Mark Scheme (Results)
Summer 2013

GCE Government and Politics 6GP02

Governing the UK

Edexcel and BTEC Qualifications
Edexcel and BTEC qualifications come from Pearson, the world’s leading learning company. We provide a wide range of qualifications including academic, vocational, occupational and specific programmes for employers. For further information visit our qualifications websites at www.edexcel.com or www.btec.co.uk for our BTEC qualifications.
Alternatively, you can get in touch with us using the details on our contact us page at www.edexcel.com/contactus. If you have any subject specific questions about this specification that require the help of a subject specialist, you can speak directly to the subject team at Pearson.
Their contact details can be found on this link: www.edexcel.com/teachingservices.
You can also use our online Ask the Expert service at www.edexcel.com/ask. You will need an
Edexcel username and password to access this service.

Pearson: helping people progress, everywhere
Our aim is to help everyone progress in their lives through education. We believe in every kind of learning, for all kinds of people, wherever they are in the world. We’ve been involved in education for over 150 years, and by working across 70 countries, in 100 languages, we have built an international reputation for our commitment to high standards and raising achievement through innovation in education. Find out more about how we can help you and your students at: www.pearson.com/uk

Summer 2013
Publications Code US036082
All the material in this publication is copyright
© Pearson Education Ltd 2013

6GP02_01
1301

No. 1 (a)
With reference to the source, outline two features of the UK constitution. AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding
The following features are in the source and can be credited :
• It is not codified
• Constitutional laws are not superior to other laws.
• It is derived from a number of sources as opposed to one.
• It is very flexible.

Marks can be allocated as follows :
5 marks for two features correctly identified and a clear and accurate explanation of each.
4 marks for two features accurately identified but explained less fully.
3 marks for two features correctly identified but only one explained clearly
2 marks for two features accurately identified with no explanation OR one feature identified with an explanation.
1 mark for one feature identified but not explained.

No. 1 (b)

With reference to the source and your own knowledge, explain the sources of the UK constitution.

AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding
From the source the following sources can be identified :
• Statute law, as passed by Parliament. Additional knowledge would refer to the fact that they change the nature and processes of government. Examples in the source are the Human Rights Act, Devolution and Lords reform.
• Conventions as unwritten rules. Examples may be added from candidate’s own knowledge, e.g. Salisbury Convention, Collective responsibility etc.
Further sources from the candidate’s own knowledge may be added, explained and exemplified, These may include :
• Historical principles such as the sovereignty of parliament and prerogative powers. • Works and documents of authority such as Dicey.
• Common law and tradition, relating often to rights.
• European Union Treaties such as Maastricht.
Threshold Guidance for AO1:
The minimum requirement to enter level 3 is three sources clearly explained with at least one from the source and one from the candidate’s own knowledge.
The minimum requirement to enter level 2 is two sources with at least a limited explanation. Level 3
6-7 Marks

Good to excellent knowledge of sources. Explanations of the sources demonstrate good to excellent understanding. There will be good use made of appropriate examples.

Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound knowledge of the sources. Explanations of the sources will demonstrate limited to sound understanding. Examples will be limited or absent.

Level 1
0-2 Marks

Very poor to weak knowledge with little or no understanding shown.
Examples are likely to be absent.

AO2

Intellectual skills

Intellectual skills relevant to this question
Ability to explain why and how the sources relate to the nature of the constitution.

Level 3
3 Marks

Good to excellent ability to explain the nature of operation of the sources Level 2
2 Marks

Limited to sound ability to explain the nature of operation of the sources Level 1
1 Mark

Very poor to weak ability to explain the nature of operation of the sources No. 1 (c)

Assess the strengths of the UK’s uncodified constitution

AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding.
The following strengths may be included, together with exemplification and some assessment as identified below. Any additional or alternative, cogent and accurate strengths and assessments should be credited.
• It is flexible and can adapt to changing circumstances. (AO2 material - some argue it is too flexible and can be manipulated by governments to suit their own purposes (e.g. fixed term parliament legislation)).
• The balance of power lies largely with the executive branch, (AO2 material though it is often argued there is too much power with government (‘elective dictatorship’) and parliament is too weak).
• It has stood the test of time. (AO2 material - some say it is outdated and not suited to a modern democracy, e.g. persistence of a non elected second chamber). • Despite being uncodified it has successfully protected rights in the UK. (AO2 material - critics now argue rights are not protected well enough because of the sovereignty of parliament).
• The lack of a codified constitution means that judges have relatively less power in the interpretation of constitutional rules and processes. This places the constitution in the hands of elected, accountable politicians. (AO2 material - recent evidence suggests that judges are increasingly intervening in constitutional interpretations).
Note : Explanation of weaknesses should only be credited where they are used to assess strengths.

