The Effectiveness of the House of Commons as a Check on the Executive

898 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The functions of the house of Commons

The Effectiveness of the House of Commons as a Check on the Executive

What is meant by the effectiveness of the commons check on the

executive is basically, how able is the house of commons to prevent

the Government (executive) from getting its own way or forcing its

will upon the people of Britain. In theory the commons level of

effectiveness is constant as each Member of Parliament has an opinion

on every bill or motion that is put forward that is based on

conscience. This is not practicable, however, as the party system and

the party whips change this. The whips tell MPs which way to vote and

can impose sanctions upon those MPs who rebel against the government.

Therefore when considering the effectiveness of the commons as a check

on the executive one must consider how that effectiveness can change

with each general election. For example, John Major was extremely

limited in the power he could exercise as Prime Minister as his the

Tory party was the biggest party by only twelve seats and so he could

easily be outvoted if a policy was widely opposed.

The opposite of this would be the first of Tony Blair’s terms in

office. With over four hundred New Labour Members of Parliament Blair

could afford to push almost any policy he wanted and expect it to be

passed with a comfortable majority. Gradually the number of New Labour

dissenters has grown and there have been a number of backbench

rebellions against Blair. He has, however, survived all of these by

virtue of his huge parliamentary majority.

Many commentators have suggested that in the coming 2005 election

Blair will be returned to office with a majority reduced by thirty to

forty seats. If this is the case it is likely that Blair will be

forced to operate as if he were heading a minority government as Major

did. Should this happen then the commons will be more effective at

controlling the executive.

As I have hinted, in New Labour’s first term 1997 to 2001 the Labour

Show More
Related

  • Party Discipline in the House of Commons and Senate

    1715 Words  | 4 Pages

    In light of the recent Senate scandal, the public’s attention has been directed to the government’s credibility and its members’ discipline again. Mike Duffy’s 90,000 dollars scandal has put the Canadian government’s party discipline into the spotlight. While it is well-known amongst general public, there are other similar incentives and disincentives shared between the Members of the Parliament (MPs) and senators in keeping them disciplined, as well as some different ones that set them apart. In this essay, I am going to analyze the main levers of party discipline in the House of Commons and the Senate for their effectiveness. By comparing the similarities and differences, I will explain for the motivations behind the Senate, even if they have seemingly fewer incentives than the MPs, such as free of worrying about being re-elected.

    Read More

  • Party Discipline In Canada

    1200 Words  | 3 Pages

    In order to let our members of parliament to have more power and saying, we will have to cut power from the party whip and the Prime Minister. In this way no one can force anyone to make a predetermined vote according to party lines rather than their personal conviction. In taking away the power from the PM and party whips will allow the riding representatives more freedom in which power is one

    Read More

  • The Two Party System of UK

    715 Words  | 2 Pages

    This is confirmed by the period 1945-79, when power tended to alternate frequently between the Labour and Conservative parties. However, during this period, Labour won power twice with a majority of less than twenty seats, resulting in a near hung parliament. This tends to weaken the idea that the electoral pendulum has swung evenly for both parties. It is important to consider the period of time looked when attempting to identify which system best describes

    Read More

  • Does a Minority Government Hinder a Governing Party?

    919 Words  | 2 Pages

    Paun Akash, Robert Hazell, Andrew Turnball, Alan Beith, Paul Evans, and Michael Crick. "Hung Parliaments and the Challenges for Westminster and Whitehall: How to Make Minority and Multiparty Governance Work (with Commentaries by Turnbull, Beith, Evans and Crick)." in Political Quarterly Vol 81, Issue 2: 213-227.

    Read More

  • Parliamentary Sovereignty

    1481 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Canada Parliamentary System

    1118 Words  | 3 Pages

    Canada runs on a democratic model of governing based on the British parliamentary system. Its parliament is thus divided into two chambers: the House of Commons and the Senate. Elected politicians are seated within The House of Commons while the Senate occupies qualified citizens which are appointed by the Prime Minister. Parliament’s purpose is to hold responsibility for passing legislations and the choosing of government, referring to the political party with the largest amount of seats. Depending on the results of the election, Canada has the potential of having either a majority, minority or in the rare case a coalition government. Customarily, an election in Canada usually ends up forming a majority government. The party with more than

    Read More

  • UK's Constitution: The Rule of Law and Parliamentary Sovereignty

    1681 Words  | 4 Pages

    Parliamentary sovereignty, a core principle of the UK's constitution, essentially states that the Parliament is the ultimate legal authority, which possesses the power to create, modify or end any law. The judiciary cannot question its legislative competence, and a Parliament is not bound by former legislative provisions of earlier Parliaments. The ‘rule of law’ on the other hand, is a constitutional doctrine which primarily governs the operation of the legal system and the manner in which the powers of the state are exercised. However, since the Parliament is capable of making any law whatsoever, the concept of the rule of law poses a contradiction to the principle of parliamentary supremacy, entailing that Parliament is not bound by the Rule of Law, and it can exercise power arbitrarily.

