...In England and the United Kingdom as a whole we have a Head of state this being in the form of monarch who is Queen Elizabeth II the longest Serving head of state as of the 9th September 2015. In the UK we have differing forms of government. One being the European parliament this is mad up of 736 members who represent all 27 member states of the EU. There are 72 that are directly elected from the UK and are there to represent the interests of our country. MEPS represent larger regions than MPs for example east midlands rather than Bassetlaw thus meaning this county of ours is represented by MEPS. This is because as shown previously we are linked to the EU, as we are a member state. The role of the parliament is to draft legislation that has an impact across all the EU states on issues such as: the environment, equal opportunities, transport, consumer rights, movement of workers and goods. Another is central government which is the layer of government that operates across the whole country. Ours is located in the city of Westminster, which is set with two houses in Westminster these being the House of Lords and the House of commons. Central government has very specific responsibilities that no other level of government is able to do. For example: signing treaties or agreements with other nations, making laws, defending the nation. When a vote is taken in the House of commons for example for a proposed law to be added there are sections which are part of the house of...
Words: 1513 - Pages: 7
...Outline the responsibilities of the different levels of government in the UK. (P1) European Parliament The European parliament consists of 736 members from 27 different countries. 72 of these members are representing the UK’s interest. The European parliament debate and pass European law. They are based in three different places; Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg. The European parliament cover several different things across Europe these include the environment, equal ops, transport, consumer rights and immigration. I think the main focus of the European parliament is to try to make the passing of legislation in the EU more democratic. Central Government The central government is below The Monarch and features the House of Commons and the House of lords which includes the Prime Minister. The central government looks after the whole country and has the power to make and pass laws. They have to defend their nation and will often have to sign agreements with other countries. The house of commons consists of 646 members of parliament who each represent a different part of the country. There are three main political parties; these are The Conservatives, The Liberal Democrats and The Labour Party. The House of Commons will deal with issues such as making laws, examining EU proposals and controlling finance throughout the nation. Most importantly anyone has the right to contact their local MP and get them to raise their issue for them within the House of Commons. The...
Words: 586 - Pages: 3
...The UK would benefit greatly from the wider use of referendumss? Discuss. A referendum is a form of direct democracy that involves a public vote on a single issue of public policy. It is a way of presenting a debated issue to public decision. The most recent referendum was in the UK; the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum which asked the question whether Scotland should break away from the UK or not. There are a variety of arguments both for and against the wider use of referendum in the UK. The use was greatly favoured by Tony Blair and his new Labour government in 1997 because they took the view that referendum was a democratic device that allows people the opportunity to give a direct voice in decision making. Therefore, any decision made via referendum acquires legitimacy because it has popular approval. Moreover, referendums can encourage political participation which will help the declining participation of the UK in the way that as referendums are where people can get directly involve in the decision making, they will see this as opportuniy to contribute to the political world as themselves, thereby encouraging them to turn out in election to vote and increase participation like in the 2014 Scottish referendum where the participation brough about a turnout of 84.59% compared to the 2010 general election turnout of 65.1%. Shown clearly in the example is the clear difference between participation of direct democracy and representative democracy which would greatly...
Words: 1067 - Pages: 5
...“Constitutional reform since 1997 has not gone far enough.” Discuss. I agree with the view that constitutional reform since 1997 has not gone far enough to a large extent. The House of Lords Act of 1999 has reformed the House of Lords, the Human Rights Act of 1998 was an important area of constitutional reform, as well as the Freedom of Information Act of 2000 and the devolution of powers. The electoral system used in the UK has also been subject to discussion over reform however all constitutional reform can be said to have not gone far enough. The House of Lords Act of 1999 removed all but 92 hereditary peers from the House of Lords. This meant that the House of Lords could be seen as more legitimate as both unelected and not appointed peers would be seen as undemocratic and illegitimate. The removal of hereditary peers means that the House of Lords are more confident in their role in scrutinising and blocking legislation as they feel more legitimate. An example of the House of Lords exerting this role is the blocking of NHS reform which led to the government rethinking and amending plans, as well as the Hunting Act 2004. However reform of the House of Lords could be said to have not gone far enough, 92 hereditary peers still remain in the House of Lords, and the Liberal Democrats call for a wholly elected upper chamber, to make Parliament fully accountable. The House of Lords are also limited in the fact that they can only delay legislation for up to a year and therefore...
