local representation

Question 23

Evaluate the view that Devolution has been a success. [30]

P2 - Unity of United Kingdom

PA + C 2x E C E E - Final E stands for Evaluation

Answer 23

• P: One of the main aims of Devolution was to keep the UK together - It was believed that granting significant autonomy to Scotland would prevent them voting for independence
• A: As no nationalist movement has yet achieved independence, it can be argued that Devolution has been a success in terms of the unity of the United Kingdom
• C: Can be argued that Devolution has fueld increased nationalism and calls for independence - This has been done, by showing Scotland, Wales and Northern Ierland that they can govern themselves, giving nationalist parties and politicans a platform
• E: The SNP has been in power in Scotland since 2007 and almost achieved independence in 2014 - Since then the support among the Scottish for independence has increased, with most polls now suggesting their is majority support for independence
• E: Support for Welsh independence has also been said to have increased since Devolution
• C: This desire for independence has also fueled tensions with Devolved bodies and the UK Government
• E: Mark Drakeford accused called Johnson, “really, really awful,” for neglecting the Welsh population in the way he formulated and announced COVID-19 policies
• E: Overall, Devolution hasn’t been a success in terms of unity - Increased support for independence since Devolution was introduced - This has also been fueled by conflicts between Devolved bodies and the UK Government

Question 24

Evaluate the view that Devolution has been a success. [30]

P3 - Potential for Further Reform

PEA - England + Scotland + Wales - How Devolution hasn’t been fully successful yet - But how it could be through further reforms

Answer 24

England:
* P: Devolution is an asymmetrical system. For example, England, lack the same representation as Wales and Northern Ierland, meaning that it could be argued to have been unsuccessful for England
* E: An English Parliament or an increase in regional assemblies could enhance the democratic representation of English citizens
* A: An English Parliament would help to create a more cohesive Political system - This would involve Westminster tackling UK wide issues, such as defence and macroeconomic policies, whilst leaving devolved bodies to control policies on education and healthcare + This would also help answer the Westlothian question

Scotland:
* P: Due to the importance of maintaining unity in the United Kingdom, as mentioned previously, Scotland have had more powers devolved to them, allowing them to reflect their more left wing Political views
* E: Having a higher rate of taxation at the top end to allow for redistribution of income
* A: However, as mentioned there is still demand for independence - Therefore, Devolution may not be successful - However, since leaving the EU, Westminster could now devolve more powers to devolved bodies which would have been handled by the EU - Thus disincentivising independence

Wales:
* P: Ever since Devolution, the support of Welsh independence is also said to have increased - Due to this, similar to Scotland, Westminster could devolve more powers to their devolved body - This would increase their power and hopefully disincentivise independence
* E: Granting powers previously held by the EU
* A: This would make the system of Devolution more democratic and therefore an argument can be made for it being more effective

Question 25

Evaluate the view that Devolution has been a success. [30]

Conclusion

Answer 25

• Devolution has been a success according to some of their aims, but a failure according to others
• It can be seen as a success as it has helped to deliver greater democracy and local representation
• However, it can be seen as a failure in terms of uniting the UK, as since Devolution, the demand for Welsh Independence has increased and since the 2014 referendum, the demand for Scottish independence has also increased
• It has also caused conflicts between devolved bodies and Westminster
• It can also be argued that Devolution is still nowhere near as successful as it could be, as the system is asymmetrical - Further reforms such as an English Parliament, more regional assemblies and granting more power to devolved bodies since leaving the EU
• However, the feasability of this is questionable, as Parliamentary sovereignty is one of the twin pillars of the UK constitution, meaning that granting more power to these bodies may attack the core of our Political system + Would these further reforms lead to further problems?

