The British Constitution

What is a constitution?

• An authorative set of laws, rules and practices specifying how a state is to be governed and the relationship between the state and the individual.
• Establishes political principles, structure, procedures, powers and duties of a government.
• Normally happens after an upheaval e.g. civil war/revolution/defeat in war.
• Set out division of governmental activities and who will perform each task.
• Decides how powerful different parts of the government will interact and work together.
• Sets out the limitations of the power of rulers and guarantees the rights of the ruled.
• Provides legitimacy to those in power, encourage governmental stability through clear rules and set out goals and values of a state.

What different types of constitution are there?

Codified/Written – All the main sources of the constitution are in one document. (e.g. USA from 1787).	Uncodified/Unwritten – Many of the constitutional rules are written down but they are not gathered together. Also, rules are found in convention and tradition. (e.g. UK/Israel/New Zealand)
Flexible – Can be altered by the law making process (e.g. Parliament in the UK)	Rigid – Constitution becomes law. Difficult to bring changes without extensive discussion. (e.g. USA)
Unitary – Power in hands of a central government where little regional differences. (e.g. UK)	Federal – Division of power with regional units (e.g. US division between central govt and states/Germany/Belgium)
Monarchical – Power in hands of monarch	Republican – Head of state is elected.
Presidential –President has power independent/separate from Congress (e.g. US)	Parliamentary – No separation of powers as leader is accountable to legislature (e.g. Executive chosen from Parliament in UK)
Sovereignty of Parliament – Parliament possesses supreme power. Can make or  unmake any law of its choosing (e.g. UK)	Sovereignty of people – Power supposedly in the power of the people. (e.g. US – Constitution opens with ‘We the people of the US’.

What is the UK constitution?

• Accumulation of traditions, customs, conventions, precedents and Acts of Parliament. Has developed gradually. Unsystematic as many ancient origins.
• No attempt had been made to collate it and codify it until 2010 when a Cabinet Manual was set up to some identify key conventions and practices.
• Uncodified (no single document)
• Unitary (Parliament makes laws for all parts of the UK) (n.b. James Mitchell has said the UK is actually a ‘Union state’ as there are important political and cultural differences since devolution)
• Flexible (Can be changed by Acts of Parliament or Referendums e.g. AV Vote)
• Sovereignty of Parliament – AV Dicey said is the supreme law-making body. Can constantly change and amend laws.
• Constitutional monarchy – monarch retains formal powers but usage constrained. Parliament has overall authority.
• Clear rule of law which applies to everyone regardless of who they are. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial.
• Fusion of powers – Executive members are part of the legislature and are responsible to it. Until the Supreme Court was brought in members of the judiciary were often part of the legislature. Some say it allows power to be coordinated and government to operate effectively.

What are the sources of the UK constitution?

• Magna Carta (1215) suggested that people had some control over what a monarch does and certain rights.
• Certain texts and commentaries such as Bagehot’s “The English Constitution”.
• One of the major sources due to power of Parliament to make and change constitution. Major statutes (Acts of parliament) e.g. Wales Act 1998 set up Welsh National Assembly, Scotland Act 1998, Human Rights Act 1998, House of Lords Act 1999.
• Prerogative powers of the Crown – certain powers expected to be carried out by a monarch but many have since been passed on to ministers to act in the monarchs name. (e.g. to declare war, make treaties and give honours)
• Laws and customs of parliament – certain procedures for the House of Commons and Lords and the rights of the members. Many identified in Erskine May’s ‘Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usages of Parliament.
• Constitutional conventions – unwritten rules that guide constitutional behaviour and how political parties act. E.g. that proceedings of Cabinet should be kept secret, ideas of collective and individual responsibility, monarchs now accepting any bill agreed by Parliament and Prime Minister chosen by House of Commons.
• Common laws – body of rules which protect freedom of speech and implemented by judges. Use of judicial precedent – decisions in court based on previous decisions with similar circumstances.
• European Union Law – Joined European Community in 1973. UK agreed accept laws and legislation passed by European Community. European law takes precedence over the UK law. (e.g. seen in Factortame case in 1990) Particularly important in areas such as trade, agriculture and working and environmental policy.
• Wade and Phillips (1998) said UK Constitution ‘embraces laws, customs and conventions hammered out, as if it were, on the anvil of experience’. Based on practical experience and making adjustments as necessary.

What changes have been made to the constitution?

• Most in support of the constitution and happy to work within existing framework.
• Other groups unhappy and believe it needs reform. Feeling developed particularly in the 1970s due to problems in economy, government, Europe and Ireland. Lord Hailsham said constitution promoted ‘elective dictatorship’ and that a ‘Bill of Rights’ was needed.
• Conservatives in power 1979-1992 and upheld many key features of constitution – Thatcher and Major centralised power and denied devolution.
• In the late 1980s and 1990s a coalition of political parties, pressure groups (Charter 88 – now called Unlock Democracy) and commentators developed coherent and influential case for reform.
• By the mid 1990s Labour Party supporting much of the constitutional reform agenda including devolution, freedom of information, electoral and parliamentary reform, strengthening civil liberties and reform of House of Lords. Seen in 1997 election manifesto.
• When came to power seen to carry out major and unprecedented constitutional change. Attempted more than any other twentieth century government. Taken a gradualist, step-by-step approach.
• Some criticised the reforms saying they were aimed to strengthen Blair’s personal power and strengthen his hold on government and policy making. Others say they did not go far enough and had no overall theme and were not consistently applied (e.g. different electoral systems for different votes).

Labour constitutional reforms 1997-2010

Area	Reforms	Frustrated or incomplete reforms
Rights	Human Rights Act (1998) – European Convention on Human Rights part of UK Law.Freedom of Information Act (2000) – greater access to information	New Bill of Rights and Duties was proposed but not introduced.
Devolution	Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Northern Ireland Assembly established. (1999)	Proposal for regional assemblies was dropped in 2004.
Decentralisation	Elected mayors in some English authorities e.g. London.	Only 12 local authorities adopted mayor model
Electoral reform	New electoral systems for devolved assemblies.	No action on electoral reform for Westminster which proposed in Jenkins Report (1998).
Parliament	All but 92 hereditary peers removed from the House of Lords.	Unable agree next stage House of Lords Reform and limited reforms to House of Commons.
Judiciary	Supreme Court started in 2009. Removed judicial role of the House of Lords.New Judicial appointments system.Changes to role of Lord Chancellor.
Participation	Referendums on devolutions and mayors.Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act (2000) regulates conduct of parties and elections.	Other referendums on electoral reform and EU constitution shelved (Conservatives carrying out AV voting system referendum in 2011).

• Changes brought more rights to citizens and greater protection and placed further checks and balances on power of government.
• Some say lacked overarching vision and evolutionary rather than revolutionary. More radical changes rejected or not attempted. Conservatives said went too far already.
• Gordon Brown interested in constitutional reform. Subject of his governments first major publication ‘The Governance of Britain’.
• Limited concrete action. Did introduce ‘Constitutional Reform Act (2010) which set out core values of the civil service.
• Conservative-Lib Dem coalition looking at alternative vote system, British Bill of Rights, House of Lords, fixed-term parliaments, implementation of Calman Commission and further devolution of power to Scotland.

Does the UK need a written/codified constitution?

Yes

No

·         Nowhere can easily be seen as from so many sources. Would remove uncertainty about specific roles e.g. of the monarch.·         Some say it is outdated, inefficient and undemocratic with most conventions dating back to a pre-modern era. The House of Lords reflects a pre-democratic era with the idea of hereditary power.·         Tendency for executive dominance (power of executive). E.g. Blair removed session of question time, changed electoral system and composition of Lords. A constitution would constrain their power. ·         No separation of powers – executive exercises great control over legislative process and local/subnational government. ·         Would protect the independence of the judiciary. ·         Would provide up-to-date statement of rights of people which is more relevant that European Convention. ·         Key laws would be entrenched (i.e firmly established and difficult to amend) ·         Would be easier for the courts to interpret what is lawful behaviour and uphold the constitution. At the moment judicial review is limited as no definitive criteria for determining what is unconstitutional. ·         Would set out clearer values and structure of the political system. ·         Would prevent any constitutional crises (e.g. over hung parliament in 2010 where no single part had an overall majority).

·         Traditional constitution known as the ‘Westminster model’ – claims this is how it is supposed to operate.·         System has worked well for several hundred years and has provided liberty and stability. Reflects the history and enduring values of the British people·         Provides for strong and effective government. Includes doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty with power centralised in cabinet. ·         There is no widespread demand for or interest in change. ·         Flexibility allows adjustments to meet new demands when required i.e. ‘new wine in old bottles’. ·         Peoples rights have been protected and a written constitution does not guarantee these rights (e.g. in US, Zimbabwe and Russia). ·         Would be hard to devise a constitution which pleases everyone.

 

The Judiciary

Branch of government responsible for adjudication of law and arbitration between groups in any legal disputes. Primarily includes judges and courts who interpret and carry out the meaning of laws.