Words: 991 - Pages: 4
...A constitution is a body of fundamental principles or established models according to which a state or is acknowledged to be governed. The UK’s constitution is part-written and uncodified. There is evidence the UK’s constitution is strong and successful, however there is evidence to also suggest that the UK needs constitutional reform. One huge advantage of the UK constitution is its ability to be flexible and change according to modern opinions or issues. An uncodified or unfixed constitution like the UK’s allows it to me able to keep updated with new social and political situations. It easier to create an Act of Parliament according to a new situation, than to amend a codified constitution. For example, in reaction to this idea of ‘new politics’ and the public’s desire to be able to influence the government between elections, lead to the introduction of referendums in 1997. The UKs democracy has withstood the tale of time and is seen as a huge strength of the UK’s constitution. The UK’s constitution is an example of the UK’s custom and tradition linking generations and has been tested in history to prove that it works. The constitution has adapted and developed over time: it is a ‘living’ constitution due to the idea that it is able to grow. In despite of parliamentary sovereignty, there are a number of ways in which the democratic character of the UK is maintained and the power of the government scrutinized and reduced where necessary. For instance, the House of Lords and...
Words: 754 - Pages: 4
...After the Labour party’s strong victory in the 1997 general election, winning 179 seats, they have made moves and provisions towards constitutional reform. Indeed, the two prime ministers; Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have done much for reform over the years, as illustrated by devolution and the human rights act. Indeed, they made provision for reform in 4 key areas, modernisation, and greater protection of rights, democratisation and decentralisation. However, it can be argued that their reform has been limited, and much more can be done for constitutional reform. Firstly, it is clear that the modernisation aspects of the reform have been severely limited. Indeed, this can be illustrated by the reform of the House of Lords. Over the past 10 years, only part 1 of the reform process has taken place. This has included the removal of over 600 hereditary peers to only 92. However, no reform for a partially or fully elected second chamber has taken place. Until this happens it is argued that the Lords is not democratically legitimate as all policy making institutions must have legitimacy. By merely appointing the members of the Lords means that whilst they may have expertise, they are not socially accountable. These include the likes of Alan Sugar and Sebastian Coe. Also, the Wright report, which includes provisions towards electing members of select committee chairs by secret ballot, and to end the Winterton rule on public bill committees is still stuck within the legislative process...
Words: 1073 - Pages: 5
...Politics: Luke flower 1. Democratic Legitimacy means that a government has been given by the voters a Democratic Mandate in an election to govern and therefore legally exercises power in the interests of all the people. At a British General Election, for example, a government is held accountable for its policies and the party, or parties, that wins the most seats may be said to have the democratic consent or legitimacy to govern on behalf of the public. 2. A Referendum can be held on Constitutional issues/changes if any changes alter the relationship between different parts of the state (e.g. devolution), or between citizens and the state such as the devolution referendum in 1979 where most Scots voted “yes” but 40% needed was not reached and it was unfavourable in Wales. Also, when there is a history of conflict and an agreement is to be made. Furthermore, If our representatives are unable to come to a decision about an issue or ff the govt feel that there will be much discontentment amongst the public if a decision is made without their consent, i.e. an issue that the people have strong opinions on, such as the EU referendum that is going to take place by the end of 2017. 3. The principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty in the UK means that referendums cannot be binding although it would be very difficult for governments to ignore the results of official referendums. Several important arguments have been raised in support of the increased use of referendums...