    Read More

  • Checks and Balances

    966 Words  | 2 Pages

    The doctrine of separation of powers developed over many centuries. This practice doctrine can be traced to the British Parliament's gradual assertion of power and resistance to royal decrees during the 14th century. Political theorist, John Locke wrote about the concept of separation of powers in his Second Treatise of Government (1690). In the United States, the separation of powers is a fundamental constitutional principle. The framers of this Constitution saw the need to divide power within the government to prevent a single group from ruthlessly taking over the country. Articles I through III of the Constitution of the United States place each of the basic powers of government in a separate branch. This separation of power allowed each branch of government to “check” each other and maintained a balance of power.

    Read More

  • Exploring To Which Extent the Parliament is Supreme

    1120 Words  | 3 Pages

    Exploring To Which Extent the Parliament is Supreme There are two sides to this argument, one obviously defending that Parliament is Supreme in the law making process, and has utmost authority, the other stating the constraints on Parliament and there it is not supreme. Within Britain, parliament is the supreme law making body. The idea behind this is that the people select parliament and, therefore, the people make the law. We describe this as PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNITY, That is to say that Parliament is the highest power in the land, and shall not be challenged. An example that shows parliamentary supremacy is Cheney .vs.

    Read More

  • Disadvantages Of Coalitions In Canada

    939 Words  | 2 Pages

    Over the years, a source of concern has been that minority governments don’t seem to last, that they can’t seem to remain in power as long as majority governments can (Bourgault, 2011: 512). Indeed, it is true that the shortest government to stay in power was the one of Meighen in 1926 whose parliament sieged for a grand total of three days before losing the confidence of the House of Commons (Migneault, 2010: 101). Be that as it may, this remains anecdotic and shouldn’t as a recurrent event (Migneault, 2010: 101). Nevertheless, it has been noted that, although majority government have commonly stayed in power for 48 months, minority government have managed to retain their place for 22 months on average (Migneault,

    Read More

  • The Power Of The Executive Branch

    1016 Words  | 3 Pages

    The power of the Executive branch has expanded over time to become the most authoritative division of government. In contrast to the Constitution 's fundamental designer, James Madison, who predicted the Legislative branch would dominate due to it’s power in making laws and regulating taxes/spending, the executive powers have proven to be superior and ever broadening. From the birth of the Republic, the President has sought to protect his rights and seek beyond his restriction of power. Setting the precedent as early as 1795, George Washington refused to relay documents relating to the Jay Treaty to the House of Representatives and saw his actions as a justified act of “executive prerogative.” Moreover, weaving throughout the Nineteenth century, presidents such as Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln conceived and added functions, such as the extensive use of the veto and the president’s direct and active role as Commander in Chief to their executive tool-belt. The Constitution communicates very little details regarding the President’s use of the power of veto and the role as Commander in Chief, but it was these presidents which established the major authority of the executive branch in these areas.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Royal Prerogative Powers

    1796 Words  | 4 Pages

    The RP helps to keep our powers separated which avoiding the judicial tyranny. After the formation of the two houses of parliament, which called the legislature, the creation of our statutes prevail to the RP. In the case of De Kayser, RP and statute found to co-exist and statute prevails, for the reason that the representatives in the House of Commons are elected from the public in order to create statute to help the development of the country. Moreover, the constitutional conventions are also part of our unwritten constitution and have conflict to the royal prerogative. Some of the RP powers are included to the conventions such as the automatic granting of royal assent, which the Queen should sign after the convention. Finally, the fire brigades union case mentioned that the executive cannot exercise the prerogative in a way which would derogate from the due fulfilment of statutory duty. The data indicates that the current prime minister, has power to overrule the UK’s parliament recent vote of a military intervention in Syria by using the RP which bypass any common decision of acts of war. Generally, powers such as the parliamentary immunity and prerogative powers, destroy the equality and justice of the society, by giving permission, to avoid the soft process of the legitimate society and finally breaking the rule of law. Supporting this argument, a member of parliament, Jack Straw strongly

    Read More

  • Unicameral and Bicameral Legislatures

    2146 Words  | 5 Pages

    Taylor, H. (1910). The constitutional crisis in Great Britain: Bicameral system should be retained with House of Lords reorganized on an elective basis. Concord, N.H: Rumford Press. 6th edition

    Read More

  • The Royal Prerogative

    2051 Words  | 5 Pages

    The royal prerogative is a source of constitutional law; it is derived from common law powers that have been handed down from the monarchy to the executive. The significance of the prerogative in constitutional law is that it provides the executive with considerable power to act without following ‘normal’ parliamentary procedures. As Dicey explained, the prerogative is ‘every act which the executive government can lawfully do without the authority of an Act of Parliament’. In constitutional terms, it is therefore important to explore the means by which the UK constitution secures the accountability for the exercise of prerogative powers by the executive. Historically the prerogative was exercised by the monarchy, the majority of powers are now used by ministers, and very few remained the personal preserve of the sovereign.

    Read More

  • Social Media as a Quantitative Indicator of Political Behavior

    998 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...has so much power. The findings of this research could be used by campaigners in an attempt to swing an election in their favour, creating an unfair bias in parliament and denigrating the ideals of democracy.

    Read More

More about The Effectiveness of the House of Commons as a Check on the Executive

Open Document