What are the roles of judges?

• Ensure that laws passed are in accordance with the constitution.
• Interpret what the law means and set out how it should be applied in particular cases.
• Preside over criminal trials for serious offences, resolve disputes between individuals, deliver sentences and make sure rules of procedures properly applied.
• Some also asked to chair enquiries e.g. the Hutton enquiry after the invasion of Iraq.
• In past if they were Law Lords, they would sit in parliament, contributing to debates on public policy and helping House of Lords. Since Constitutional Reform Act, from 209 instead operate in the new Supreme Court.
• Now taking on a greater political role and part of political system as the “third branch of government” – reviewing government’s decisions and hearing claims that government infringing constitution or Human Rights Act. Seen to be upholding the will of the legislature and guardians of the law. Carry out judicial review of laws and actions.
• Some trust their judgement and expertise believing them to be independent and incorruptible. Other politicians see them as a threat to their policy making.

Why are judges playing an increased role?

• Due to the expanding role of government there is more legislation for them to adjudicate.
• The greater complexity of government which leads to greater conflict and disputes which need resolving.
• There is a greater focus on the rule of law and rights of citizen since the Human Rights Act.
• People are more willing to use courts to get what they want e.g. culture of litigation/suing.
• Politicians unwilling deal with sensitive issues so leave them to courts to resolve e.g. abortion, stem cell research.

What changes have been made in the administration of justice?

• Previously Lord Chancellor head of judicial system which brought conflict as also role as Home Secretary – conflict of interest. Pressure to see a single ‘Minister of Justice’ as head of a specific department for judicial system. Changes brought in from 2007.
• Ministry of Justice established – responsible for sentencing, probation, prisons etc.
• Lord Chancellor is now known as the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor. Lost most of its judicial functions – no longer a judge but has a role in appointing judges. Shares power with the Lord Chief Justice who is overall head of the judiciary and has responsibility for the courts and judges.
• Home Secretary takes responsibility for police and security service as well as overseeing crime reduction and counter terrorism.
• Supreme Court established which meant that Law Lords could no longer sit and vote in the House of Lords whilst they were Justice of the Supreme Court to help independence.

What are the key elements of the legal system?

• Clear court structure of Her Majesty’s Courts Service (HMCS).
• Supreme Court à Hear appeals from Court of Appeal and High Court. Run by Law Lords. No jury.
• Court of Appeal – Hear appeals from Crown Court, High Court and County Court. Civil and Criminal Divisions. No jury.
• High Court – Chancery division (involving money/tax), Divisional Court (bankruptcy/land), Queen’s Bench Division, Contract and tort, Commercial Court, Admiralty Court, Administrative Court (oversee legality of other decisions).
• Crown Court – Hear criminal cases for sentencing with judge and jury trial. Hear appeals from Magistrates Court.
• Magistrates Court – Here criminal cases including smaller offences, family issues and youth courts. No jury.
• County Courts – Look at civil cases involving immigration, child support etc.
• Tribunals Service – Hear appeals from decisions on immigration, social security, child support, pensions, tax and lands.
• Different kinds of courts, judges and legal professionals.
• There are Justices of the Peace who have no legal qualifications and are unpaid. Hear 95% of cases in England and Wales. Receive training to give them sufficient knowledge of law and nature and purpose of sentencing. Advised by court clerk.
• Longer cases dealt with by district judges. Legally qualified.
• Judges preside over Crown and County Courts and Higher Courts.
• Sometimes assisted by Jury – not needed if accused pleads guilty or only sentencing. Jury seen to bring the law closer to the people. Provide ordinary people with opportunity to participate in affairs of government. Others say not a good thing as lack understanding technical cases and no specialist training/education. Criminal Justice Act restricted right of jury trial in important cases.
• Barristers and solicitors represent interests of the disputing parties.

How is the independence of the judiciary secured?

• Independence important in a liberal democracy. Decisions should not be influenced by government and should be able to function freely.
• Constitutional Reform Act 2005 help independence of judiciary from legislature and executive – limited the judicial role of the Lord Chancellor, established a new Supreme Court separate from House of Lords and removed Law lords from Parliament.
• How judges are selected – Used to be appointed by government – most senior by Prime Minister and others by Lord Chancellor. Led to jobs being given to relatives and friends and were not chosen on judicial merit. Instead chosen by political leanings.
• New independent Judicial Appointments Commission from 2005 changed this. Commission puts forward own nominations and clear restrictions on power government to reject them.
• Their security of tenure – Retain their position subject to good conduct. Governments cannot choose to just remove them. No dismissals in the 20^th and 21^st
• Their political neutrality – expected to hold no political opinions and be ‘above and beyond politics’. Interpret but do not make the law. Need to be beyond politics and committed justice.
• Sentences of judges not subject parliamentary debate or criticism. Although sometimes irritated politicians make comments on lenient sentences.
• Granted immunity from the law of defamation – allowed to attack someone’s good name and reputation in a court.
• Given fixed salaries to ensure they are not open to corruption.

What sort of people are appointed as judges?

• Seen to be elitist and unrepresentative. Usually born into professional middle classes, often educated at public school and then Oxbridge. Tend to be wealthy, conservative in their thinking, middle aged when first appointed. Low percentage of women and ethnic minorities. In 2007 664 out of 3,545 were women and 123 were ethnic minorities.
• Of the 21 judges approved to be High Court Judges in 2008 all were white, male, former barristers and six of the nine who were educated in the UK went to independent schools. Only 8% recommended for appointment were black or Asian and 34% women.
• Those judges in the Supreme Court when opened: 10/11 went to Oxbridge, 9/11 independent schools, 10/11 men, average age 67.8.
• Seen to be out of touch with the lives of people from different backgrounds. Can not understand habits and terminology of everyday life. Lord Denning in the 70s said ‘blacks’ should not be on juries as they came from ‘alien’ cultural backgrounds, a judge remarked in a rape case that ‘Women who say no do not always mean no’ and during a murder trial Lord Donaldson asked ‘What is snogging?’.

Why has there been a growth in judicial activism?

• Distinguished judges have said that playing a more active role in cases relating to areas such as governmental secrecy, industrial relations, police powers, political protest, race relations and sexual behaviour. Taking a broad and active view of their role as interpreters of the constitution and reviewers of action.
• Judges expected to be impartial and outside political influence and pressure. 1955 Kilmuir Guidelines urged them to silence to prevent criticism. Guidelines have been relaxed and judges giving more interviews and express opinions on public policy.
• Less clear-cut separation of judges from political process. Lord Chancellor, Attorney General and Solicitor-General involved in both. Solicitor-General part of judicial process but gave legal advice to Blair government on Iraq supporting intervention.
• Caught up in other political issues. May be asked by Prime Minister to chair important enquiries and recommend future actions e.g. Hutton Enquiry. Can lead to criticism of judges – Hutton was said to have protected Blair and to have blamed BBC too much.
• Doubts as to whether neutral as people will naturally have political leanings and preferences. Believe naturally biased due to background, attitudes and opinions.
• Left in Britain critical of judges and wary of power. Labour felt been attacked in industrial relations e.g. Taff Vale Case which restricted right of unions to strike and in 1980s took union funds away. Labour document entitled Mainfesto in 1985 said ‘their attitude is strongly conservative, respectful of property rights and highly authoritarian’. Believe against minorities and social progress.
• Passage of Human Rights Act 1998 provided further opportunities for activism and politicisation of the judiciary. Decide on validity of government legislation.

Why has there been a growth in judicial review?

• Judicial review is process that enables judges to override decisions and laws of elected government by determining whether they are legal.
• Make rulings on whether laws are constitutional, resolve conflicts to do with civil liberties and those within government. Can monitor public official’s actions and nullify those illegal or unconstitutional.
• Become increasingly relevant. Between 1981 and 1996 cases judicial review rose from 500 to nearly 4,000.1987 government lawyers published document for civil servants called The Judge over your Shoulder. Reflected they were under more pressure.
• Caused great resentment within government and ministers. Home Secretary Michael Howard under Major had a number of decisions considered to be unlawful e.g. exclusion from the UK of the Reverend Moon (Leader of Unification Church).
• Continued under Labour government where judges sided against government on issues of immigration and asylum seekers – declared parts of Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act (2002) illegal. Said Anti-Terrorism and Security Act 200 was unlawful and discriminatory. Ruled against government in 2004 on its immigration control policies regarding Roma migrants. David Blunkett accused judges of routinely rewriting the laws that parliament had passed’.

Have judges become too powerful?

Yes they have	No they haven’t
People feel uneasy that unelected judges involved in political territory.Believe that parliament should be main protector of people’s liberties.Judges lack accountability and are remote from reality. Common from narrow backgrounds and have specific interests. Government should be judged in the polling booth, not in the courtroom. Should not rely on judges to make difficult decisions.	Provide a means of protecting people from power of government and unduly powerful Executive.Are aware of how people have elected.Independent so can make difficult decisions. Held in high respect so people accept their decisions. More respected than politicians. Important in modern democracy that judiciary can review decisions.