Threshold Guidance for AO1 :
The minimum requirement to enter level 3 is three strengths clearly explained
The minimum requirement to enter level 2 is two strengths with at least a limited explanation. Level 3
6-8 Marks

Good to excellent knowledge and understanding of the strengths of the constitution and assessments of those strengths.

Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound knowledge and understanding of the strengths of the constitution and assessments of those strengths.

Level 1
0-2 Marks

Very poor to weak knowledge and understanding of the strengths of the constitution and assessments of those strengths.

AO2

Intellectual skills

Intellectual skills relevant to this question
Ability to make cogent assessments, demonstrating analysis of why strengths may be criticised or not seen as strengths at all, together with some evaluation of which strengths are most important and why
Level 3
7-9 Marks

Good to excellent ability to make assessments and evaluations of the strengths of the constitution.

Level 2
4-6 Marks

Limited to sound ability to make assessments and evaluations of the strengths of the constitution.

Level 1
0-3 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to make assessments and evaluations of the strengths of the constitution.

AO3

Communication and coherence

Level 3
6-8 Marks

Good to excellent ability to construct and communicate coherent knowledge, assessment and analysis, with use of appropriate political vocabulary.

Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound ability to construct and communicate coherent knowledge, assessment and analysis, with some use of appropriate political vocabulary.

Level 1
0-2 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to construct and communicate coherent knowledge, assessment and analysis, with little or no use of appropriate political vocabulary.

No. 2 (a)

With reference to the source, outline why the increasing exercise of judicial review is controversial.

AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding
The source contains the following controversial issues :
• Judges, encouraged by the ECHR are shrinking national sovereignty by becoming too politicised.
• Judges are trespassing on the functions of government.
• The over-vigorous use of judicial review.
• Judges are making decisions which should be in the hands of parliament and the people.

Marks can be allocated as follows :
5 marks for two controversial issues correctly identified and an accurate explanation of each OR all four issues identified with no explanation OR three issues raised with at least one explained.
4 marks for two controversial issues accurately identified but explained only sparsely OR three issues identified with no explanation.
3 marks for two controversial issues correctly identified but only one explained.
2 marks for two controversial issues accurately identified with no explanation OR one controversial issue identified and explained.
1 mark for one controversial issue identified but not explained.

6GP02_01
1301

No. 2 (b)

With reference to the source and your own knowledge, explain the main effects of the Human Rights Act.

AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding
The source contains the following effects :
• Shifting the boundaries between legal and political decision making.
• This has affected such areas as immigration, sentencing policy, security and policing, privacy and freedom of expression.
• The Human Rights Act has given greater scope for the use of judicial review
Candidates’ own knowledge should explain how and why the HRA has affected the issues shown, e.g.
• HRA has caused rifts between the government coalition partners.
• The HRA has eroded parliamentary sovereignty.
• The HRA has affected how judges apply sentences.
• Rights judgments have affected government dealings with terrorism and law and order issues, e.g. Belmarsh, Abu Qatada.
• Judgments have attempted to define the limits of privacy and press freedom when these matters might be in the jurisdiction of parliament.
Candidates should be credited for referring to any other issues raised by the HRA.
Threshold Guidance for AO1 :
The minimum requirement to enter level 3 is three effects clearly explained with at least one from the source and one from the candidates own knowledge.
The minimum requirement to enter level 2 is two effects with at least limited explanation. Level 3
6-7 Marks

Good to excellent knowledge and understanding of the effects of the
HRA with appropriate examples deployed.

Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound knowledge and understanding of the effects of the
HRA. Use of examples will range from limited to not at all.

Level 1
0-2 Marks

Limited to very weak knowledge and understanding of the effects of the HRA with probably no examples deployed.

AO2

Intellectual skills

Intellectual skills relevant to this question
Ability to explain the operation of the HRA and the effects that have been identified. Level 3
3 Marks

Good to excellent ability to analyse and explain the links between the HRA and the effects that have been identified.

Level 2
2 Marks

Limited to sound ability to analyse and explain the links between the HRA and the effects that have been identified.

