Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Devolution from the Parliament of the United Kingdom to the Scottish Parliament
British political system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Since 1999, the way in which the United Kingdom is run has been reformed by devolution. Devolution is a system of governance in which the government is decentralized and more powers are governed by the three nations making up the United Kingdom (Bailey & Budd, 2016). The United Kingdom comprises the countries of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and England. Traditional most of the decisions have been made from the Westminster. However, devolution aims at transferring some of the powers from the Westminster to the assemblies in Cardiff, Edinburg, and the Scottish parliament. Due to the historical differences between the countries making up the United Kingdom, devolution has been applied in different ways, although the aims and benefits have …show more content…
Over the years there have been calls for independence from various countries making up the UK. Part of the reasons for these calls comes from the realisation that most of these countries feel they have been short-changed in terms of resource distribution (MacKinnon, 2015). A good example is a recent referendum on the independence of Scotland. Nevertheless, with devolution, the majority of the resources will be brought close to the people and not many people will have the feeling of being short-changed. Given that the central governments operate from England and the fact that England appears to be prosperous than others countries making up the UK, the best thing to do is to provide more resources to the other countries so that they can be as prosperous as England (Minto et al., 2016). By allowing countries such as Scotland some form of autonomy to make decisions such as control of Law and Order, Health, Education, Transport, the Environment ,housing and Economic Development and since 2016, Scotland can also set own income tax , they will be able to feel that they are equal partners in the United Kingdom and that their economies are not wholly dependent on the decisions made in …show more content…
By bringing the government closer to the national regions, the regional governments are allowed more room to take on local initiatives. Devolution has provided more space for democracy since it brings the government close to the people. Given that the UK is made up of four countries with different social and economic situations, devolution offers the opportunity for the opportunity of the governments to be close to the people. By having the administrations close to the people, the local people can have local resolutions to the problems and issues that face which are distinct to them (Alcock,2012). This means devolution supports the administrative allocation of power from the state to the regions. This means the devolved government from a second tier or a government which is responsible for various policy and administrative issues. Besides, with the continued recognition of a "Europe of regions", devolution provides the best option for the developments of the regions within Europe by giving less attention to the political boundaries. In essence, devolution provides a better avenue for the local people engage and do business with not only other people within the UK but also with people from other parts of Europe and the world. Devolution intensifies effectiveness in determining service provision. In a
Evaluate the extent to which there is a democratic deficit in the UK (30) The UK political system is one that has lasted for many hundreds of years. Though it has remained reasonably stable throughout this time, there have been many problems with UK politics. A democratic deficit is defined as any situation in which there is believed to be a lack of democratic accountability and control over the decision-making process. Many would argue that the UK suffers from a democratic deficit.
Comparing the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly On the 1st of July 1999 the Scottish Parliament assumed its full powers and duties. This was a devolved government, where some legislative powers were transferred from Westminster to the Parliament in Scotland. The Scottish parliament was designed to embody the links between the people of Scotland, the members of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive. The powers of duty are divided between the Scottish Executive (handles ministerial powers and duties) and the Secretary of State for Scotland (holds responsibilities relating to reserved matters). The Secretary of State however, remains a member of the UK cabinet.
To enable Britain to fulfil its part of the United Kingdom’s responsibilities within the European Union.
Some of the advantages of having a federal government are that the national level of government can work on the bigger picture tasks while the state government solve the local and specific issues, so that each departments time can be used wisely and efficiently. Furthermore, if citizens took their everyday problems to the national level, then the national government would be over worked and the citizen might have to travel far to even reach the states capital. Each side of the
Devolution is the transfer of powers from a central body to subordinate regional bodies. In Scotland, Devolution was set up to restore legitimacy to a system of government that reflected Scottish preferences. The reason behind the demand for Scottish self-government is that Scotland had the historic status of nationhood before the Union of 1707 and within the Union, has a different set of legal, educational and religious institutions that reinforce a Scottish identity.