Question 26

Evaluate the view that Parliament holds the Government to account effectively. [30]

Introduction

Answer 26

• Define: Parliament is the legislative body in the United Kingdom, comprising of the House of Commons, House of Lords and the Monarch
• Define: Select committees look into issues in depth. The select committees in the Commons investigate and report on the activities of Government departments. Their counterpart in the Lords carry out topic based inquiries
• Define: PMQs takes place on Wednesday at 12:00pm. It is televised and it allows the Leader of the Opposition to ask 6 questions and the leader of the third largest party can ask 2 questions. This gives them the ability to expose Government failure
• Discuss: This essay will discuss select committees, ministerial questions and legislative scrutiny
• Direction: Exploring these areas will allow me to conclude whether or not Parliament holds the Government to account effectively

Question 27

Evaluate the view that Parliament holds the Government to account effectively. [30]

P1 - Select Committees

PEAECCEE

Answer 27

• P: Select committee questioning is calm, measured and professional and less partisan than PMQs. As a result it can be argued to be effective + Since the Wright reforms, Select committees are more indpendent of the Government. Select committee chairs in HoC are no longer chosen by whips, which has allowed prominent backbench MPs who oppose the Government to obtain key roles in Select Committees
• E: Conservative backbencher and former Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes, is the chair of the Women and Equalities Committee and has consistently criticised the Government
• A: Due to the calm and professional manner of questioning of select committees, they are respected + Because they are televised, it increases their influence
• E: In March 2023, the Privileges Select Committee, scrutinised former PM Boris Johnson over his involvement in the ‘Partygate’ scandal, which generated a lot of public interest and media attention
• C: Though available resources for select committees have increased, they can only cover a limited amount of topics in depth, limiting their ability to hold the Government to account across all areas of policy
• C: In addition to this, the power of select committee to summon witnesses is considerable but not unlimited
• E: In 2013, the Home Secretary, Theresa May, blocked the Home Affairs Select Committee from interviewing Andrew Parker, (The Head of MI5)
• E: Select committees are effective + Media coverage + Increases public interest and publically scrutinises the Government - However, they only investigate a limited amount of topics + Power of summoning witnesses to be questioned in the committees is limited

Question 28

Evaluate the view that Parliament holds the Government to account effectively. [30]

P2 - Ministrial Questions/PMQs

Answer 28

• P: The leader of Opposition can ask 6 questions and the leader of the third largest party can ask 2 questions. This gives them the ability to expose Government failure and suggest why they would be more effective. This means that the Government have to adress the concerns of the public
• E: Corbyn, made a habit of asking questions from members of the public - Some other Opposition leaders in history have been highly effective at scrutinising the Government. Starmer is reasonably good, especially considering his work as a prosecutor
• P: The fact that PMQs is also televised, (most watched aspect of Politics among the public), encourages public engagement in Politics and allows for Government failures to be publically exposed - In addition to this, misleading Commons can lead to huge pressure to reisgn, which forces the PM and Ministers to be competent and also to use rational arguements in PMQs as opposed to political demagoguery, as it would embarass them and harm their party image
• C: PMQs provides little effective scrutiny and is more focused on partisan political point scoring - The PM and other Ministers often give Political answers, intended to deflect and increase their social media presence, rather than to honestly answer questions
• C: PMQs is also very boisterous and is more Parliamentary theatre than effective scrutiny
• A: This presents a very negative view of politicans to the public, thus decreasing their trust in the Political process
• E: Can be argued that PMQs should be scrapped and more attention should be focused on other forms of scrutiny, such as the Liason Committee, which provides far more in depth and meaningful questioning to PM. Effectiveness on Scrutiny is partly dependent on the work of the leader of the Opposition. Some questions are limited due to partisanship, however, it is effective as it allows the Opposition to directly ask key Ministers question, which forces the Government to be competent and defend their decisions

BONUS POINT: Boris Johnson cancelled appointments twice to attend Liason Committee and therefore avoided scrutiny - So maybe a new form of scrutiny needs to be introduced rather than putting more emphasis on the Liason Committee

Question 29

Evaluate the view that Parliament holds the Government to account effectively. [30]