What impact has the European Convention and Human Rights Act had?

• European Convention drawn up in 1953 and Britain signed the document. European Convention guaranteed certain rights for people. (Life, freedom from torture/slavery, right to liberty and free trial, freedom of thought and religion, right to marry and have a family etc.) Meant citizens who felt their rights been denied could take case to Strasbourg for compensation.
• Courts of Human Rights in Strasbourg interpret Convention in each case. Often went against the British government. Prisoners won right to consult lawyer/write to MP, corporal punishment in schools was ruled out; armed forces had to allow lesbians/homosexuals etc.
• Difficult for people to access Strasbourg as cost money and very slow process – sometimes cases taking 5-6 years to reach a decision. People ended up giving up.
• The Convention became part of British Law as part of the Human Rights Act in 1998 (Became operative from 2000). Now the British counts have to review these decisions. Judges now able to declare law incompatible with Convention and government would be able to change it in reaction. In this way would not pose threat to parliament sovereignty.
• Judges now able to apply human rights laws in their rulings. Can hold government and public bodies to account for their actions. Pour over precise wording of British statutes. Bogdanor says the measure ‘considerably alters the balance between parliament and the judiciary…for in effect the Human Rights Act makes the European Convention the fundamental law of the land’.
• Mixed reaction and many occasions seen to have failed: schoolboy arsonist allowed backed into classroom due to right to education, rapist given compensation for appeal being delayed, burglar given money to sue man whose house he broke into, travellers allowed to stay on green-belt sites, serial killers allowed hard-core porn due to right to information and freedom of expression.
• Michael Howard said need to ‘liberate the nation from the avalanche of political correctness, costly litigation, feeble justice and culture of compensation running riot in Britain today’.
• Others say has not brought that much change as between 2000 and 2002 only 94 of 431 cases were upheld. Barrister Keir Starmer said ‘hand on heart, the Humans Right Acts has changed the outcome of only a very few cases’.
• Some upset that the HRA has been used by those who engender little public sympathy, specifically criminals and foreign nationals using deportation. For example Afghan hijackers in 2006 were allowed to stay as they had been denied their rights under the HRA. Some have requested a formal Bill of Rights which has clearer terms and exceptions.
• Conservative party are currently focusing on this idea but it will be hard to enact given the UK’s relationship with Europe and would be tough to decide what to include.

The Prime Minister and Cabinet

What is the core executive?

• The branch of government and complex network of institutions and people at the centre that run day-to-day government, are responsible for making policies and administer laws. They are a group of individuals who assume the role of leadership, formulating and implementing public policy.
• The ‘pinnacle’ of the decision making process: typically compromises the Prime Minister, the Cabinet and its committees, the offices that serve the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, and the departments headed by senior ministers and including senior civil servants.
• Membership of the core executive is liable to change (fluid) and changes based on the relevant issues. During the build up to the Iraq war – members of the intelligence services and leaders in the military became particularly important. It is ‘constantly responding to new problems and changing circumstances’. Moran (2005) emphasises that ‘demands for decision just flow in’.

What is the role of the Prime Minister?

• Supposedly chosen by the Queen but by convention she chooses the leader of the majority party in the House of Commons. Leader has to be a member of the House of Commons.
• Head of the Executive branch of government and chairman of the Cabinet.
• Leader of his party in the country and in parliament. Use leadership to keep party united, working out compromise solutions as necessary as it is essential to remain united with them. With majority of House of Commons he will be able to get it to follow party policies.
• Responsible for the appointment and dismissal of members of Cabinet and other members of the government. Also, in appointing bishops and peers as well as Chairman of BBC (roles taken on from the monarch).
• Leader of the government at home and abroad. Answers questions in the House of Commons at Prime Minister’s Question Time or as the countries voice during national disasters, at important events or conferences with European Leaders.
• Determines the date of the next general election.
• Assisted by Prime Minister’s Office, composed of : civil servants and political advisers which handle his engagements and relationship with parliament and departments; Policy Units which provided specialist advice on different aspects of policy; Political unit who help develop links with his party and supporters; Press Office that handle relations with the media; Strategic Communication unit to spot problems and coordinate announcements and choose ministers.

How has the power of the Prime Minister grown?

• At the beginning of the Twentieth Century believed to be “first among equals” – reflecting a belief that Cabinet reached its decisions collectively and on a majority basis. The Prime Minister just held a formal role with little additional power. The power of the Executive branch has grown since then with some believing Cabinet Government has become Prime Ministerial Government. (Crossman, 1976). Mackintosh (1977) said the Cabinet had just become a ‘clearing house and court for appeal’.
• Able to: appoint and dismiss members of Cabinet; decide structure and membership of Cabinet Committees, Leads a single-party government normally (except different now with the coalition), holds bilateral, appoints senior civil servants, wartime leadership, increasingly used own special advisers, supported by own and Cabinet office, very visible in the public and seen as a figurehead.
• There are constraints on the Prime Minister’s power:

Cabinet: Will need to keep Cabinet united behind them as require their support. They will also be expected to elect senior party figures who are often rivals for their job. For example ‘New Labour’ Blair appointed ‘Old Labour’ Prescott as Deputy Prime Minister.

Party: Need their loyalty in the House of Commons when voting to prevent revolts.

Parliament: Need to retain support to get policies through chambers and needs to be able to defend their decisions. Particularly over decisions to go to war e.g. Iraq.

Events: Need to be able to deal with any events which are the biggest danger they face. Need to have the support of the population and followers to deal with these. E.g. Blair faced the problems of defeat in plan to allow police to detain suspected terrorists for longer, over loans for peerages and Iraq.

Hostility in the media: Needs to perform well on television to retain support. Tony Blair had a remarkable degree of press support and this helped him maintain power. In contrast, Gordon Brown found it had to maintain power when a large section of the media turned on him.

Prime ministerial leadership style

• Thatcher: Made less use of cabinet. Detailed policy work was done in cabinet committees or in bilateral meetings. Announced government policy at cabinet discussions and kept some issues away from it. Lawson said paid more attention to advisers instead ministers. This alienated a lot of her ministers and weakened her position.
• Mayor: Cabinet discussed government policy and exercised greater influence over policy discussion. Mayor managed his cabinet in a way to ensure he stayed in office despite never being fully secure.
• Blair: Depicted as a dominant prime minister. Hennessy described it as a ‘command premiership’ and Kavanagh said he was ‘Napoloenic’. Blair made the key decisions and had little time for cabinet government: instead having bilateral meetings or informal meetings – dubbed ‘sofa government’. Blair also strengthened the Prime Minister’s Office and looked to control from Downing Street by using special units and special advisors. Brown did have massive influence – compared to ‘dual monarchy’: each had own spheres of influence and advisers. Faced more conflict from his Cabinet later in his rule over Iraq, hospitals and tuition fees.
• Brown: Initially promised to use Cabinet but soon reverted to reliance on an inner circle. He faced dissent within the Labour Party and the cabinet.

Has the system of Government become Presidential?

Yes

No

·         Both have opportunities to manipulate the media, control policy-making, and to act as a national leader over and above the party.·         Signs of personalised leadership – Blair was seen to be the architect of ‘New’ Labour.·         Mainly uses his own Prime Minister’s office as a non-formal office of support. Similar to a President in use of advisers and consultants. ·         Pre-eminence in shaping policy – particularly with overseas issues. Force decisions on Cabinet colleagues. ·         Focus on the leaders personal characteristics in presentation of policy and role in manipulating media. ·         Announcements are often made at staged and televised public events rather than in the House of Commons. Become a communicator-in-chief for the government. ·         Become the spokesperson for the nation. Claims to represent the public interest. ·         Lack of attendance and voting in the House of Commons suggests a lack of interest. ·         Attempts to distance themselves from events in Commons. Talk about government as if they are separate and ‘above’ it. This developed Blair’s nickname of ‘Teflon Tony’ as he retained dignity and authority despite what was happening to his ministers.

·         Britain has a separate Head of State·         A British Prime Minister can be brought down if they lose support.·         Britain has a cabinet which is also responsible to the House of Commons for decisions and needs to be satisfied. ·         Prime Ministers have to please their strong and centralised parties and maintain party discipline. If they do not there will be concerted efforts to remove them. ·         Direct rather than control the agenda. ·         Other senior ministers enjoy support from government departments and have their own special advisers. ·         The prime minister needs the support of ministers and officials to achieve objectives.

Foley (2000) said Prime Ministers such as Thatcher and Blair became presidential in a ‘uniquely British way’ as ‘Cannot ignore the Cabinet’ and other strong differences

What is the Cabinet?

