parliament pt 2

Question 1

what are the 3 areas where we can asses how effective parliament is

Answer 1

legislative
representative
scrutiny

Question 2

How Well Does Parliament Perform Its Legislative Function - IS EFFECTIVE

Answer 2

1. high legislative output - parliament passes high number of laws due to fusion of powers - gov dominates commons so legislation can be pushed fast
2. backbench MPs introduce bills - even private member bills can become law with support –> abortion act 1967 and the abolition of death penalty act 1965 were private member bills when introduced
3. HoL acts as revising chamber - sends back poorly drafted bills for reconsideration –> 2020 the lords sought amendments to Agriculture Bill - strengthen food standards post brexit

Question 3

How Well Does Parliament Perform Its Legislative Function? - ISNT EFFECTIVE

Answer 3

1. poor legislative quality - govs with large majorities pass laws too fast - avoiding scrutiny and debate
2. private member bills rarely succeed - due to lack of gov support. EG - in one session only 6% were enacted
3. gov control dominates agenda - most bills passed r gov sponsored - reduces legislatures independence
4. lords limited by lack of power - cant permanently block legislation EG - 2020 lords voted to amend EU Withdrawal Bill but commons rejected the changes

Question 4

How Well Does Parliament Perform Its Representative Function? - IS EFFECTIVE

Answer 4

• more socially representative than in past EG female MPs: 118 (2001) to 263 (2024), BAME MPs 12 (2001) to 90 (2024)
• reflects public opinion through elections EG - 2019 GE gave Cons clear mandate for Brexit ending political deadlock
• multiple parties represented - EG - 10 parties won seats in 2019 and there are also independent peers and crossbenchers in Lords
• MPs respond to constituent needs - MPs helped constituents facing immigration and residency issues post-brexit

Question 5

How Well Does Parliament Perform Its Representative Function? - ISNT EFFECTIVE

Answer 5

• underrepresentation - only 34% women and 10% minority backgrounds
• FPTP produces disproportionate results eg 2015 UKIP got 3.8 million votes but 1 seat
• lord is unelected endermining democratic legitimacy
• whips reduce independence bc MPs follow parties views rather than thier constituencies
• MPs prioritise career over representation

Question 6

How Well Does Parliament Perform Its Scrutiny Function? - IS EFFECTIVE

Answer 6

• parliamentary questions promote accountibility - UQ make ministers respond w short notice. EG - speaker John Bercow allowed many UQs between 2017-19
• united opposition can be powerful - EG - 2009 opposition parties forced labour gov to provide residency rights to Gurkha veterans
• HoL plays key scrutiny role EG crossbenchers in lords bring independent expertise and highlight gaps in legislation
• minority govs face increased scrutiny EG the Benn Act 2019 passed by MPs opposed to a no-deal brexit, forced the gov to seek extension to avoid crashing out of EU

Question 7

How Well Does Parliament Perform Its Scrutiny Function? - ISNT EFFECTIVE

Answer 7

• some forms of questioning are weak - PMQs described by david cameron as ‘punch and judy show’, govs can use ‘planted questions’ from loyal MPs to avoid difficult scrutiny
• opposition can be divided and ineffective EG - labour splits over syria airstrikes 2015 (66 labour MPs backed the gov)
• scrutiny in lords is constrained - parliament acts and sailsbury convention limit the Lords abiloity to reject or delay bills
• parliamentary ping-pong - occurs when lords and commons dont agree on amendments EG 2020 Internal Market Bill was stuck in ping pong which limited clear scrutiny
• large majorities weakens scrutiny - between 1997-2004 labour passed most legislation with ease due to its majority - avoiding major defeats

Question 8

whats parliamentary ping pong

Answer 8

when a bill is sent back and forth between the commons and lords due to a disagreement

Question 9

what are the 2 main types of committeees in the HoC

Answer 9

select committees - scrutinise work go gov departments
public bill committees - scrutinise specific pieces of proposed legislation

Question 10

features of select committees

Answer 10

• 11-15 members chosen by the whole HoC
• chair is elected by secret ballot and can be from any party
• governing party has a majority on each committee
• public reports with recommendations. the gov expected to respond within 2 months
• gather evidence, call witness and produce in-depth scrutiny