P3 - Legislative Scurtiny

Answer 29

• P: HoL is effective at holding Government to account. HoL frequently offers technical amendments to improve and fix bills and is often called the ‘amending chamber’ - However, the HoL does back down if its amendments are rejected by Commons, recognising their lack of democratic legitimacy; however, sometimes they do take a stand if they believe it is justified
• E: This is often to protect human rights or in relation to a bill that has gained a significant amount of public backlash. In 2001, ten defeats in the HoL led to the Government removing the 2001 Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act. The HoL took a stand as they said it would have hindered human rights
• A: This shows that although the HoL is aware of their lack of democratic legitimacy, they are still willing to pose scrutiny and when it is necessary they are also willing to stand against a bill in order to protect the rights of the people
• C: When a Government has a large majority in the House of Commons, it is rarely every defeated and is able to almost pass all legislation through the chamber
• E: Blair was defeated 3 times between 1997-2010
• C: The legislative powers of the HoL has also been limited by The Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949. 1911: Cannot vote down any money bills - 1949: Reduced delaying power from 2 years to 1 year
• E: This was used 3 times during Bliar’s Government, including to pass the Hunting Act 2004. which banned hunting with dogs
• E: Effectiveness depends on Government majority. When a Government has a small majority, the HoC can hold them to account, however, they struggle if the majority is large. HoL can provide effective legislatie scrutiny, however, the extent of this is restricted by its lack of legislative powers. Sailsbury convention also limits HoL power of scrutiny as they cannot vote down any legislation that fufils a Government party’s election manifesto

Question 30

Evaluate the view that Parliament holds the Government to account effectively. [30]

Conclusion

Answer 30

• Parliament is effective at holding the Government to account
• However, it is clearly more effective at holding weak Governments with small majorities to account
• Ministirial question time/PMQs is also important because it allows the Opposition and other party’s to try and expose the Government, which forces them to be competent
• Select committees are effective, as although they can only investigate limited topics, they draw on people who have lots of expertise - This form of scrutiny is also calm and professional - It also gains media coverage which alerts the public to mistakes of the Government
• The HoL is particularly important in providing legislative scrutiny
• However, the HoL is limited in it’s legislative abilities due to The Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949
• In addition to this, conventions like the Sailsbury convention also reduce their power of scrutiny, as they cannot strike down legislation that fufils a Government party’s election manifesto

Question 31

Evaluate the view that the House of Commons is effective in scrutinising the Executive. [30]

Introduction

Question 32

Evaluate the view that the House of Commons is effective in scrutinising the Executive. [30]

P1

Question 33

Evaluate the view that the House of Commons is effective in scrutinising the Executive. [30]

P2

Question 34

Evaluate the view that the House of Commons is effective in scrutinising the Executive. [30]

P3

Question 35

Evaluate the view that the House of Commons is effective in scrutinising the Executive. [30]

Conclusion

Question 36

Evaluate the view that Parliament is representative of the Electorate. [30]

Introduction

Answer 36

• Define: Parliament is the legislative branch of the UK Political system
• Define: The electorate refers to those who are entitled to vote in an election
• Discuss: This essay will explore how Parliament can be judged as representative in 3 ways; How democratically representative it is, how well it represents the interests of the public and how descriptively representative it is
• Direction: Exploring these three areas will allow me to conclude whether or not Parliament is representative of the electorate

Question 37

Evaluate the view that Parliament is representative of the Electorate. [30]

P1 - How democratically representative it is

Answer 37

Argument for Parliament being representative of the Electorate
* HoC can be seen as representative as it is elected on a regular basis, with MPs representing a relatively small number of votes
* This means that voters can hold their representatives to account and remove them if they judge them to have not represented them effectively
* Each MP has to win a plurality of voters in their constituency in order to get elected, whilst many win a majority of votes - (Plurality voting system)
* Ex: In South Staffordshire 2019, Gavin Williamson won 73% of the vote

Argument for Parliament not being representative of the Electorate
* The HoL is unelected, yet still holds significant powers to influence policy and scrutinise/delay Government legislation - However, this was limited by Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949
* Rather than being elected, most members of HoL are appointed by HoL Appointments Commision or by Party leaders at the end of a PMs time in office
* However, there are still 92 hereditary peers as stage 2 of the 1999 House of Lords reform act never took place
* This is fundamentally unrepresentative, as those who aren’t elected shouldn’t have major power in a democratic Political system
* In addition to this, the HoC is elected using the First Past The Post voting system, which is unproportional and unrepresentative in comparison to other systems
* Ex: In the 2019 election, the Conservative party won 56% of the seats in Parliament with just 43% of the vote

Overall Judgement
* Parliament isn’t representative
* HoL is unelected and therefore fundamentally undemocratic
* First Past The Post Voting System is a reason why the HoC is often criticised for being unrepresentative, as it is an unproportional and unrepresentative voting system