• The group of most senior ministers who are chosen by the Prime Minister. They empowered to make decisions on behalf of the government. Most are made heads of government departments with the title of Secretary of State and a majority come from the House of Commons. Some are non-departmental ministers g. Baroness Warsi (Look at your list of who each Secretary of State is)
• In the 19^th century Bagehot described it as the ‘efficient secret’ and ‘core’ of the political system as it directed the work and coordinated activities of departments. There was a wide belief that there was a system of Cabinet Government.
• Today, the Cabinet plays less of a role. Some believe the power has passed into the hands of the Prime Minister making it a Prime Ministerial government.
• More senior ministers attitudes and preferences seen to carry greater weight than those of others present (Chancellor of Exchequer, Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary). Chief whip of party also attends to advise Cabinet on feeling of the rest of the party. Help prevent revolts against Party.
• Blair Cabinets noted for number of women included; five, six and then eight.
• Cabinet normally has around 20 members but there are arguments for and against smaller Cabinets.

For a smaller Cabinet

Against a smaller cabinet

·         Kavanagh (1994): “It must be small enough to allow ministers the opportunities to discuss, deliberate and coordinate policies”·         Makes it easier to direct policy within key areas. Have ‘super-ministries’.·         Other department ministers would attend when input was needed. ·         Cabinet members would see national problems as a whole – free from department commitments. ·         Could meet more frequently and be available for important decisions. ·         Easier for the Prime Minister to lead it.

·         Kavanagh  (1994): “Yet it must also be large enough to include heads of major departments and accommodate different political views in the party”·         Would lack the experience of those involved in day-to-day administration.·         Difficult to include up-and-coming younger ministers and would not gain experience. ·         Difficult for the Prime Minister to include representatives of all shades of party opinion – could lose touch party and public opinion.

What is the role of the Cabinet?

• Deciding on major policy to be followed at home and abroad.
• Typically deal with unforeseen or major problems – e.g. invasions of a friendly state (Libya), fuel crisis, discovery of a major human or animal disease (BSE or foot-and-mouth, Swine Flu).
• Coordinating the policies of different departments to ensure there is ‘joined-up government’ with different individuals wanting different things. Play a key role when committees been unable to reach decision
• Planning for the long term e.g. environment, defence and pension policy.
• Role being reduced as meeting less often and for less time. In 1970s 60 meetings per year, each a couple of hours. Tony Blair averaged 40 a year and most under one hour.
• Can reflect prime ministerial style or that members are broadly agreed on what they want to achieve and how they want to achieve it.

How does the Cabinet operate?

• ‘Cabinet’ refers to the formal meetings held each week. In recent years these have become more concerned with exchange of information and ratification of decisions made elsewhere. For example, in 2003 Ministers had already agreed not to join the Euro before it went to cabinet.
• Peele notes that “since 1997 there has also been a much greater use of less-formal policy coordination devices” or sofa-Cabinet meetings.
• Therefore, Cabinet may refer to other decision-making processes elsewhere. In this sense it is still significant in deciding policy. These other decision-making processes include:

·         The inner Cabinet: Informal gatherings of leading departmental ministers. A small body of important and/or like minded colleagues.

·         The kitchen Cabinet: Own trusted advisers who may be Cabinet members of may also be special advisers or civil service advisers.

·         Cabinet committees: PM decides the chair and composition of these groups. Often used to deal with more difficult issues. Some of these are permanent focusing continually on an issue whilst others are temporary according to the preferences and needs of the Prime Minister e.g. Tony Blair established them for the millennium and genetic modification. A list of these is available on the Cabinet Office website.

·         Bilaterals: Meetings between the PM and one relevant Secretary of State.

How has the importance of the Cabinet changed?

• Importance of weekly meeting has become less. Nigel Lawson said “a normal Cabinet meeting has no chance of becoming a grave forum of statesman like debate” – too many people and too little time.
• The main role of Cabinet is not detailed discussion but to help cohesion across the party and coordinate general governmental policies and how to pursue them.
• Most policies are developed in Cabinet committees and go to the Cabinet for approval or to be ‘rubber-stamped’. This was particularly the case under Tony Blair.
• Peter Hennessy under Blair said “The Cabinet is no a longer a central organ of government”.
• The Butler review, which looked into the Iraq War, commented there were ‘too many sofa chats’ in Cabinet and ‘too many occasions when minutes were not taken’ – leading to a lack of clarity about what had been decided. This reflected the minor role the Cabinet played in the decision and lack of communication.

What is collective cabinet responsibility?

• Ministers are collectively responsible to the House of Commons for governmental policy.
• They are required to stick to the agreed Cabinet line and stay united. They must also ensure sensitive information does not enter the public domain.
• They have the opportunity to voice discontent BEFORE policy is decided but when it is agreed they are either expected to resign if they can not go along with it or they decide they can live with it and stay silent. That way as Lord Salisbury said ‘every member is absolutely and irretrievably responsible’ for what happens.
• Those who have resigned include Nigel Lawson (1989) – Opposed economic policy, Geoffrey Howe (1990)- Opposed policy on Europe and Robin Cook (2003) – opposed Iraq. Tom Watson (2006) resigned having put pressure on Blair to resign. James Purnell did the same to Brown in 2009.
• Most choose to stay silent in order to keep their job/employment! On other occasions people have survived dissent – ‘Wets’ were opposed to Thatcher’s economic policy and remained and Clare Short remained in cabinet for 2 months after expressing concerns about Iraq.
• It ensures that ministers all portray the same views and opinions to make policy clear and coherent.
• Helps to maintain a united front in public which increases public confidence.
• Avoids confusion that can arise when different members say different things.
• Not as effective as it is used to be as ministers instead leak their views in coded language or make thinly veiled criticisms (e.g. Peter Mandelson on joining the euro under Blair). Also, convention is waived when suits the Prime Minister. Governments have survived countless crises including Westland and Iraq and there were no mass resignations.

What is individual ministerial responsibility?

• Ministers are accountable to parliament for their own personal conduct, the general conduct of their department and the policies they pursue.
• Grounds for resignation include: mistakes made within departments, policy failure (James Callaghan after devaluation of sterling), political pressure (Stephen Byers after disputes between civil servants and special advisers in his department and press criticism) and personal misconduct. (Neil Hamilton in 1994 over ‘cash for questions case/Peter Mandelson accepted loan for a house purchase and fastracked passports/David Blunkett about issues in private life in 2004 having had an affair and later fast-tracked visa application for lover’s nanny/Peter Hain after suspicious donations/David Laws over past expense claims)
• The convention however is not a rigid one and there is sometimes confusion about when they should resign due to lack of binding rules. Ministers often deny culpability for their actions and failures. Blame it on other groups instead e.g. Ed Balls blamed failure to publish SATS results on time on company administering them. Ministers are not expected to resign if their failings in policy are traceable to the actions of civil servants.
• Does have some merits as it ensures that someone is accountable, keeps civil servants on their toes and it facilitates the work of opposition as someone has to justify government policy to those seeking to expose failings.

What is the role of the Cabinet Secretariat, Cabinet Office and Cabinet Secretary?

• Cabinet Secretariat is 30-40 senior civil servants who timetable meetings, circulate papers, prepare the agenda and minutes for the Prime Minister.
• Cabinet Secretary is the country’s top civil servant (Sir Gus O’Donnell) who is in daily contact with the Prime Minister and Cabinet members. They work together to decide Cabinet agenda and the order of items on it.
• The Secretariat is assisted by a Cabinet Office of some 1,5000 civil servants who support Cabinet, prepare the work for committees and follow up their decisions in order to lead and support the reform and delivery programme.
• Within the Cabinet office there are groups to specialise with specific issues. For example the Civil Contingencies Unit is a committee of ministers, officials, military, policy and the security services to deal with terrorist activities. Also, Social Exclusion Unit and Performance and Innovation Unit.
• The Cabinet office is there to ensure the government delivers its priorities, particularly in health, education, transport, crime and asylum policies.

 

Ministers and Civil Servants

Who are ministers?

• Around 100 government members including Cabinet ministers, ministers of state and parliamentary under-secretaries. Initially prove themselves in the House of Commons.
• Ministers have no training and they study their new brief quickly and then need to work themselves into their job.
• Typically been from House of Commons or Lords although Gordon Brown has brought in non-political advisors e.g. Sir Digby Jones – former director of CBI who became minister for trade and investment in the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform.
• Work in departments of state or ministries – most of which are headed by non-Cabinet ministers. Major ministries headed by Cabinet ministers. The more important the department the more ministers it will have.
• Supported in their work by junior ministers and parliamentary private secretaries. Very reliant on the performance of the civil servants who work in their department who organise their day, appointments and offer advice.

What role do they carry out?

• Politician with duties in Cabinet and parliament and also administrator of a large Whitehall department consisting of civil servants.
• As politicians, normal constituency duties as MPS but also speak in House of Commons debates, appear in committees and pilot any legislation through the House of Commons which is relevant to their department.
• Also need to supervise and take an interest in their department ensuring it runs effectively. Make key decisions and take responsibility for actions of civil servants. Need to ensure run a smooth, well-oiled machine with people they can rely on.
• In theory listen to advice put before them and make their judgement. In practice perhaps only decide 15% of issues that come up.
• Since Next Step Programme of 1980s Executive Agencies have been set up to separate areas of policy and implementation for efficiency and day-to-day running.