Question 11

example of a select committee

Answer 11

Home Affairs Select Committee
- background - Windrush Scandal - wrongful detention + deportation of long-term uk residents due to harsh Home Office immigration policies
- committee role –> launched april 2018, questioned Amber Rudd (HS at time) and victims, found systemic failings in Home Office and that ministers ignored warnings. then Amber Rudd resigned
- impact - showed select committees deliver real accountability and influence policy reform

Question 12

ways select committees are EFFECTIVE

Answer 12

1. recommendations taken seriously - 40% oare adopted by the gov
2. access to oral and written evidence - they can call ministers, civil servants and experts for testimonys
3. independence from whips and ministers - memership includes backbenchers and opposition MPs - not tightly controlled by gov
4. consensual tone - committees focus on evidence and policy not political attacks
5. charing a committe is a serious role - EG Yvette Cooper (Home affairs committee) gave up a frontbench role to focus on effective scrutiny. –> showing charing a select committee now rivals being a minister in influence

Question 13

ways select committees are NOT EFFECTIVE

Answer 13

1. can only advise - reccomendations are non-binding so gov can ignore them
2. gov majority can dominate - 2013 theresa may blocked the home affairs committee from interviewing andrew parker, then M15 head
3. some committees lack independence - 2020 jeremy hunt (health chair) scrutinised a department he had prev led - raising concenerns of bias
4. not all committees work well together - EU committee criticised for public splits and partisan loyalty
5. career motivations may limit impact - Rory stewart was chair of home affairs committee but left to become minister - shows ministerial promotion can still outweigh committee roles

Question 14

what are public bill committees

Answer 14

• temporary committees who examine individual bills line-by-line after 2nd reading in commons
• established after bill passes 2nd reading
• dominate by MPs selected by whips
• ## propose amendments but limited to gov approved changes

Question 15

arguing that Public Bill Committees are EFFECTIVE

Answer 15

1. detailed line-by-line scrutiny - examine and amend individual clauses of bills
2. bring expertise from ministers - frontbenchers and shadow minister give expert knowledge
3. opps to catch overlooked issues - adress flaws missed in earlier stages of debate

Question 16

arguing that Public Bill Committees are INEFFECTIVE

Answer 16

1. dominated by gov - 99% of ministerial amendments pass - less than 1% non-gov succeed
2. late in legislative process - by this point bills are seen as a done deal so meaningful changes are unlikely
3. lack of independence and expetise - eg 2011 Sarah Wollas

Question 17

other types of commons committees

Answer 17

1. liaison committee –> all chair from select committees. meet 2 times a year to question PM in depth
2. Backbench business committee –> controls 20+ debate days a year allowing backbecnh MPs to choose debate topics
3. petitions committee –> considers e-petitions. scheduals a debate in commons or pushes for further gov action

Question 18

the reform of parliament - 2 key areas

Answer 18

1. HoC
   - proposal to change voting system to something more proportional eg STV/AMS
   - but this unlikely to happen soon bc 2011 AV ref where public rejected by a lot
2. HoL
   - debates focus on whether HoL should be elected
   - reform began in 1999 where most hereditary peers removed by labour gov
   - 2nd stage to create elected chamber failed bc disagreement over how to balance democratic legitimacy and retain expertise

Question 19

arguments AGAINST electing the house of lords

Answer 19

1. hereditary peers have mostly been removed so the most undemocratic element gone - only 88 remain
2. maintains independence - atm has experts, cross benchers and non-career politicians - more willing to challenge gov policy
3. elections could reduce quality - elections could lead to less expert and more partisian - less scrutiny
4. could politicalise the lords - lose current chambers strength - non partisian expertise and independence

Question 20

arguments FOR electing the house of lords

Answer 20

1. 92 hereditary peers still vote - undemocratic and outdated
2. democratic legitimacy - more legitimate and able to properly hold gov to account
3. more diversity and regional representation - lord currently london based older men.
4. elections - broarder range of views and opinions especially from minorities without power in commons
5. balanced power - 2 elected chambers could check each other - preventing executive dominance in parliament