Question 38

Evaluate the view that Parliament is representative of the Electorate. [30]

P2 - How well does Parliment represent the interests/views of the public

Answer 38

Arguments that Parliament represents the public
* Relatively small size of constituencies, coupled with the fact that one MP is responsible for those who live there, results in effective representation of local interests and a strong link between constituency and MP + MPs represent their constituents’ interests in Parliament
* Ex: October 2022 - 33 Conservative MPs rebelled against Liz Truss’ Government and abstained in a vote on banning fracking - Despite the Government ordering them to oppose it - One of these MPs was Mark Fletcher of Bolsover, who had a strong local movement against fracking
* Both the HoC and HoL represent the population as a whole on issues they care about and of pressing matters
* Ex: This could be seen as the Opposition scrutinised Boris Johnson’s Government during the ‘partygate’ scandal, which reflected the outraged British population
Arguments that Parliament does not represents the public
* MPs often don’t vote according to teir constituency wishes. They almost always vote according to how they are whiped to do so - This is in order to keep favour with their party and climb the ladder
* This is because whips ensure as many members of their party vote as possible as well as making sure they vote in the same way their party wants them to

Overall Judgement
* In terms of representing the interests/views that the public/constituencies care about, Parliament is somewhat representative
* However, although MPs do seek to represent their constitents and the wishes of the public as a whole, they are limited at doing so by the whipping system

Question 39

Evaluate the view that Parliament is representative of the Electorate. [30]

P3 - How descriptively representative Parliament is

HINT: The examples used relate to statistics + There aren’t many points for - So talk about ways Parliament is trying to improve how desriptively representative it is

Answer 39

Arguments that it is descriptively representative
* Although Parliament is unrepresentative in this regard, there have been many attempts made to improve
* Some of these include using all-women shortlists and headhunting/mentoring promosing candidates from minority ethnic backgrounds
* The HoL Appointment Commision also seeks to appoint peers from different backgrounds

Arguments that it is descriptively unrepresentative
* Parliament remains highly unrepresentative in terms of gender, race and educational background
* Ex: After 2019 election, just 34% of HoC and 29% of HoL were women, compared to over half the population
* Ex: After 2019 election, just 10% of HoC and 7.3% of HoL were fromminority ethnic backgrounds, compared to 18% of the poplulation
* Ex: After 2019 election, 22% of HoC and 57% of HoL went to private School compared to 7% of the population
* Ex: In the 2019 Parliament, 10% of MPs were part of the LGBT+ compared to an estimated 3.1% of the UK population
* There are many reasons for the lack of representation and this is a big problem
* If Parliament was more representative, then it would lead to representatives being able to better understand the wishes of the population and further the Political agenda

Overall Judgement
* Parliament remains very unrepresentative; particularly in regard to race, gender and educational background
* This should be seen as a major problem as it leads to the views and interests of marginalised sections of the population being ignored and unrepresented in policy formulation

Question 40

Evaluate the view that Parliament is representative of the Electorate. [30]

Conclusion

Answer 40

• The extent to which Parliament is representative of the electorate is limited
• The HoC is elected - Democratic - However, the First Past The Post voting system is often criticised for being unproportional and unrepresentative
• The HoL is fundamentally undemocratic
• MPs don’t always accurately represent their constituents and the public, as although they may want to, they are limited by the whipping system
• Parliament remains descriptively unrepresentative, especially in the categories of gender, race and education
• However, strategies are being implemented to help reduce this issue and broarden the political agenda - This will also stop the views and interests of marginalised sections of the population being ignored and unrepresented in policy formulation

Question 41

Evaluate the view that Parliament performs its functions effectively. [30]

Introduction

Answer 41

• Define: Parliament represents the legislative branch of the UK Political system
• Discuss: In this essay, I will be exploring the three main functions of Parliament, as well as looking at how effective they are at performing them. These include: Passing legislation, scrutnising the executive and representing the electorate
• Direction: Exploring these three functions in further detail, will allow me to conclude whether or not Parliament is effective at carrying out it’s main functions

Question 42

Evaluate the view that Parliament performs its functions effectively. [30]

