The majority of new laws or changes to existing laws come from government but the can also come from MP’s, Lords or even a member of the public. E.g. ‘Sarah’s Law’. Both the House of Commons and House of Lords must debate and vote on the proposals. 2.
This is an effective check because when minister have their question time the opposition should be ready to criticize and demand answers. This ensures that a Government is credible and held accountable. If not, an unchallenged government can make mistakes. The Commons are also play as a check point for legislation. Most of the UK’s legislation originates from the government.
This argument shows that the leader of the Labour Party may have restrictions on his or her powers when in opposition as they are made to work with a shadow cabinet hence delegating power. Also it isn’t just the shadow cabinet ministers who have a say, but also the party leader must attend back-bench meetings which allows less prominent members of the parliamentary party to voice their opinions which may influence the party’s next manifesto. Yes the Labour Party leader may delegate some power whilst in opposition, however when in government, it may be an entirely
With the rise in the professional politician many prefer to remain loyal in order to gain power and move up in the hierarchy as opposed to become a rebel who remains in the back benchers. This can be seen after the vote on tuition fees and the liberal democrats. Despite the fact that they had campaigned for this cause endlessly only 26 (including a few Conservatives) chose to vote against the bill. Whips play an important part in removing efficiency from Parliament. By having whips who ensure that MPs behave in accordance to the decisions of the executive both Parliaments ability to scrutinise and hold the executive to account is diminished, but also their role as representatives of their individual constituency is also compromised.
To what extent does parliament control executive power? (40 marks) A parliament is a body that has several roles, including legitimising legislation, passing laws, scrutinising or amending legislation, calling government to account and representing voters. Emphasis is placed that the government branch in the UK (the government) normally dominates the parliament due to various reasons such as high majorities, MPs loyalty to the party manifesto, influence of PM on MPs, existence of party whips and the limitations of the House of Lords. However, some may argue that the government does not have it all its own way as parliament can control the government in a number of ways including, dismissing large majoritarian governments, sovereignty of the parliament, public accountability, barriers set by select committees and the House of Lords. Parliament may face difficulties in controlling executive power as the government usually has an overall majority.
Assemblies which are also known as parliaments or legislatures provide a key role in government. They act as national debating chambers and public forums in which government polices and major issues can be discussed and analysed. In most cases they are invested with formal law-making power giving them some capacity to shape and influence public policy. However, assemblies have been criticised by Heywood (2002, p. 311) as being no more than “talking shops” that do little more than rubber stamp decisions that have effectively been made elsewhere. This essay will firstly discuss how parliamentary and presidential systems differ, the different types of legislature and their main functions.
So I would have to say that the policies were mostly Tory throughout this period although as I’ve said, there are a number of mitigating factors which could hinder this judgement. The historian Evans is negative towards the idea that Liverpool’s “second wave” was indeed liberal, he comments that few ministers changed their positions and argues that the Liberal frameworks would’ve been placed by the supposed reactionary “first wave”. Liverpool passed an Act increasing the voting qualification of Irishmen from 40 shillings to £10. To me this sticks out as highly reactionary as it was passed in the hope of preventing lower class Irishmen voting radicals into parliament. It is a direct way to prevent any significant change to the government personnel.
At a glance it is obvious that a major part of UK democracy is parliamentary democracy as this is our chosen form of government, having the houses of parliament which consist of the house of commons and the house of lords. In the UK we have the government which is drawn from parliament as well as the monarchy who are now concerned primarily with ceremonial roles within governing the country. However it is key to note that although the monarchy does have a part in the governing of the UK it is not elected and so this damages the argument of the UK being fully democratic. However the majority of parliament is elected at least. In the UK parliament all members of the house of commons are elected in free and fair elections by their local
Robert Dahl and Charles Lindbolm suggest a pluralist view of democracy suggesting that pressure groups are beneficial to democracy. They enable political participation in national and local politics providing a role for individuals in the system. The work of pressure groups monitors the government and holds it to account and as a result can leak and expose information. As pressure groups aim to influence public policies either by direct action or lobbying and raising awareness of an issue as groups compete to influence policies and the government may take advice from them. Furthermore pressures groups are essential to democracy as they give the opportunity for minorities such as ethnic groups and genders to express distinctive points of view, encouraging people to become involved with decision making and public life forming a link between the government and the people.
Backbench MPs, those whom are elected to parliament but not in Government, cabinet or shadow cabinet, are all elected by their constituents, Those who vote for the MP within his/her constituency, and are expected to represent them under our representative democracy we have in the UK, but the constituents no aren’t first priority. There are three models that MPs may follow the first and what in recent years has taken precedence for the ministers is the Mandate model. In this model the MP is expected to do as his party says and support all plans his/her party has. This may or may not be an issue, many of the electorate now vote simply for the party not the person and the majority won’t even know their MPs name, they may read the party manifesto and decide to vote for they party and through this model that means that the MP will support all points within the manifesto and so the public don’t need to know about the MP. So why are the MPs following this and acting as a sheep?