Words: 1032 - Pages: 5
...Parliamentary sovereignty, once the dominant principle of the UK Constitution, is now under considerable pressure. Discuss this statement with reference to the UK’s membership of the EU, the devolution acts of 1998, the Human Rights Act 1998 and recent judicial comments on the Rule of Law. "Certainly we want to see Europe more united… but it must be in a way which preserves the different traditions, parliamentary powers, and sense of pride in one's own country." Margaret Thatcher Over the course of the years many prominent figures such as politicians and academic writers have been concerned with the diminishing of Parliamentary sovereignty. “Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK, which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change. Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important part of the UK constitution.” Historically, due to the lack of a single codified constitution in the UK, the Westminster Parliament is the most powerful and influencing factor on the British political frontier. As opposed to America where the constitution dominates US politics, and legislation can be deemed unconstitutional and revoked by the US judiciary. However, since further integration into Europe incorporating The European Communities Act 1972, The Human Rights Act 1998, European Conventions on Human Rights...
Words: 1911 - Pages: 8
...Has constitutional reform in the UK gone too far since 1997? Due to the uncodified nature of the UK constitution it is organic and the lack of higher law enables constitutional reforms to occur far quicker and with greater ease than seen in other countries, such as the USA. A constitutional reform is a political change in the constitution. There are varying bodies of opinion on the extent of constitutional reforms that are currently required within the UK. Constitutional changes have been mainly seen since 1997, under Blair and Brown, such as the establishment of a Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly in 1999, a constitutional reform some argue to be unnecessary while others argue should be extended and developed. A key issue that has divided constitutional opinions since 1997 is the idea of the unelected House of Lords, which some say undermine the legitimacy of democracy within the UK. The Salisbury convention already exists and ensures that the House of Lords does not obstruct proposals, which are previously contained in the elected government’s most recent manifesto, which is argues as an example of the removal of undemocratic sovereignty held previously by the Lords. However the fact that it is unwritten has been opposed to as the Lords is not fully controlled by the Government. To counteract the opposition other reforms have been introduce to reduce the powers of the House of Lords, such as the 1999 reform reducing hereditary peers to 92 from 600, and also the loss of...
Words: 1560 - Pages: 7
...abolished. This makes the UK less undemocratic rather then more democratic. This is due to the fact that the House of Lords as a whole is an unelected chamber and therefore undemocratic, however by removing the voting rights of some hereditary peers it makes it less undemocratic as they are there simply by birth and not even appointed. So this reform does make the UK slightly more democratic however some peers remain and the whole chamber is still unelected and so is still very undemocratic. The referendum reform which is the introduction that any proposal to transfer power within the UK should be approved by a referendum. This makes the UK more democratic as it allows the country to become directly involved in the big decisions of devolution as it means large changes in there area/country and as a form of direct democracy makes the decision legitimate and fair. However it also can lead to voter fatigue and also only the government can decide when to put forward a referendum and so the power is not totally with the people. Also depending on wording of the question this can have an effect on the results and could be seen to be...
Words: 282 - Pages: 2
...Unit 1 P1 “Outline the responsibilities of the different level of government in the UK.” House of Commons – It is the lower house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The HoC is part of the legislative process of British Politics. It consists of 650 elected members of Parliament, who represent a board spectrum of political parties. Each MP represents a constituency, which is a localised geographical area. There are two ways in which people get elected, it can happen either during a general election or by-election. A big range of political views and interests are represented in the House of Commons, which enables the ‘House’ to ensure that legislation and decisions are well debated by a variety of different people, which political views differ. HoC has a lot of different roles, MP’s are responsible of debating and passing all laws (legislation), controlling finances, protecting the individuals, examining European proposals, and scrutinises the work of the government, policies and administration. Those roles may have extremely wide impact on the country and public services. House of Lords – It is the upper house, the Second chamber, and is also commonly referred to as “the Lords”. The House of Lords can have a variable amount of members. Currently, there are about 790 members who are eligible to take part in the work of the HoL. Members come from many walks of life and bring experience and knowledge from a wide range of occupations. Majority of them are life peers, which...