P1 - Passing legislation

Question 43

Evaluate the view that Parliament performs its functions effectively. [30]

P2 - Scrutinising the executive

HINT: Talk about PMQs and Select Committees

Answer 43

PMQs
* Opposition get to ask 6 questions, second largest party gets to ask 2
* PMQs is televised, which gives the Opposition an opportunity to expose Government failure - As well as suggest why they would be more effective
* Misleading the HoC can cause huge pressure to resign - This makes sure that the PM and MPs are up to date with policy and ensures they are compotent
* However, PMQs are arguably more focused on partisan political point scoring, rather than detailed scrutiny, which limits is effectiveness - PMs and MPs often give answers to gain social media traction than to honestly answer scrutiny

Select Committees
* Select committee questioning is calm, measured and professional and less partisan than PMQs.
* Since the Wright reforms, Select committees are more indpendent of the Government. Select committee chairs in HoC are no longer chosen by whips, which has allowed prominent backbench MPs who oppose the Government to obtain key roles in Select Committees
* Ex: Conservative backbencher and former Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes, is the chair of the Women and Equalities Committee and has consistently criticised the Government
* Select committee resources are scarce and therefore, they can only make inquiries on a limited number of topics
* In addition to this, their power to summon witnesses is not unlimited
* Ex: In 2013, the Home Secretary, Theresa May, blocked the Home Affairs Select Committee from interviewing Andrew Parker, (The Head of MI5)

Question 44

Evaluate the view that Parliament performs its functions effectively. [30]

P3 - Representing the electorate

HINT: Talk about three main ways Parliament represents the electorate - Pros and Cons for each + Examples

Answer 44

How democratically representative it is
* HoC is representative as it is democratically elected on a regular basis - MPs represent a small number of voters, (constituents)
* Voters are able to hold representativest to account and remove/vote against them if they are deemed ineffective
* Plurality voting system is used, however, some MPs do get elected with a majority
* Ex: In 2019 South Staffordshire, Gavin Williamson won with 73% of the votes
* The HoL is unelected, yet still holds significant powers to influence policy and scrutinise/delay Government legislation - However, this was limited by Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949
* New Labour tried to rectify this
* However, there are still 92 hereditary peers as stage 2 of the 1999 House of Lords reform act never took place
* This is fundamentally unrepresentative, as those who aren’t elected shouldn’t have major power in a democratic Political system
How does Parliament represent the interests of the public
* MPs represent constituents interests in Parliament
* Ex: In 2022, 33 Conservative MPs rebelled against Liz Truss’ government and obstained on voting on banning fracking, despite the Government ordering them to oppose it. One of these MPs was Mark Fletcher of Bolsover, which had a strong local movement against fracking in the area
* HoC and HoL also represent through scrutiny the pressing issues of the public
* Ex: Opposition scrutiny over Johnson’s ‘partygate’ scandal, as the public were outraged
* However, the extent to which MPs can support these interests is limited by the whipping system - As most MPs vote how they are whipped to do so, so they can climb the ladder

Arguments that it is descriptively unrepresentative
* Parliament is descriptively unrepresentative. This can be evidenced by stats such as:
* Ex: After 2019 election, just 34% of HoC and 29% of HoL were women, compared to over half the population

Question 45

Evaluate the view that Parliament performs its functions effectively. [30]

Conclusion

Answer 45

Passing legislation

Scrutinising the Executive
* PMQs is more focused on partisan political point scoring than effective scrutiny - It is also extremely boistrous and is more like Political theatre - Limits it’s effectiveness
* However, misinforming HoC can lead to pressures to resign, which does at least force the PM and MPs to be up to date on policy
* Select committees would be effective, however, resources are scarce, meaning that they can only investigate a limited number of topics
* Power to summon witnesses is not unlimited

Representing the electorate
* Mostly ineffective at representing the electorate
* Although HoC is elected, most MPs do seek to represent their constitencies, however, the extent they can do this, depends ont he whipping system
* HoL is unelected - Still have power in a democracy, despite being unelected - Even though this power was reduced by the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949
* Parliament is also descriptively unrepresentative, which can cause the needs of marginalised groups to be ignored - Especially unrepresentative of gender, race and education