What are the limitations of ministers powers?

• Outnumbered by their senior officials by around six or seven to one.
• Lack permanency staying in one department for on average two years.
• Non-specialist often lacking knowledge of the department’s work – rarely have clear objectives and priorities. Never ‘master their brief’.
• Have multiple demands on their time – Cabinet, parliament, media and role in European Union. 65% of work is non-departmental.
• May find it difficult to get key information as dependent on what officials tell them or what data they are presented. Officials control supply of information and may purposely embarrass officials.
• May find it difficult to get their policies implemented and their decisions carried out as officials developed art of delay to frustrate ministerial initiatives.

What is the structure of the civil service?

• It is the governmental bureaucracy made up of professional and permanent paid officials who administer/run the government departments. Those at the top are known as the ‘higher civil service’ or ‘mandarins’. They are based mainly in Whitehall ministries.
• The highest civil servant is the Cabinet Secretary but in each department there will be a Permanent Secretary, Deputy Secretaries, Under Secretaries, Assistant Secretaries, Senior Principals and Principals.
• There are Ministerial departments which are led by a government minister and cover matters that require direct political oversight. (A list of these is available on page 240 of your textbook)
• There are Non-Ministerial departments which cover matters for which direct political oversight is judged unnecessary or it is unsuitable for there to be political interference. These are led by senior civil servants. Examples include the Assets Recovery Agency, the British Council and the Export Credits Guarantee Departments.
• There are also executive agencies who work and report back to ministerial departments. They carry out an operational function for them. For example Her Majesty’s Prison Service works for the Home Office, Jobcentre Plus for the Department of Work and Pensions and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency for the Department of Transport

Who is in the civil service?

• Numbers have fallen from a peak in 1976 when there were approximately 750,000 to 459,600 in 1999. This was due to privatisation, outsourcing and cutbacks. In 2004 this had risen to 523,580 again. Senior civil servants compromise the leading 750-800 leading officials.
• In the 1960s seen to come from an unrepresentative social background. Also, degrees seen to be not particularly relevant to the work they would be doing and believed to lack experience of the outside world.
• Since 1990s more done to ensure they have experience of a wider range of activities such as commerce, industry and Whitehall and more extensive recruitment occurs in the Private Sector.
• A bias in favour of public school students who become Oxbridge graduates remains but there has been increased recruitment from other universities, a movement away from the arts subjects and greater scope is given for women and members of ethnic minorities.

What is the role of civil servants?

• Preparing legislation, drawing up answers to parliamentary questions and briefing the particular minister.
• Administration – overseeing and carrying out the day-to-day work of the department. Involve meeting up with representatives of different groups.
• Helping to develop the department’s attitudes and work by looking at options and weighing up the benefits of each.
• Implementing and managing policy.
• The Permanent Secretary in each department is responsible for overseeing 90% of work due to the Secretary of States political commitment.

What principles do higher civil servants work to?

• Permanence – Do not change at election time and must serve any government of any party. Therefore develop experience and continuity so they are able to offer the inexperience incoming government with their expertise. Confidentiality means that civil servants can speak frankly to ministers without fear of dismissal.
• Neutrality – Required to be politically impartial and not let political leanings affect their actions. Expected to further the policies of the elected government – to ‘be neutral on the government’s side’.
• Anonymity – Expected to offer confidential advice, in secret. Expected to not be linked with specific policies. Some say this is negative as may conceal poor advice and shield them from consequences.
• A new civil service code was launched on 6 June 2006 to outline the core values and standards expected of civil servants- integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality.

Who dominates the relationship of ministers and civil servants?

• Some believe ‘Ministers decide, civil servants advise’ with civil servants ‘on tap, but not on top’. Officials expected to be impartial.
• Ministers come and go over short periods of time. Officials have been in departments for a long time and have expertise in policy choices available. The civil service views become the ‘department view’. This may come in to conflict with ministers own priorities. If minister has time to gain experience, master details and become involved in shaping rather than presiding over departmental policy they will be able to have greater influence.
• Mandarins are those civil servants who have close and regular contact with ministers. Believed that because of their experience and expertise they have powerful influence over the department. Seen to be opposed to change and development and may frustrate and conceal information from ministers.
• Some say it depends on the strength of the minister. Strong ministers will use their individuality and strength to ensure they dominate their civil service. Crossman talked about the efforts ‘not to be taken over by the civil service’ but Healey said ‘the minister who complains that his civil servants are too powerful is either a weak minister or an incompetent one’.
• Gerald Kaufman said Civil Service prepare briefings purely from ‘departmental point of view’ and not from the governments. Civil service advise minister on line to take whilst ministers focus on political role.
• Much debate about where power lies in British government: with the politicians or bureaucrats who serve them? Theakston (1999) detected four models or theories.

Traditional, public administration model – Ministers decide on issues based on advice from civil servants. ‘Civil servants advise, ministers decide’. Civil servants have passive and neutral role – loyally serving their ministers and implementing decisions. Ministers have to take the lead role in decisions – taking the praise or blame	The adversarial model – adopted by critics on the Left who say social background and attitudes of powerful civil servants means that they use their connections and cunning to frustrate left-wing ministers. Civil servants prevent any chance in the direction of policy which they disagree with. Power struggle between the two as they both have different agendas.
Whitehall community model– Alliance of mutual interest between the two. Civil servants want to have a strong minister because it will benefit their standing as well. Civil servants have expertise and links to organised group interests which ministers can contribute their judgement and commitment to their Cabinet colleagues. Need to have cooperative relationship to both succeed.	Public choice model – the New Right opinion of public sector provision. Believe that civil servants will want to expand public services and grow. Suggest that the ministers and civil servants work together to support expansion of the department.

How has the Civil Service changed in recent decades?

• For many years British Civil Service highly regarded and compared to a Rolls Royce in terms of its skill in handling policy issues and transitions between governments.
• By 1960s and 70s feeling that change needed to bring the civil service into the 20^th Criticised for being too elitist due to social composition and rigid structure. Believed reform would improve personnel in civil service and improve quality of advice. Service was increasingly seen as a barrier to radical change due to conservative nature. Members of civil service thought to lack qualities for running a modern state. Need economy specialists.

Thatcher Impact

• First issues tackled by Fulton Report (1968) which looked at improving recruitment and training of personnel. Accelerated further under Thatcher and Mayor years as part of the Next Steps Reforms (1988 Report).
• Thatcher focused on market principles and was against the idea of a large bureaucracy – did not want ‘big government’. Wanted to curb role of civil service as she believed it was too large and was urging misguided policies. Instead public services transferred to newly created executive agencies.
• Very suspicious of the civil service and the culture associated with it – no admiration of it. Believed senior civil servants poor managers and lacked skills.
• Thatcher cut number of personnel, retired long-serving officials, brought in outside advisers who challenged the attitudes and outlooks of senior officials and appointed Sir Derek Ibbs to run the Efficiency Unit – slimmed-down and better managed civil service.

New Labour Impact

• Tony Blair focused on delivering effective public services and meeting performance targets. Developed Executive Agencies to ensure goals attained – cutting class sizes and cutting waiting lists.
• Improve policy coordination and implementation using Performance and Innovation Unit in the Cabinet Office.
• Wider diversity. By 2008 women made up 31% senior civil service and ethnic minorities 4%. Recruiting with those from experience in the private sector or with specialist skills.
• Wanted to change the culture of senior civil servants. Believed many resistant to new thinking and doubted quality of them. Wanted efficiency in Whitehall and disliked idea that departments had their own views and civil servants would always keep to it.
• To deal with this Blair brought in new people from outside the service – special advisors. Examples include Jonathon Powerll and communications director Alasdair Campbell. Increased overall number from 38 under Mayor to 80. Added a political dimension to the opinions gained from civil servants – could be hand picked and did not need to be neutral. Independent source of advice – Mo Mowlam felt gave ‘strong central support and political focus’.
• Conflict between special advisors and civil service – civil servants believe trespassing in their domain. Andrew Tyrie claims they are ‘unelected ministers. They are the people who are really running the country’. Also conflict between them – for example between Martin Sixsmith and Jo Moore who both worked for Stephen Byers.
• Labour defend this development saying there are still no more than three or four individuals in each Ministry and that they ‘protect civil servants by carrying out work that might raise doubts about civil service neutrality’.

Parliament

What is a legislature?

• Parliament – from French word, ‘parler’ (talk)
• Legislature – from Latin for ‘legis’ (law) and ‘latio’ (proposing)
• Representative assembly empowered to make laws

What are the key functions of Parliament?

