They are dependent on a coalition government because so far they have never had a majority in Parliament. Without the Conservatives choosing to form a coalition with them in order to create a majority, the Liberal Democrats would never have been able to come into power. Furthermore they’re becoming increasing unpopular in power due to breaking promises and being accused of ‘turning Tory’. This suggests that they have no political strength by themselves and that many potential voters will turn to alternatives, such as the Labour party, who could ultimately gain popularity due to the failures of the Liberal Democrats; therefore the UK is still a two party system favouring the Conservatives and Labour party. However on the other hand it is argued that the UK could not possibly be a two party system because the Conservatives wouldn’t have been able to come into power without the Liberal Democrats.
These constitutional reforms were proposed to improve democracy and the legitimacy of the governments in the UK however there has been a sense that these reforms have occurred with no real end goal therefore it makes it difficult to consider how effective they will be and if they would even make a difference due to the political framework of the UK. With the UK’s preservation of parliamentary sovereignty it in effect cancels out any proposals to move away from an elective dictatorship and to become more democratic. One reform that has taken place since 1997 is the reform of the House of Lords in the form of the House of Lords Act (1999). This was reform was proposed in two parts. The first phase was the dispersal of hereditary peers with only 92 remaining today and it abolished the voting rights of most hereditary peers.
Some MPS choose to be party delegates rather than conviction politicians because they fear of being sacked and losing their job, by not listening to the leader and following orders, instead speaking up against the leader’s views which could put them in a position where they could lose their job. For example George Galloway who was a conviction politician and said things that he felt was right, he was sacked by
Supporters would suggest that the constitution is fit for purpose. Recent activities that have taken place in the UK would suggest that the constitution is fit for purpose, for example the Scottish referendum. In this essay, I am going to argue that the UK constitution is no longer fit for purpose. The facts that our constitution is uncodified means that there is not much clarity as many individuals/citizens do not know their rights. This means that the government can override our rights, for example the case of the Belmarsh Prison Act 2001 and the Anti-Terrorism Act.
Using 3 or 4 points, explain why Weimar was a failed political experiment. Provide evidence. It was not a political experiment, but it failed in its democratic process through its constitutional laws. -Many ordinary electors in Germany, whatever their private political views, saw voting for the three democratic parties as the best way to prevent the creation of a German Soviet and ward off the threat of a Bolshevik revolution. Not surprisingly, therefor, the Social Democrats, the left -liberal Democrats and the Centre Party (The churches political wing) gained an overall majority in the elections to the Constituent Assembly.
However, there are inevitably some questions arising about the electoral college and whether it still works best for the US today. Some say it should be completely scrapped, with a more democratic direct election taking it's place; others day that it can be mended by reforming it, and the final argument is to defend it, and leave it as it is. One reason to end the electoral college system is because it is not democratic enough. The winner of the nationwide vote could in fact lose the election because of the way the electoral college works. Popular vote winners have been denied the presidency in 1824, 1876, 1888 and 2000.
The election for the coalition results in 76% supporting pro-Weimar parties, showing that the opposition and threats to the government had settled. People in Germany were no longer looking for extremist parties which was proved by the failure of the right-wing coalition. In theory the coalitions should have worked well with the cooperation from all parties. However, the SPD were reluctant to work with other parties subsequently weakening the democracy. This proves the political instability of Germany in this period as they were the largest party in the Reichstag but still refused to cooperate.
Zonglun Wu Compare and Contrast Essay Are undecided voters important? Are undecided voters less knowledgeable? There are different ways that the media portrays undecided voters in the current presidential election. When reading media it is important that we understand who are these "undecided voter" and what kind of bias do authors have, because it helps us to see the whole campaign more objectively. In Elizabeth Koberts article, "Searching for the undecided voter" the author descirbes the undecided voter as being a small, but important group that has a reputation of being less knowledgeable about politics.
They also have a number of hereditary peers (although there will no longer be any hereditary peers appointed. There have been many calls to make the House of Lords into an elected chamber as people say that the fact that it is unelected reduces the democracy of the United Kingdom and that it is unfair to have an unelected as the peers may not actually represent the views of the people. However, there are also many arguments as to why the House of Lords should remain unelected. The first and possibly most convincing argument is the fact that an elected second chamber would actually be completely pointless as it would be exactly the same and the House of Commons. This means that instead of making the House of Lords elected, it would probably be more practical just to get rid of it all together and just have the House of Commons.
Firstly, consulting the electorate on specific policy matters relies on people making well-informed decisions about complex and often specialist matters. One could argue that the general public simply do not understand the intricacies of politics and government enough to make the right choices about running the nation – and therefore that the experts who we elect and rely on as part of our current democracy should continue to represent the electorate in making these decisions. The 2011 referendum on AV was widely criticized for the lack of information available to and certainly used by voters, and many argue that had people better understood the issue, they would have voted differently. Another argument about the unreliability of referendums concerns campaigning. As seen with AV in 2011, the ‘No’ campaign was better funded and better supported which majorly affected the referendum’s outcome – one can argue that wider use of referendums will put even more political decisions in the hands of the rich and influential, detracting from democracy.