In 2007, the SNP scraped a narrow election victory in the Scottish Parliament of 1 seat, holding 47 to Labour's 46 out of 129. This forced the SNP to form a minority government, being a pathetic 18 seats short of a majority but the result still caused uproar in the media. The SNP's decision-making power may be seen as weak due to its minority status. However, being in government has given the nationalists centre stage in the media for promoting their principal policy of independence for Scotland from the rest of the UK. Whether or not this conjecture has any feasibility remains to be seen. Which begs the question, what plans could the SNP have for Scotland that would supposedly improve the welfare of every citizen in the nation, be they laird or lavvy cleaner?
National, Local, and State governments work together cooperatively to solve common problems rather than making separate polices. They work more on an equal level to get things fixed. This type of federalism is hard to tell where one type of government ends and the next one begins. National and state governments are independent and interdependent with an overlap of functions and financial resources. It is difficult for one to accumulate absolute power with this type of federalism.
The intention of this essay is to explain the process of law reform within the English legal system. The way in which the activity of parliament and that of the judiciary affects the way in which laws are reformed in the UK will be also discussed. The common law system in the UK means that the UK's primary legal principles have been developed by the judiciary rather than by parliament. However, as parliamentary sovereignty is an important key principle of the UK constitution parliament is the supreme legal authority in the UK. Parliament can create, change or repeal any law and generally speaking the judiciary cannot overrule legislation that has been passed by parliament.
The most significant and challenge to the traditional view of parliamentary sovereignty was Britain’s membership of the European Community in 1972. The European Communities Act 1972 brought with it the requirement that European Law be given priority over domestic courts over conflicting issues of national law. This notion was a direct affront to parliamentary sovereignty, which required that if a later statute, contradicted and earlier statute, which sought to incorporate European Law into English Law, then the later statute should impliedly repeal the earlier statute. Therefore the European Communities act imposed a substantive limit on the legislative ability of subsequent Parliaments.
Thus, the capacity for tyranny is curbed no matter where it originates. Federalism supports union without destroying state identity. Issues can be debated at a state level, before they are addressed on a national scale. Local proceedings affect the position of state legislators on a national scale. Not all states or parties must be in agreement on the national level, and the conclusions reached by individual states can be compared as they relate to the nation as a whole.
Parliamentary sovereignty is a vital principle in the U.K constitution, which demonstrates that there are no legal limitations for parliament when creating/ending any legislation. The extent of impact Parliamentary sovereignty has is that nothing can override the legislation of parliament and it is impossible to bind future parliaments. However, these principles put forward by a constitutional law theorist Dicey, arguably do present political limits to parliamentary sovereignty. When the European law was incorporated in the U.K, parliamentary sovereignty was abdicated to the EU which prioritised European law. Thus, parliament had abdicated its power to another body which is referred to as the transfer of powers. To overcome the issue of EU Supremacy and parliamentary sovereignty the European Communities Act 1972 was passed in order to avoid conflicting views.
 legitimacy (territories should once more be placed under the control of the old ruling houses of the traditional order), and stability (balance power in Europe)
On the one hand, without international relations from the EU, Britain is economically and socially vulnerable. While Britain’s exit from the EU may define Britain’s power according to British citizens, the type of power that matters is relative power, which is the power when it is being compared to other states. If the other states do not recognize Britain as a force of power, then its exit from the EU is pointless. On the other hand, by discontinuing the benefits granted by the EU, Britain declines the assistance that could have helped the country to become more powerful. In other words, Brexit decreases a source of gathering power for Britain, since the EU not only offers economic opportunities, but it also provides useful information so that the member states can behave accordingly. Overall, realism suggests that while Brexit increases Britain’s confidence in being powerful, it also decreases the country’s power in a way.
In their book, Smith and Wistrich state that Britain sensed a problem in the identity once there has been devolution of power to Scotland and Wales in 1998 (2009). It maybe true that Scots and Welsh feel more attached to their own na...
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (London: 2005). pp. 51, 71-72. Accessed May 3, 2014. http://www.jhud.co.uk/huddleston/uk2005_tcm77-248610.pdf.