Parliament
Is Parliament an ineffective check on the executive?
Committees NO
Independently elected, chairs by secret ballot (Keith Vaz, Home affairs), and
receive £14500 to maintain standards + neutrality.
Can call upon anyone (and force anyone - Mark Ashley, Sports direct boss held
in contempt of Parliament) to attend, and, bar matters of national security (which
covers only small number of committees) can ask anything. Not afraid to
challenge govt - 2015 Syria Vote. Liaison committee interviews Cameron every 6
months.
Popular media coverage (eg. Jamie Oliver 2016) which can raise attention to
issues.
~40% of recommendations from their reports (on any given topic) make it into
law - huge legislative influence.
Lords committees comprised of experts in their fields. EU committee’s scrutiny of
~1000 directives coming from Brussels/Strasbourg every year is amongst best in
EU, referenced in Commons + EU.
BUT
Public Bill Committee/Statutory bill committee are whipped, 90% of amendments
are suggested by government.
Select committees easily ignored - 2015 Syria Vote.
Committees are under resourced, and can suffer from crude interviewing tactics
(Murdoch) due to lack of training.
Questioning Yes
Written questions - 98k/year - provide opportunity for MPs to clarify policy and
get in writing government policy. Avoids lengthy waiting in chamber to ask
question.
Oral questions, far more public, give an opportunity to publically out a govt
minister. Urgent questions (2016 Turkey’s ascension to EU), far more common
under Bercow, give opportunity to question ministers directly - PMQs even get to
confront PM!
Lords debates, however, are with experts in field, less combative, and not as
whipped - compare debate over tax credits 2015 - Lords had twice as long to
debate.
But
Written questions can be ignored if the cost of pursuing them exceeds £800, or in
matters of national security.
Oral questions require lengthy waits in the chamber, answers can be evasive,
and PMQs is a farce of planted questions, only on once a week, and for 30
minutes - “Punch and Judy” politics.
Opposition/Backben Opposition, via “Short money” (£6.2mil, but cut by 10%) is able to launch
chers concerted critique of government policy. Shadow ministers follow their opposite
providing detailed scrutiny of policy and actions. Opposition leader gets 6Qs at
PMQs,
Backbenchers are able to use PMB to launch their own campaigns, sometimes in
contravention of government (Halfon, Hospital car park charges).
But
Is Parliament an ineffective check on the executive?
Committees NO
Independently elected, chairs by secret ballot (Keith Vaz, Home affairs), and
receive £14500 to maintain standards + neutrality.
Can call upon anyone (and force anyone - Mark Ashley, Sports direct boss held
in contempt of Parliament) to attend, and, bar matters of national security (which
covers only small number of committees) can ask anything. Not afraid to
challenge govt - 2015 Syria Vote. Liaison committee interviews Cameron every 6
months.
Popular media coverage (eg. Jamie Oliver 2016) which can raise attention to
issues.
~40% of recommendations from their reports (on any given topic) make it into
law - huge legislative influence.
Lords committees comprised of experts in their fields. EU committee’s scrutiny of
~1000 directives coming from Brussels/Strasbourg every year is amongst best in
EU, referenced in Commons + EU.
BUT
Public Bill Committee/Statutory bill committee are whipped, 90% of amendments
are suggested by government.
Select committees easily ignored - 2015 Syria Vote.
Committees are under resourced, and can suffer from crude interviewing tactics
(Murdoch) due to lack of training.
Questioning Yes
Written questions - 98k/year - provide opportunity for MPs to clarify policy and
get in writing government policy. Avoids lengthy waiting in chamber to ask
question.
Oral questions, far more public, give an opportunity to publically out a govt
minister. Urgent questions (2016 Turkey’s ascension to EU), far more common
under Bercow, give opportunity to question ministers directly - PMQs even get to
confront PM!
Lords debates, however, are with experts in field, less combative, and not as
whipped - compare debate over tax credits 2015 - Lords had twice as long to
debate.
But
Written questions can be ignored if the cost of pursuing them exceeds £800, or in
matters of national security.
Oral questions require lengthy waits in the chamber, answers can be evasive,
and PMQs is a farce of planted questions, only on once a week, and for 30
minutes - “Punch and Judy” politics.
Opposition/Backben Opposition, via “Short money” (£6.2mil, but cut by 10%) is able to launch
chers concerted critique of government policy. Shadow ministers follow their opposite
providing detailed scrutiny of policy and actions. Opposition leader gets 6Qs at
PMQs,
Backbenchers are able to use PMB to launch their own campaigns, sometimes in
contravention of government (Halfon, Hospital car park charges).
But