Level 1
1 Mark

Very poor to weak ability analyse and explain the links between the
HRA and the effects that have been identified.

No. 2 (c)

Should judges, rather than politicians, be responsible for protecting civil liberties?

AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding
The arguments that judges are the right people to protect civil liberties include these :
• Judges are neutral and legally trained so they should make judgments according to law and the rule of law rather than short term political considerations.
• Judges are independent of political pressure.
• Judges can prevent government exercising excessive power over individuals. • It could be argued that some politicians have a poor record of defending civil liberties e.g. anti-terrorism legislation
The arguments that judges are not appropriate include these :
• They are neither elected not accountable.
• They do not take account of public opinion.
• Some argue they come from a narrow social and educational background and so are not representative.
• It could be argued that some politicians have a good record of defending civil liberties e.g. Human Rights Act, Freedom of
Information Act.
Full knowledge and understanding should include explanations of these arguments. Threshold Guidance for AO1:
The minimum requirement to enter level 3 is three discussion points well explained and with some balance.
The minimum requirement to enter level 2 is two discussion points with at least limited explanation.

Level 3
6-8 Marks

Good to excellent knowledge and understanding of the arguments in favour of judges making such judgments together with the arguments in favour of politicians having the responsibility. Good balance between each side of the argument. 6GP02_01
1301

Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound knowledge and understanding of the arguments in favour of judges making such judgments together with the arguments in favour of politicians having the responsibility. Possibly very unbalanced between each side of the argument.

Level 1
0-2 Marks

Very poor to weak knowledge and understanding of the arguments in favour of judges making such judgments and the arguments in favour of politicians having the responsibility. Probably only one side of the argument covered. AO2

Intellectual skills

Intellectual skills relevant to this question
Ability to analyse the arguments in favour of judges having this role as well as those favouring politicians. The strengths and weaknesses of each side of the argument should be analysed and evaluated.
Level 3
7-9 Marks

Good to excellent ability to analyse and evaluate each side of the argument, with a supported conclusion.

Level 2
4-6 Marks

Limited to sound ability to analyse and evaluate each side of the argument, probably with a conclusion, but not well supported.

Level 1
0-3 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to analyse and evaluate each side of the argument, probably without a supported or unsupported conclusion.

AO3

Communication and coherence

Level 3
6-8 Marks

Good to excellent ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments and evaluations, making good use of appropriate vocabulary. Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments and evaluations, making some use of appropriate vocabulary Level 1
0-2 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments and evaluations, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary No. 3

Has the experience of coalition government strengthened or weakened prime ministerial power?

AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding
The arguments that coalition has strengthened prime ministerial power include these :
•

•

•

The coalition has given the prime minister and his government a solid majority in the House of Commons. Government has not lost a major vote in the
Commons.
Once policies have been agreed by the coalition partners, they have additional authority as they are supported by two parties and so represent a consensus view. The coalition also has a strong mandate as the two parties together were elected by a majority of the electorate.
The constant threat of government collapsing has, arguably, strengthened the ability of the prime minister to maintain coalition discipline.

The arguments that coalition has weakened prime ministerial power include these:
•
•
•
•
•

Policy now has to be cleared with his coalition partners and this has caused problems. He is more vulnerable to dissidence both within his own party and within his coalition partner.
There has been increased activity and activism by the House of Lords as the government’s mandate is weak.
His powers of patronage are limited because he cannot appoint all cabinet members himself.
Arguably the fixed term rule is a unique product of coalition government and has taken away one of his discretionary powers.

Threshold Guidance for AO1 :
The minimum requirement to enter level 3 is at least four arguments well explained with at least two on each side of the issue.
The minimum requirement to enter level 2 is three arguments with least limited explanation Level 3
14-20 Marks

Good to excellent knowledge and understanding of both the ways the prime minister’s power has been weakened and strengthened, including a good to excellent range of examples since 2010. Good balance between material on both sides of the argument.

Level 2
7-13 Marks

Limited to sound knowledge and understanding of both the ways the prime minister’s power has been weakened and strengthened, including some examples since 2010. Possibly not equally balanced between material from both sides of the argument.

Level 1
0-6 Marks

Very poor to weak knowledge and understanding of both the ways the prime minister’s power has been weakened and strengthened, including few or no examples. Probably unbalanced between two sides of the argument, possibly with only one side covered.

