UK govt essay plans
1. Evaluate the extent to which rights are effectively protected by the UK constitutional
arrangements - correct answer-- Common law (trad, custom and precedent/judge made) >
precedent made by judges protecting rights e.g. murder vs statute law can 'overturn' these or
reform
- Statute Law > HRA 1998 (incorporated ECHR convention) e.g. whole life sentences
deemed breach of article 3 in convention 2013 vs not entrenched so can be set aside by parli
e.g. over terrorism legislation
- Conventions (non-legal rule) > Salisbury Convention protects rights of people in govt voted
in can fulfil its promises from manifesto vs collective responsibility and whips/patronage =
rights not protected??
---weak rights in part due to elective dictatorship
2. Evaluate the extent to which parli is effective in carrying out its various functions - correct
answer-- Represent > represent each constituent no matter how voted, 650 roughly equal,
hold surgeries etc vs HoL not elected, not demographically rep e.g. 32% women HoC and
problem w/ electoral system/wasted votes e.g. UKIP
- legitimation (as govt draft and legislate) > debate bill at second reading and committee
stage (may propose amendments), 25 acts passed by Parli 2017 vs legislative committees in
HoC is whipped = ineffective, usually govt aligned e.g. 2010 defence committee 5c and 4 ld
- Oversight/ scrutiny (of leg and govt) > HoL can scrutinise leg by proposing improvements or
delaying + expertise, PMQs, vote of no confidence e.g. Callaghan 1979 and 2019 but failed
vs HoC too much power as can reject improvements, pmqs a media 'event' = not serious,
whips/patronage e.g. only 2 consv against Iraq 2003, galloway forced to resign after
opposing labour bill 2003
---diff between hol and hoc
3. Evaluate the extent to which the cabinet can act as a check on prime ministerial power -
correct answer-- Effectively remove PM from office > e.g. Thatcher, cabinet ministers
resigned due to low poll ratings (poll tax disputes)
- Ministers in charge of large departments, such as the Treasury, have their own power
bases > e.g. Blair-Brown vs can only be utilised when popularity already in decline
- only 'First among equals' > cannot command absolute power like president can, needs
cabinet to approve and hopefully support vs notion of pms becoming more presidential w/
short full cabinet meetings generally rubber-stamping decisions that had been taken
elsewhere e.g. 'sofa govt' of Blair, didn't include int development secretary in talks about Iraq
- Coalition govt >
4. Analyse and evaluate the factors that may undermine judicial neutrality - correct answer--
Process of appointments > Lord Chancellor can reject candidates e.g. Michael Gove 2015-6
vs not permitted to repeatedly reject names as power limited by const reform act 2005 which
also created independent JAC
, - Conservative bias in senior judiciary > mainly male, white upper-middle class and private
school educated, 3/12 women 2019, 70% private schooled 2016 vs becoming more diverse,
number of women had increased from years prior, plus job/trained to act objectively
- Growing trend on taking public stand on policy issues > lord Philips criticising wider use of
mandatory sentencing vs this is rare
esp w/ increased stories by media criticising judges e.g. after sc determined mps must vote
on triggering article 50, branded 'enemies of the people' by DailyMail
1. Evaluate the arguments for retaining an uncodified const - correct answer-- flexible > can
evolve with the times and implements new laws, conventions for modern day e.g. fixed term
parli act 2011 vs
- historical and tradition > sense of pride in the historical aspect of const, no revolution vs
outdated, many modern countries have a codified const, could enhance legitimacy and
functions of dem + correlates w/ lib ides of setting out limits of govt and protections of
citizens
- effective government > not written = govt decisions backed by parli can't be overturned by
judiciary + fusion of powers = govt usually get their way unless cation or small majority e.g.
Thatcher govt 1979-90 which intro privatisation and reform of welfare state = strong, decisive
action vs too much power, 'elective dictatorship' = apathy of citizens causing low turnout
2. Evaluate the effectiveness to which the HoL can act as a check on the HoC - correct
answer-- delay passage for up to 1yr > blocking bills such as hoc reform vs usually have to
be backed by hoc backbenchers e.g. 91 consv mps 2012
- amend leg > acting as scrutiny on HoL vs can be rejected by commons
- national debate > may scrutinise actions of commons and bring up important issues e.g.
effect of Brexit on the union of the UK 2019 vs not really picked up my media
- question govt ministers on govt policies and decisions > e.g. blunkett questioned on visa
scandal enquiry vs collective responsibility/whips/patronage prevents hol acting as opps e.g.
galloway 2003 labour bill
3. Assess the limitations on the PMs powers - correct answer-- cabinet > can effectively
remove pm through resignations = disunity e.g. Thatcher end of 1980s, and power of certain
members e.g. Brown, chancellor of exchequer = 'dual monarchy' vs already caused by lack
of popularity or can strengthen
- electoral success and electorate > unpopular = mandate not secure e.g. Thatcher's
vulnerability in late 1980s coincided w/ low poll ratings and labours improved rating + brown
uncertain time of election that never happened vs if polls high and popular authority over
cabinet and party is assured e.g. Blair 1997 = power
- national crisis/pressure of events > 2008 Brown further damaged by financial crisis
undermining rep for eco competence vs can strengthen e.g. Thatcher and Falklands...but v
unpredictable and can be caused by PM e.g. Blairs support for USA in Iraq
- media > becoming more critical e.g. a low under Brown who lacked communication and
oratory skills to be modern successful leader vs strengthened by personality e.g. charisma of
Blair....but increasingly over 'hyped' and facts blurred
- party >
4. Evaluate how far membership of the EU affected British sovereignty - correct answer--
public policy > every year EU issues 12,000 regulations, decisions and recommendations
1. Evaluate the extent to which rights are effectively protected by the UK constitutional
arrangements - correct answer-- Common law (trad, custom and precedent/judge made) >
precedent made by judges protecting rights e.g. murder vs statute law can 'overturn' these or
reform
- Statute Law > HRA 1998 (incorporated ECHR convention) e.g. whole life sentences
deemed breach of article 3 in convention 2013 vs not entrenched so can be set aside by parli
e.g. over terrorism legislation
- Conventions (non-legal rule) > Salisbury Convention protects rights of people in govt voted
in can fulfil its promises from manifesto vs collective responsibility and whips/patronage =
rights not protected??