Law-making

• Parliament is the UK legislature
• Supreme law-making body
• Convention that legislation should be fully discussed before it is put to a vote

Representation

• . As an elected body, the HoC is expected to reflect public opinion and respond to widely held grievances
• Minority viewpoints should at least be allowed a hearing

Debate

• Apart from discussing legislation parliament is regarded as the proper place to debate issues of national concern even if they cannot be affected by a change in the law, e.g. September 2002 Parliament recalled to discuss possibility of war in Iraq

Scrutiny of the executive

• Under the principle of accountability, ministers are accountable to parliament for their decisions
• Governments can be dismissed if they lose the confidence of a majority of MPs

Recruitment of ministers

• By convention all ministers must be members either of the Commons or of the Lords (e.g. Baroness Amos & Lord Falconer both served in Blair’s govt.)
• In other words, members of the executive must also be part of the legislature (unlike the USA)

Legitimation

• Elected part of Parliament, from which executive is largely drawn
• Support from MPs provides the executive with legitimacy
• Loss of a vote in HoC may lead to a vote of confidence in the executive

 

House of Lords

History of reform

• 1911 Parliament Act: Lords lose power to veto bills or delay bills more than two years
• 1945 Salisbury Doctrine estd. ensures Labour govt’s manifesto commitments to nationalisation & welfare state are not overturned in Lords
• 1949 Parliament Act Lords block Labour steel nationalisation plans. Delaying power cut to one year.
• 1958 First life peers created by Harold Macmillan. Women peers arrive.
• 1998 House of Lords act, first stage of reform, only 92 hereditary peers left
• 2000 Wakeham Report published with recommendations for second stage of reform, including largely appointed chamber
• Nov 2001 New Labour unveils final stage House of Lords reform. Stiff opposition from MPs from all parties to call for only 20% of peers to be elected by public
• March 2003 Queen’s speech introduced bill to end hereditary peers entirely
• March 2004 Reform of House of Lords ‘kicked into the long grass’
• 2006, Speaker of House of Lords
• 2009 – Supreme Court –

Work performed by Lords

• Consideration and revision of Bills from House of Commons; can pass, amend or rejects bills; 1949 Parliament Act limits powers of delay to one year; focus is on public bills
• Initiation of non-controversial legislation: ¼ bills begin in HoL; can also introduce Private Members’ Bills
• Power of delay: limited by 1949 Parliament Act & Salisbury Convention
• Holding of general debates: 25% of time of HoL taken up in this way; provides more considered debate & looks at details compared with HoC
• Select committees, e.g. scrutinises legislation from Europe via Select Committee on European Union
• Judicial role: since 2009 performed by Supreme Court but in the past HoL was highest court of appeal

Does the HoL need reform?

Yes, it does:

• The process of reform is unfinished – House of Lords Act (1999) intended as 1^st stage of reform
• HoL has constantly frustrated wishes of HoC, e.g over fox-hinting bill (1949 Parliament Act used to pass law in 2004)
• Present system of appointments is little better than hereditary peerages
• Scandals associated with HoL, e.g. ‘Tony’s cronies’, ‘Cash for honours’
• Current HoL is unrepresentative, e.g. presence of Church of England Bishops, appointments since 2001 have included 17% women & 3.5% ethnic minorities

No, it doesn’t

• The Lords performs vital functions, for example the consideration and revision of bills from the House of Commons, the initiation of non-controversial legislation, Private Peers Bills, the power of delay and the holding of general debates (for more info see Watts,p.186)
• If you have an alternative voting system for a second chamber, e.g. PR it may seem more representative of the people
• People from different walks of life, e.g. business, law provide valuable expertise and insight
• Peers don’t need to be elected to perform the job they do when their job is primarily to revise
• A partially elected chamber would be a compromise

Roles of the House of Commons

• Legislation: passing Private Members’ Bills, e.g. 1967, Abortion Act as well as public bills introduced by government
• Raising & spending public money: scrutinised by Departmental Select Committees & Public Accounts Committee
• Scrutinising: through committees, questions at Ministerial or PMQs, written Qs and work of shadow cabinet; holding debates, e.g. Westland Affair or War in Iraq
• Representation: ensuring grievances of constituents are addressed, e.g. petitioning parliament; lobbying
• Recruitment: important to toe the party line to be spotted by whips and advanced for ministerial or shadow ministerial roles

Legislative process

Different types of bills – Private Members’ Bills

• Introduced by backbenchers
• Ballot Bills – 20 names drawn from ballot, introduced on certain Fridays
• 10 Minute Rule Bills – opportunity to raise profile
• Bills brought from HoL
• Limited time for debate
• Often deal with ethical issues, e.g. Abortion Act 1967 and Bill reducing homosexual age of consent to 18 (1994)

See also white papers and green papers

Legislative process

• Study the process, but think about opportunities for scrutiny by parliament during the process:
• 1^st reading: formal introduction of bill
• 2^nd reading: general debate on principles of bill
• Committee stage: detailed examination in standing committees
• Report stage: amended bill reported back to Parliament, last opportunity for amendments
• 3^rd reading: final opportunity for debate, whole bill is considered
• Royal assent: last time rejected in 1707

What are the main roles of an MP?

Serve their constituents

• Regular surgeries
• Promoting constituency interests
• Attending political meetings & social functions
• Receiving constituents who visit Westminster
• Handle grievances & ensure they are dealt with at appropriate level, e.g. by asking questions in House

Serve the nation

• Attend house regularly
• Take part in debates
• Serve on select & standing committees
• Take part in law-making process
• 1996 survey, 50% of MP’s time taken up with parliamentary opposed to constituency duties

Advance personal causes

• Private Members’ Bills
• Act as spokespersons for particular interests or areas of their expertise
• Lobbied by private companies
• mocracy means ‘people power’ with government resting on consent of governed. Lincoln said ‘government of the people, by the people and for the people’.

Conflicts of interest

• Constituency needs may conflict with national policy, e.g. closure of a local industry
• Personal interests may conflict with party policy, e.g. foreign policy issues such as Iraq War

What other challenges do MPs face?

• Variety of constituency types – according to size, socio-economic composition, economic activity
• Location – constituencies can be extremely remote, difficulties accessing Westminster
• Marginals – constituencies which are closely contested by all major parties
• Funding – criticisms over costs of administration, lack of research facilities

How representative are MPs?

• Current govt. often enjoys support of less than ½ voters
• Questions over legitimacy
• Minority views underrepresented
• 2/3 MPs lack majority support in their constituencies

How representative are other assemblies?

Representation of women

• Welsh Assembly – 50:50 (2003)
• Sweden – 1 in 3 or more
• European Parliament -nearly 33%
• House of Commons – 20%
• France & Italy – 10%

Ethnic representation – HoC

• 2010 GE – 27 MPs from ethnic background in (15 in 2005 GE)
• 11 Cons MPs from ethnic background
• First 3 Muslim female MPs elected (Lab)
• First black female Cons MP
• 2001 all 12 MPs in Lab Party

Social representation

• 2001 GE over 100 MPs from educational backgrounds
• 2010 – new intake – more than 1/3 never served in Commons before
• Other professions over-represented, e.g political staffers, lawyers, media & city
• Anthony King, ‘professional politicians’
• Nearly all present Con-Dem front bench ministers attended public schools, including Eton and Westminster & Oxbridge educated

Age

• Middle-aged – average age 50
• Oldest serving MP (2011) – Sir Peter Tapsell, 80, ‘Father of the House’
• Youngest – Pamela Nash, 25

Women

• 1997, – 120 women MPs, nick-named ‘Blair’s Babes’
• 2005 – 128
• 2010 – 144
• Other assemblies better represented, e.g. Welsh Assembly 50:50

Reasons for under representation of women

• Child-bearing & home-making responsibilities
• Electoral system (candidate selection)
• Nature of parliamentary life
• Fawcett society identifies four ‘Cs’: culture, childcare, cash, confidence
• Sex Discrimination Act (1975) amended to allow all-women shortlists

Is Parliament the sovereign law-making authority?

Evidence it is

• Ultimate political authority
• Parliament (HoC & HoL) has unlimited authority and is supreme-law-making body in UK
• Only Parl. can make and amend laws
• No other institution can override its decisions

Evidence it isn’t

• Parliament can’t bind successors
• Executive limits powers of Parliament, e.g. government introduces majority of legisaltion
• EU membership and rulings, e.g. Factortame
• International organisations, e.g. IMF, NATO
• Devolved assemblies, e.g. Wales & Scotland have significant autonomy
• Media can shape political agenda or hold parliament to account, e.g. Daily Telegraph published expense details of MPs
• Electorate, can hold Parliament to account at the ballot box
• Pressure groups & TUs, e.g. some parties, esp. Labour Party dependent on support & funding; industrial action can topple governments, e.g. ‘Winter of Discontent’, 1979

Does government (executive) dominate parliament?

