Assess The Role Of Responsible Government Essay

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

Parliament is very effective when dealing with the public and their interests and needs like when they redress public grievances to make sure they are listened too. However, parliament isn’t so effective on the representative side of things. This is because the electoral system that we use isn’t very fair and excludes smaller parties of a chance of being voted into parliament. This therefore means a large number of public votes have been

“In theory Parliament has total power. It is sovereign” were the words of Dicey in his book Law of the Constitution. A.V. Dicey was a British jurist and constitutional theorist in the 20th century who was adamant and argued extensively about the absolute nature of sovereignty of the Parliament which he derived from Coke and Blackstone. He had said “"Parliament" has

Under a minority government, no party has ultimate control of making policies, it instead rules on consensus with the other parties, conversely, in a majority government, a single-party dominates the legislative process. Though complex agreements between opposition parties, the governing party can maintain confidence. For example, countries including Canada use contract parliamentarism, where opposition parties agree to support the government in return for policy on other concessions (Akash et al., 2010, p. 216). While this promotes collective responsibility, parties are still able to decide their own position on most matters. Therefore, parties collaborate to protect minority agreements that “often survive a full parliamentary term” (Akash et al., p. 216). This can result in motions being passed that cover a broad variety of different topics that ultimately can address issues that all parties see lacking in

Why is government necessary? In the words of Alexander Hamilton, “Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice, without constraint” (Federalist No. 15 137). Men have a sin nature and must have an authority set in place to keep them from falling into anarchy. America has federal and state governments with a system of checks and balances for exactly this reason, but one sector of the government has overstepped the bounds that were set for it in this country’s infancy. In order to answer the question of whether more power should be put into the hands of the federal or state government, three things must be considered: the history of state’s rights in America, the differing types of government, and the constitution itself.

Parliament has a central function in carrying out a scrutiny role. It carries close inspection and where it is necessary, amendments maybe proposed this is carried out in both houses. It holds the government collectively and the PM and other ministers accountable for their actions. It does this in debates, question times and through the work of Departmental Select Committees (DSC). However it maybe be argued that is not enough since scrutiny does not often involve blocking legislation. It is not expected that parliament will make substantial changes, but it does

Beginning with the Articles of Confederation, our nascent country began its path to self-governance. No longer “property” of the British Empire, the task at hand was how to effectively govern these newly formed states. Apparently a fan of symmetry, the

Canada’s parliamentary system is designed to preclude the formation of absolute power. Critics and followers of Canadian politics argue that the Prime Minister of Canada stands alone from the rest of the government. The powers vested in the prime minister, along with the persistent media attention given to the position, reinforce the Prime Minister of Canada’s superior role both in the House of Commons and in the public. The result has led to concerns regarding the power of the prime minister. Hugh Mellon argues that the prime minister of Canada is indeed too powerful. Mellon refers to the prime minister’s control over Canada a prime-ministerial government, where the prime minister encounters few constraints on the usage of his powers.

For many years it has been argued that parliamentary sovereignty has, and still is, being eroded. As said by AV Dicey, the word ‘sovereignty’ is used to describe the idea of “the power of law making unrestricted by any legal limit”. Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution, stating that Parliament is the supreme legal authority in the UK, able to create and remove any law. This power over-rules courts and all other jurisdiction. It also cannot be entrenched; this is where all laws passed by the party in government can be changed by future parliaments. In recent years sovereignty of parliament has been a

One major issue that allows the Prime Minister execute such a high degree of ministerial power is the Cabinets ability to use party discipline to ensure it has its party’s support. MPs of the party must always “toe the party line” to guarantee the will of the PM is carried out. If any elected member of the Prime Ministers’ party were to vote against the PM, the PM has the executive

That the Rump Parliament had absolutely no achievements at all to its name is a strong statement. As a governing body setup by the remnants of Pride's Purge, the MP's that remained were all wanted there originally, indeed by the very man that would eventually dissolve them -- Oliver Cromwell. So something had certainly led Cromwell to become increasingly disillusioned with the Parliament he in sense created. This essay will examine these reasons and just what achievements the Rump succeeded in.

In 2011, three legal and constitutional scholars, Peter Aucoin, Mark D. Jarvis and Lori Turnbull set out to write a book detailing what they believed to be obvious and egregious errors in the way in which the current form of responsible government as it was practiced in the Canadian federal government, fell short of operating within basic democratic parameters. Canada has a system that is based one the Westminster system, in which its the Constitution act of 1867 is influenced by British principles and conventions. “Democratizing the Constitution reforming responsible government” is a book that makes an analysis for the reform of responsible government in Canada. The authors believe that from the unclear rules, pertaining to the role and power of the prime minster foresees for a failing responsible government. In this essay the functions of the government , conventions of the constitution, the a proposal for reform will be addressed.

Small Versus Big Government Introduction The difference in the U.S. Government at it's founding vrs today in reference, to the idea of small vrs big government. The Government originally had only concern with the Military, tariffs and all forms of Foreign relations Today the government regulates all aspects of a persons life. Tax,the redistributation of wealth,healthcare and have a strong influence on local governments through the withholding funds.

The parliamentary structure within British politics, has gave way to MPs being more autonomous due to being placed in opposition, government, frontbench and backbench. Such literature in regards to this would illustrate that such interest groups and pressure groups in general should not have the capability to influence and shape MP-constituent relationship. David Cameron himself has been quoted as saying on the lobbying techniques that exist as ‘the next big scandal waiting to happen’ (BBC News). This highlights that interest group politics is becoming an increasing issue where such groups are redefining and changing how politics functions. Although it can be argued that this holds little relevance to the question regarding the relationship between MPs and constituents, it is significant as due to the little access that exists to policy makers and MP this has let the relevance access point that exist for constituents to be overloaded by such groups. Peters argue in this regard that ‘the demand made on the political system to deliver without aiding any understanding of the need to balance competing demands’ (Peters et al, 2009:

There is a House of Commons Select Committee for each department within Whitehall. These were set up to scrutinise government and hold them to account. The formation of these committees consist of a minimum of 11 members and look at three aspects of each department – Administration, Policies and Spending. With this established, we will be looking at the policy aspect of scrutiny and evaluate how much Select Committees influence the content of legislation. The paper will be structured by starting with the analysis of current literature on this topic and trying to pinpoint what has already been stated about the influence select committees have