---weak rights in part due to elective dictatorship
2. Evaluate the extent to which parli is effective in carrying out its various functions - correct
answer-- Represent > represent each constituent no matter how voted, 650 roughly equal,
hold surgeries etc vs HoL not elected, not demographically rep e.g. 32% women HoC and
problem w/ electoral system/wasted votes e.g. UKIP
- legitimation (as govt draft and legislate) > debate bill at second reading and committee
stage (may propose amendments), 25 acts passed by Parli 2017 vs legislative committees in
HoC is whipped = ineffective, usually govt aligned e.g. 2010 defence committee 5c and 4 ld
- Oversight/ scrutiny (of leg and govt) > HoL can scrutinise leg by proposing improvements or
delaying + expertise, PMQs, vote of no confidence e.g. Callaghan 1979 and 2019 but failed
vs HoC too much power as can reject improvements, pmqs a media 'event' = not serious,
whips/patronage e.g. only 2 consv against Iraq 2003, galloway forced to resign after
opposing labour bill 2003
---diff between hol and hoc
3. Evaluate the extent to which the cabinet can act as a check on prime ministerial power -
correct answer-- Effectively remove PM from office > e.g. Thatcher, cabinet ministers
resigned due to low poll ratings (poll tax disputes)
- Ministers in charge of large departments, such as the Treasury, have their own power
bases > e.g. Blair-Brown vs can only be utilised when popularity already in decline
- only 'First among equals' > cannot command absolute power like president can, needs
cabinet to approve and hopefully support vs notion of pms becoming more presidential w/
short full cabinet meetings generally rubber-stamping decisions that had been taken
elsewhere e.g. 'sofa govt' of Blair, didn't include int development secretary in talks about Iraq
- Coalition govt >
4. Analyse and evaluate the factors that may undermine judicial neutrality - correct answer--
Process of appointments > Lord Chancellor can reject candidates e.g. Michael Gove 2015-6
vs not permitted to repeatedly reject names as power limited by const reform act 2005 which
also created independent JAC
, - Conservative bias in senior judiciary > mainly male, white upper-middle class and private
school educated, 3/12 women 2019, 70% private schooled 2016 vs becoming more diverse,
number of women had increased from years prior, plus job/trained to act objectively
- Growing trend on taking public stand on policy issues > lord Philips criticising wider use of
mandatory sentencing vs this is rare
esp w/ increased stories by media criticising judges e.g. after sc determined mps must vote
on triggering article 50, branded 'enemies of the people' by DailyMail
1. Evaluate the arguments for retaining an uncodified const - correct answer-- flexible > can
evolve with the times and implements new laws, conventions for modern day e.g. fixed term
parli act 2011 vs
- historical and tradition > sense of pride in the historical aspect of const, no revolution vs
outdated, many modern countries have a codified const, could enhance legitimacy and
functions of dem + correlates w/ lib ides of setting out limits of govt and protections of
citizens
- effective government > not written = govt decisions backed by parli can't be overturned by
judiciary + fusion of powers = govt usually get their way unless cation or small majority e.g.
Thatcher govt 1979-90 which intro privatisation and reform of welfare state = strong, decisive
action vs too much power, 'elective dictatorship' = apathy of citizens causing low turnout
2. Evaluate the effectiveness to which the HoL can act as a check on the HoC - correct
answer-- delay passage for up to 1yr > blocking bills such as hoc reform vs usually have to
be backed by hoc backbenchers e.g. 91 consv mps 2012
- amend leg > acting as scrutiny on HoL vs can be rejected by commons
- national debate > may scrutinise actions of commons and bring up important issues e.g.
effect of Brexit on the union of the UK 2019 vs not really picked up my media
- question govt ministers on govt policies and decisions > e.g. blunkett questioned on visa
scandal enquiry vs collective responsibility/whips/patronage prevents hol acting as opps e.g.
galloway 2003 labour bill
3. Assess the limitations on the PMs powers - correct answer-- cabinet > can effectively
remove pm through resignations = disunity e.g. Thatcher end of 1980s, and power of certain
members e.g. Brown, chancellor of exchequer = 'dual monarchy' vs already caused by lack
of popularity or can strengthen
- electoral success and electorate > unpopular = mandate not secure e.g. Thatcher's
vulnerability in late 1980s coincided w/ low poll ratings and labours improved rating + brown
uncertain time of election that never happened vs if polls high and popular authority over
cabinet and party is assured e.g. Blair 1997 = power
- national crisis/pressure of events > 2008 Brown further damaged by financial crisis
undermining rep for eco competence vs can strengthen e.g. Thatcher and Falklands...but v
unpredictable and can be caused by PM e.g. Blairs support for USA in Iraq
- media > becoming more critical e.g. a low under Brown who lacked communication and
oratory skills to be modern successful leader vs strengthened by personality e.g. charisma of
Blair....but increasingly over 'hyped' and facts blurred
- party >
4. Evaluate how far membership of the EU affected British sovereignty - correct answer--
public policy > every year EU issues 12,000 regulations, decisions and recommendations