• Government is usually majority party
• Shape the agenda of the House
• Determine the legislative programme
• Increasing use of delegated or secondary legislation
• Shape the outcome of legislation
• Usually win divisions in the House
• Control of information to Parliament

Elective dictatorship

Evidence for

• Flexible constitution allows majority governments to make fundamental changes
• Weakened HoL and absence of Bill of Rights, removes checks and balances
• Tight party discipline removes threat of backbench revolts, esp. presence of whipping system, e.g. 3 line whip on controversial bills
• Growth of career politicians
• Governments often have clear majorities

Evidence against

• Power of select committees
• Back bench revolts, e.g. over Terrorism Act (2005-6)
• Referendums, e.g. Devolution (1979) or Regional Assemblies (2004)
• Growing importance of media & political opinion polls

How effective are Commons Committees?

• Standing Committees
• Early Day Motions
• Opposition Days – 20 days granted
• Criticism via media
• PMQs & QT
• Written Qs

How powerful are select committees?

Strengths

• Less partisan – aim is to produce a report
• Expertise – members well-informed
• Provide more openness in govt
• Help to inform debates in HoC
• Make govt more accountable
• Influence policy & legislation

Weaknesses

• Whips play a more prominent role in selection of membership
• Limited budget
• Bureaucratic – reports often shelved
• Lack muscle – ministers can decline to attend or give information
• Composition reflects government majority
• Recommendations can be ignored
• Weak compared to US Congressional Committees

Effectiveness of the Opposition

Strengths

• Structured and regular challenge – Shadow Cabinet
• Provides alternative to govt policy & legislation
• Sustained scrutiny & debate
• Provides bi-partisan support, e.g. when war declared against Iraq, NI Peace Agreement
• Alternative to government – policies need to be coherent & convincing

Weaknesses

• Not supported by civil service advisers / resources
• Govt sets the agenda & Opposition responds
• PM sets date of GE
• Polarises policies – tries to set ‘clear water’ between govt & opposition
• Landslide victories for govt. weaken role of Opposition, e.g. in divisions

Do individual MPs make a difference?

Strengths

• Criticise policy – Question Time, motions for adjournment, ‘catch the speaker’s eye’
• Initiate legislation – Private Member’s Bill
• Convey their views – media appearances, sound out party colleagues
• Mavericks – MPs at end of career or no hopes of promotion

Weaknesses

• Career politicians – Anthony King
• Poor facilities
• Amount & complexity of govt.
• Constituency work
• Select & standing committees

The significance of the average back-bench MP

• Useful party members – e.g. specialists in key areas of party policy
• Good constituency members
• Individualists – thorn in the side of party leaders
• Other professional interests – e.g. law, journalism, charities

Influence of whips

Functions of whips

• Officials who manage supporters of the party
• Maintain party discipline & unity
• Chief whip assisted by 8-10 assistant whips
• Whips in the Lords
• 3 line whip – compulsory attendance
• 2 line whip – pairing system
• 1 line whip requests attendance

Reasons for whips

• Maintaining unity
• Carry out party mandate
• Divisions provide ammunition for opposition & media
• Without them divisions within the party could confuse electorate over party direction & undermine leadership

Reasons for ‘toeing the party line’

• Don’t want opposition to form govt.
• Opportunities for private redress (informal processes) e.g. 1922 Committee
• Carrot & stick approach – promise of promotion

Frequency of back-bench rebellions

• Rebellions over contentious or key issues, e.g. Iraq, fox-hunting, tuition fees, criminal justice
• Free votes – moral or ethical issues, e.g. fox-hunting (2003)
• Parliament Act (1949) used to enforce ban on hunting

Reform of the House of Commons

Reasons for growing demands for reform

• Decline of parliamentary style of govt in favour of presidential one
• Decline in public confidence
• Growth in direct democracy
• Desire for greater speed & efficiency
• Need for improvements in working conditions
• Removal of outdated practices
• Desire for closer scrutiny of executive

Recent reforms

• Modifications to HoC timetable: 2002, hours made more ‘family friendly’ but slightly reversed in 2005 to allow late sitting on Tuesdays
• Provide more space: Portcullis House
• PMQs: moved to one 30 min session every Wednesday
• Commons’ Liaisons Committtee: 6-monthly committee of chairs of major committees, able to question PM
• Greater pre-legislative scrutiny increased
• Committee for Standards & Privileges & Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards estd. 1995 after cash for questions scandal
• New speaker (Michael Martin replaced by John Bercow following MPs expenses scandal) determined to improve public reputation of Parliament

Future reforms

• Constitutional Reform Bill passing through Parl to introduce a new voting system and change number of MPs and boundaries
• More powerful select committees
• Better pay & facilities for MPs
• Full-time MPs
• Fewer MPs
• More free votes

Multi-level governance

Local government

What is local government?

• Government by elected local authorities
• Provision of public services
• Local governance – agencies, e.g. private, public & voluntary providing local services

What are the key structures of local government?

• County council – 500,000 – 1,500,000
• District councils – 4-15 in each county, 100,000

County Councils	District Councils	Divided
·          Education Social services Transport Strategic planning Fire services Consumer protection Refuse disposal Smallholdings Libraries	·          Local planning Housing Local highways Building regulation Environmental health Refuse collection	·          Recreation Cultural matters

Other organisations

• London Borough Councils (Governed by Mayor of London & Greater London Authority)
• Metropolitan District Councils, e.g. Greater Manchester or Merseyside
• Unitary authorities – creation of single tier authorities for large areas, e.g. Wales, Scotland and some former counties, e.g. Avon and towns, e.g. Milton Keynes & Reading

Importance of local government

• Local councils manage 3.5 million council houses
• Majority of education is state-funded and run by local councils
• 1 million people work in local government
• £70bn pa is spent on local government – 25% of all public expenditure!

Why is local government good for democracy?

• Democratic -policy decisions made at lowest possible level; strengthens participation; adds legitimacy
• Local expertise – decisions can be made based on local knowledge & needs
• Accessibility – easier to redress problems
• Innovation – councils can experiment with new ideas
• Plays an important part in our lives – spending £70bn, employing 2.1m & providing c.700 services

Evidence that local government is not essential to democracy

• Turnout – low, averaging around 25%, some less than 12%
• Declining turnout since 1945
• Overshadowed by national events – protest voting common
• Dependent on central govt funding
• Poor media coverage – ignorance about policies & work of local govt
• FPTP – returns same parties

Power of Parliament over local authorities

• Determines structure of local government
• Creates & abolishes new authorities, e.g. GLC, 1986
• Lays down compulsory features, e.g. compelling them to establish various committees
• Requires councils to provide minimum standards of provision, e.g. education and care of elderly
• Approves or overrules by-laws made by them
• Approves bult of money issued to local authorities and can change local system of taxation
• Grants discretionary powers to ministers to intervene, under doctrine of ultra vires (local authorities are only allowed to do what is authorised by law, anything else is beyond their authority – ultra vires)

History & evolution of local authority powers

See Watts, p.263-264, key dates below

• 1945 – local authorities grew in importance, playing a key role in reconstruction after WWII & provision of welfare services as part of NHS & Welfare State and housing programmes; authorities granted considerable autonomy in provision of houses
• 1979-91 – Thatcher era, feeling that local authorities had become too big, too politicised, e.g. GLC and metropolitan city councils such as Liverpool, and too costly; drive to privatise public services ; key services became more centralised, e.g. education through national curriculum & Ofsted inspection; some bodies, e.g. GLC & 6 Metropolitan City Council abolished; 2.2m council houses sold off as part of ‘right to buy scheme’ which was arguably ideologically motivated; controversy over funding of local government with introduction of Community Charge (or ‘Poll Tax’) in 1990; over 100 separate acts of Parliament to reform powers of local government
• 1990s to present – Council Tax introduced in 1993 to replace controversial Poll Tax; devolution introduced under New Labour as well as new tiers of local government, e.g. London Assembly and Mayor of London; local referendums on how communities wish to be governed; ‘Third Way’ encourage private-public partnerships, e.g. academies

Impact of Europe on local government

• EU funding, e.g. European regional & social funds – authorities in Birmingham and Wales esp. successful in attracting funds for urban regeneration projects
• Litigation – Lancashire Country Council successfully prosecuted UK government for failing to improve water quality on its beaches at European Court

Funding of local councils – sources of revenue

• Council Tax
• Income from fees, e.g. swimming pool and car park charges
• Grants from central government (‘Block Grant’)
• Income from business taxes
• Past methods – Poll Tax (see above or p.266)
• Case study, revenue for Leicestershire County Council in 2005-6 comprised 165m block grant, 185 business rates, 191 local taxation

Pros & cons of Council Tax

• Pros – relatively simple – based on property values
• Easy to collect – 97% collected
• Levied on households rather than individuals
• Allowances for those living alone or on low incomes

• Cons – can be arbitrary
• Linked to property value rather than ability to pay
• Levels of council tax increasing faster than inflation
• Property prices can change between valuations making the ‘banding system’ of valuation inaccurate

• Alternatives methods of financing local government
• Lyons inquiry in local government, 2007 recommended retaining Council Tax in short term
• Local income tax – applied to basic rate of income tax this would add on average 7.7p in the pound to most people’s tax bills
• Local sales tax – not directly related to ability to pay and proportionately would hit lowest earners most

How representative are councillors?