AO2

Intellectual skills

Intellectual skills relevant to this question
Ability to link aspects of coalition government to both strengths and weaknesses in the position of the prime minister. Ability to evaluate the two sides of the argument and to reach a supported conclusion.
Level 3
8-12 Marks

Good to excellent ability to analyse and evaluate both sides of the argument and to reach a supported conclusion.

Level 2

Limited to sound ability to analyse and evaluate both sides of the argument and to reach a supported conclusion, which may not be supported fully.

4-7 Marks
Level 1
0-3 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to analyse and evaluate either side of the argument probably without a supported or even unsupported conclusion. AO3

Communication and coherence

Level 3
6-8 Marks

Good to excellent ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making good use of appropriate vocabulary. A well structured answer.

Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making some use of appropriate vocabulary. A soundly structured answer.

Level 1
0-2 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary. Little or no coherent structure to the answer.

No. 4

‘The House of Lords is now more effective than the House of
Commons in checking government power.’ Discuss.

AO1

Knowledge and understanding

Key knowledge and understanding
Examples of ways in which the House of Lords has been more effective than the Commons may include these :
• The lack of a proper mandate for the coalition has meant the Lords has been more active and is unconstrained by the Salisbury
Convention.
• Party discipline is weaker or absent in the Lords so it has proved to be more independent. This has been especially true under coalition.
• Government has lost some legislation or parts of legislation in the
Lords but not in the Commons
• The Commons is in a weak position simply because the coalition is inherently vulnerable. This weakness does not apply in the Lords.
• The political balance of the Lords makes it more independent.
• A number of highly controversial pieces of legislation have been effectively dealt with in the Lords, including NHS reform, Welfare
Reform, forest privatisation and similar.
• Generally the Lords is more representative of various groups in society. Examples of ways in which the Commons remains pre-eminent may include
:
• The legal restraints on the Lords remain, as demonstrated by the
Commons overturning various Lords amendments to recent legislation. • The Commons Select Committees have grown in influence and authority. • The Commons still holds the reserve threat of vetoing legislation or even bringing down government, Lords can only delay and advise.
• The media still concentrates more on the Commons and its role in making government accountable, e.g. PMQT.
Threshold Guidance for AO1 :
The minimum requirement to enter level 3 is at least four arguments well explained with at least two on each side of the issue.
The minimum requirement to enter level 2 is three arguments with least limited explanation

Level 3
14-20
Marks

Good to excellent knowledge and understanding of the recent role and importance of both the Lords and the Commons, with some examples deployed. Well balanced in terms of evidence from recent experience of both houses.

Level 2
7-13 Marks

Limited to sound knowledge and understanding of the recent role and importance of both the Lords and the Commons, with some examples deployed, but not extensively. Possibly unbalanced between evidence concerning the Lords and the
Commons.

Level 1
0-6 Marks

Very poor to weak knowledge and understanding of the recent role and importance of both the Lords and the
Commons, though possibly with a lack of balance, perhaps referring only to the Lords. Probably there will be an absence of examples.

AO2

Intellectual skills

Intellectual skills relevant to this question
Ability to analyse the changing role of both the Lords and the Commons, explaining why changes are occurring. Good evaluation of evidence culminating in a supported conclusion.
Level 3
8-12 Marks

Good to excellent ability to analyse and evaluate the importance of both houses, and to evaluate their respective importance. Ability to support a firm conclusion.

Level 2
4-7 Marks

Limited to sound ability to analyse and evaluate the importance of both houses, with a conclusion, though this may not be fully supported.

Level 1
0-3 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to analyse and evaluate the importance of either house, with little or no evaluation and probably no conclusion, supported or unsupported.

AO3

Communication and coherence

Level 3
6-8 Marks

Good to excellent ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making good use of appropriate vocabulary. A well developed structure and a response with a good introduction and conclusion.

Level 2
3-5 Marks

Limited to sound ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making some use of appropriate vocabulary. A sound structure to the answer with a cogent introduction and conclusion.

Level 1
0-2 Marks

Very poor to weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary. Lacking a satisfactory introduction and/or conclusion. Further copies of this publication are available from
Edexcel Publications, Adamsway, Mansfield, Notts, NG18 4FN
Telephone 01623 467467
Fax 01623 450481
Email publication.orders@edexcel.com
Order Code US036082 Summer 2013

For more information on Edexcel qualifications, please visit our website www.edexcel.com Pearson Education Limited. Registered company number 872828 with its registered office at Edinburgh Gate, Harlow, Essex CM20 2JE