How Government Is The Uk To State How Governments Are Formed

‘The main reason for conservative dominance in the years 1951 to 1964 was labour disunity’ Assess the validity of this view. (June 2011)

Heath can be seen to be a successful leader due to the fact he won the 1970 election, much to Harold Wilson’s surprise. However, many would place the win not down to the

These sorts of powers would generally be associated with a President, not a Prime Minister.

Fundamentally the UK government does not have elective dictatorship. The government is still elected even though they have a large majority of seats in the House of Commons. However if a government does have a very large majority they are able to make big changes very quickly but all times they are

There is usually a majority in Parliament, thanks to the First Past the Post electoral system so coalitions are rare. The monarch normally asks a person commissioned to form a government

This period of Labour rule is often marked down as a poor performance on behalf of the labour party, critically looked upon by many historians. There were many failings under the rule of this government however the circumstances they were placed in caused severe restraints in their options.

Another contributing factor at this election may have been performance in office, which in the above statement is not seen as important as personality and image. However, performance in office may have been extremely detrimental for the conservatives in 1997 because of their crisis in 1992. This focuses on the retrospective model, as people saw the Conservatives as incompetent in handling the economy because of Black Wednesday in September 1992. The Conservatives and especially Noramnt Lamont, Chancellor of the Exchequer, were to blame for the crisis that saw the pound forced out of the ERM. This didn’t help at the 1997 general election where they did extremely badly in a huge Labour win.

It could be argued, however, that the two party system which was once in place is declining, meaning more parties have a realistic chance to achieve role as government. In the last thirty years the support for the Conservative and Labour parties has been gradually decreasing, leaving them with only 67% of the vote at the 2005 general election, which was the smallest percentage they’d gained since 1918. This is an example of partisan dealignment because the working class started to transfer their party support to Conservative instead of Labour. The Liberal Democrats support was significantly increasing, leaving them with 22% of the vote in the 2005 election as well as 62 seats. Their seat numbers had been increasing since 1974 when they only had 14 seats in parliament, suggesting a change in the dominance of only two parties. Today, the Liberal Democrats, who haven’t been considered a main party since, are currently the weaker part of a coalition government, with Labour in opposition. This shows a clear end to the two party system, with three parties in significant places of power.

10: Using your own knowledge as well as the passage, explain why the First-Past-the-Post system has rarely resulted in coalition government at Westminster.

Prime Minister Christie is confronted with the difficulty of leading a large majority in parliament. There's absolutely no guarantee of harmony in the corridors of power and politics. There's no evidence to suggest that the governing party is deeply divided, we bear witness to the political consequences of adding a new element of uncertainty to the mix. Any parliamentarian will tell you that YOUR worst day in government is a hundred times better than your best day in opposition. The Progressive Liberal Party are now learning that your worst day with a majority is about a thousand times better than your best with a minority. Political parties cannot ignore the influence of back-benches nor can they deny their significance. Where there lacks

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

Whether or not there truly was a ‘post war consensus’ in British politics from 1951 to 1964 is a highly debatable topic of which historians can often appear to be in two minds about; on one hand, Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson infamously described the period as ‘Thirteen years wasted’, whereas historian Robert Blake (a supporter of the Conservatives’, regards it as a ‘Golden age of growth’. The likes of Kevin Jeffrey’s even argue that consensus had even started before the war. Overall, the central issue was the idea of a mixed economy.

The centrepiece of Labour 's programme of constitutional reform was undoubtedly devolution. This was achieved with remarkably few problems. There now seems no likelihood that the new arrangements could be reversed, even by a Conservative administration. The election on 6 May 1999 of a Parliament in Scotland, with extensive powers of primary legislation as well as tax-raising, and an Assembly in Wales, with powers of secondary legislation only, will have a profound impact on governance within the UK. In

The monarch is a figure head and does no decision making. The voters of a parliamentary system elect parliament who then elect the prime minister and the cabinet. The prime minister is normally the leader of the most popular party in parliament. The PM even being the head of government is not as powerful as the head of government in a presidential system. The parliament of the system withholds the most power. They make or break any law. Compared to the separation of powers as in a presidential system there is only a separation of functions. Each part of government has its own function to perform, but there is no system of checks and balances. An example of the overlapping of powers is the need of a vote of confidence. A vote of confidence is proposed by a party and needs backing from the other part of government. With no system of sorts there is more likely of upheaval and change of rule. There is not as much stability in a parliamentary system as there is in a presidential. Lastly there is no judicial rule as there is in a presidential system. A parliamentary system has had success in the past but still is seen as not as successful as a presidential system.

From what I’ve read and heard about Margaret Thatcher, she was a very kind woman who loved to help people and would always put other people before herself and her campaign. I believe that this was partially because she was a believer in God and also because of the way she was raised. by her