• Majority white, middle-aged men
• Barriers to participation – political party membership, education, social & ethnic background
• Most councillors work on a voluntary basis, so the profession is only open to those with private means or retired

More details on p.270-1 of Watts

Devolution

Definitions of key terms

• Unitary – power controlled at centre, e.g. UK
• Federal – power shared between different tiers, e.g. USA
• Devolution – process of handing power to regional assemblies, can be withdrawn
• Road to devolution – growth of nationalism in Scotland, Wales & NI
• Historic situation – before 1707, Scotland was a sovereign state
• Constitutional recognition – Secretary of State for Scotland, Wales & NI
• Economic depression – poor housing, unemployment & public services
• Cultural differences – Scotland had its own legal system & currency
• North Sea Oil

Origins of devolution

• Successes by nationalist parties (SNP, Plaid Cymru) in 1970s
• March 1979, referendums in Wales & Scotland (Wales devolution lacked support, Scotland lacked necessary 40%+ of electorate supporting idea in Scotland)
• 1980s & 90s ‘democratic deficit’ (e.g. 1997 Cons. Failed to elect single MP in Scotland)
• 1997, New Labour manifesto pledge for greater regional powers
• 1997 referendums in Scotland & Wales

Scottish Parliament – structure & powers

Structure

• 129 MSPs elected by Additional Member System
• No single party with overall majority (Lab formed a coalition with Lib Dems in 1999 & 2003, SNP formed minority govt since 2007 under Alex Salmond)
• Largest single party chooses First Minister (Alex Salmond) who chooses executive (cabinet

Powers

• Scottish Parliament has significant policy-making powers, e.g. health, education, agriculture, law & home affairs (but not foreign or economic policies)
• Income tax varying powers (up to 3p in pound)
• Manages annual budget £30 bn
• Represent Scottish interests at Westminster
• Guardian of devolution settlement

Welsh Assembly – structure & powers

Structure

• 60 MAs elected by Additional Member System
• Assembly elects First Minister (Alun Michael/ Rhodri Morgan) who chooses cabinet

Powers

• Fewer powers than Scot. Parl
• No primary legislative powers, but can recommend legislation to Westminster
• No powers over defence, foreign affairs, constitutional issues etc.
• No tax-varying powers, operates within block grant allocated by Westminster
• Oversees Welsh quangos

Northern Ireland Assembly (‘Stormont’) – structure & powers

Structure

• Devolved assembly with law-making powers
• Elected by PR
• Executive of 10 ministers, operating ‘power-sharing’ between community leaders
• 108 members

Powers

• No primary legislative powers
• Direct rule frequently re-imposed
• North-South Ministerial Council – allowing minsters from N.I. and Eire to promote joint policies

Successes of devolution

• Widely seen as democratic – strengthened democratic control & accountability; helped fund & support regional projects, e.g. protecting Welsh culture & language
• Provides legitimate government – regions governed by local representatives rather than distant central government in Westminster
• More representative voting system – compared with FPTP, AMS system had brought in coalition governments and wider social and gender representation than Westminster
• Preserves UK as a political identity – dealt with problem of growing nationalism and independence demands
• Produced distinctly regional policies, e.g. Scottish Parliament provides free university education and social care for elderly and free prescription charges
• Calls for further devolution, e.g. English Parliament to tackle problem of West Lothian Question & meet needs of English nationalist parties, e.g. BNP & UKIP

Failures & reasons why has the devolution project been put on hold

• Overlap in spheres of influence, e.g. health care provision
• Bureaucracy – costly at a time of economic recession
• Break down of unitary authority and undermines sovereignty of Parliament
• Expense in creating additional assemblies and tiers of govt.
• Confusion – over provision of public services leading to charges of ‘post code lottery’
• Lack of support, e.g. NE rejected regional assembly following a referendum
• Lack of regional identity to support further devolution, e.g. SE assembly
• Growing influence of Europe, e.g. funding for development
• Devolution has created a constitutional anomaly – West Lothian Question

Europe

Problems with Europe

• Media hostility – esp. Murdoch press
• Fear of higher taxes & fiscal controls
• Euroscepticism
• Fear of losing British traditions, e.g. ‘Save the pound!’
• Growth of a democratic deficit
• Fear of federal Europe

History of Europe

• Founded on need for economic & political stability in post-war Europe
• 1952 European Coal & Steel Community (6 countries; Fr., Germ., It. …)
• 1957, Treaty of Rome (Germany, France et al, but not UK) set up EEC (European Economic Community
• Britain fostered ‘special relationship’ with US and Commonwealth countries
• 1961, British govt. realised economic potential of EEC & applies to join
• 1963 & 1967, French President Charles de Gaulle vetoed Britain’s application to join
• 1973, Heath signed Tr. of Accession
• 1975, referendum on continuing membership (67% voted to remain)
• 1986, Single European Act created single European market & ‘four freedoms’ – goods, trade, services & capital
• Thatcher wanted free trade, but rejected ‘harmonisation’ of economic & social policies (e.g. social chapter & minimum wage)
• 1991, European issues led to downfall of Thatcher
• 1991, Maastricht Treaty, reformed institutions of European govt., extended QMV, European Central Bank, economic & monetary union (Euro), 3 pillars
• 1990s, due to British fears of federalism & loss of sovereignty – opt out clause from social chapter & single currency
• 1997-2008, Blair’s govt. more pro-Europe but Gordon Brown (then Chancellor) insists on UK meeting 5 economic tests before entry
• 1997 & 2001 Treaties of Amsterdam & Nice lead to further enlargement – currently 27 member countries
• Referendum on European constitution promised after GE (abandoned 2005)
• 2004, EU Constitution – intended to clarify the powers of the EU, strengthen role of EU Parliament, extend use of QMV, but rejected by France in referendum in May 2005 and Dutch the following month
• 2007, Lisbon Treaty – may of the key elements of the Constitution survived but didn’t require national referendums
• Further expansion likely, e.g. Turkey

Key terms associated with Europe

• Supranational organisation = institutions which have powers above those of any individual nation’s government
• Intergovernmental powers = right of any member state to veto any measure to protect its interests
• Federal system of govt. = 2 layers of govt., each with its own powers & responsibilities

Key European institutions

Commission	Parliament	Council of Ministers	European Council	Court of Justice
Executive body of the EUCarries out particular policies, e.g. running of CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) Initiates new policies Represented by 27 commissioners (College of Commissioners) 20,000 EU civil servants help to administer the work of commissioners Each commissioner is nominated by one of member states, e.g. Peter Mandelson was Trade Commissioner now Baroness Ashton) Expected to adopt a European attitude and not be preoccupied with European loyalties President of Commission is Jose Barroso Weekly meetings	Meets in Strasbourg & BrusselsReceives reports from commissioners, holds debates Initially its role was only advisory, but recently powers have increased, e.g. co-decision procedure Has the power to veto key legislation, e.g. over constitutional change Power to dismiss the entire Commission, e.g. 1999 785 members elected every 5 years by PR UK has 78 MEPs	Makes all the policy decisions & issues directives1 minister represents each of the 27 countries Usually foreign minister, but it can be a council of ministers of specific departments, e.g. agriculture, home affairs, defence etc. Preparations for meetings handled by COREPER (Council of Permanent Representatives) Each member state acts as chair of Council of Ministers, rotating every six months, minister of the host country chairs the meetings	Meets every six months, at ‘summit meetings27 PMs or equivalents Discuss broad issues or constitutional problems	Based in Luxembourg27 judges ruling on EU laws and treaties Power to fine member states who break laws, e.g. Factortame case on rights of Spanish trawlers to fish in UK waters

Other organisations

Court of Auditors – audits all EU accounts; Economic & Social Committee – advises the Council of Ministers, and includes experts; Committee of the Regions – represents regional concerns (doctrine of subsidiarity)

Democratic deficit

• Decisions are taken remotely, (i.e. in Brussels or Strasbourg) without reference to the needs of individual nations
• Lack of clarity & communication
• Election process – European elections used for protest voting, PR promotes minority parties & coalitions, apathy
• Institutions lack democratic control, e.g. Commission is appointed

How are laws and policies made in the EU?

• European Commission – initiates policy
• European Council (Heads of Govt – discusses & approves
• Council of Ministers – discusses & approves (QMV)
• Economic & Social Committee / Committee of the Regions – must be consulted by Council (decisions not binding)
• European Parliament – debates, amends & increasingly takes part in decision-making
• European Court of Justice – interprets laws

What are the main decision-making procedures?

• Consultation e.g. over CAP, Euro and EU budget
• Co-operation procedure – EU Parl can reject legislation, which must then be voted for unanimously by Council
• Assent procedure – EU Parl must give its assent to any future enlargement
• Co-decision procedure – Parl can reject legislation from Council
• QMV – decisions in Council need 73.9% of vote and majority of members

Key European issues – explore these in Watts p.305-8 or in recent news

• Enlargement
• Federalism
• Euro
• Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
• Constitution
• Institutional Reform