Words: 2575 - Pages: 11
...A constitution is a set of principles, which may be codified or uncodified, that establishes the distribution of power within, that establishes the distribution of power within, a political institution. They limit government jurisdiction the rights of citizens and the method of amending the constitution itself. The UK Constitution is uncodified which means the UK constitution is not organised into singular document, but written in alternative ways for example a Convention. I will talk about the following factors, Executive Power, Modernisation and Flexibility which is the way ill assess the UK’s Constitution Executive Power is a strength of the UK Constitution, due to the UK Constitution being unwritten and uncodified the government can be more powerful and decisive easier as they do have to follow a strict set of rules. For example the 1997 Government rearranged the House of Lords with reforms this was quickly done and this was due to the UK not having a constitution. However, the liberals state that not having a constitution and having a strong government threatens the individual rights, the position of minorities and the influence of public opinion. For example Tony Blair decided in 2005 to declare war on Iraq without consulting the people this led to backlash from the public and protests. However, the General Elections is to choose a representative, one of the perks of having a representative is they can use their specialist knowledge to make decisions on the public’s behalf...
Words: 696 - Pages: 3
...Assess the strengths of the UK constitution [25 marks] A constitution is a set of principles, that may be uncodified (unwritten) or codified (written), that relates to how power is distributed within a political system, and establishes how a state is to be organised and governed. Constitutions seek to establish duties, powers and functions of various institutions of government and contribute to defining the relationship between the state and the individuals, for example, defining the extent of civil liberty. The UK constitution helps provide legitimacy to those, of which, are in power, but also limits government power. Although the UK constitution is uncodified, as a whole, parts of the constitution are codified, for example, the European Convention on Human Rights is a codified part of British Law, even though it was designed and created by the Council of Europe, in 1950. Firstly, the UK constitution, being uncodified, means that it is flexible and can be easily adapted to changing circumstances, which could include referendum use and the continuous changing role of the House of Lords. The UK constitution is often called 'organic', which means that the constitution is rooted in society, and consequently means that when society and it's values change the UK constitution can adapt and change to society, without delay or hesitation. Furthermore, because the UK constitution is uncodified, it allows Parliament to pass Acts, without long delays and also allows new, uncodified...
Words: 738 - Pages: 3
...Should the UK have a codified constitution? A constitution is a set of rules that seek to establish the duties, powers and functions of government. Constitutions can be uncodified, like the UK’s at the moment, or codified in the case of the USA’s for example. A codified constitution is authoritative, entrenched and judiciable, everything that an uncodified constitution isn’t. On the one hand there are many arguments supporting the view that the UK should adopt a codified constitution. If a codified constitution were introduced, the key constitutional rules would be collected together in a single document, and they would be more clearly defined than in an ‘unwritten’ constitution where rules are spread across many different documents. A codified constitution would create less confusion about the meaning of constitutional rules and greater certainty that they can be enforced. A second argument supporting a codified constitution is limited government. A codified constitution would cut government down to size. A codified constitution would effectively end the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and subsequently elective dictatorship. Elective dictatorship is a constitutional imbalance in which executive power is abused to allow governments to win elections. In the UK, it is reflected in the ability of a government to act in any way it pleases as long as it maintains control of the House of Commons. It would not be possible for government to interfere with the constitution...
Words: 716 - Pages: 3
...1.a) With reference to the source, describe three sources of the Uk constitution (5 marks) The constitution of the United Kingdom is the set of laws and principles under which the United Kingdom is governed. In the source it states a few examples that the constitution has built on, but here is three: The constitution has built on Common Law, historical documents and European legislation. b) With reference to the source, and your own knowledge, explain the arguments in favour of a codified constitution for the UK. (10 marks) One argument that is brought up in favour of a codified constitution for the UK is that the constitution is not set out clearly in any document, there is not the same system as in the USA that has a document that clearly sets out what the constitution contains or states what citizens’ rights and freedoms are. As the source says, the Justice Secretary Jack straw said “Most people might struggle to put their finger on where their rights are.” Jack Straw also argued that having a codified constitution would ‘bring us in line with the most progressive democracies around the world.” It would also correct the imbalances in the current political system, for example, the second chamber and considering what the constitutional status the House of Lords holds. Limits executive dominance, It would take some of the Governments power away and would decrease the chance of government dictatorship as the public would see what in fact there allowed to do and...
Words: 575 - Pages: 3
