Preview

electoral dictaorship britain

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1121 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
electoral dictaorship britain
Is Britain an elective dictatorship?

Lord Hailsham suggested the phrase elective dictatorship in his academic paper written in 1976. Elective dictatorship refers to the fusion of powers of the executive and the legislature; where the legislature is drawn from the executive therefore resulting in dominance of the executive over the legislature.
������ Firstly the executive�s majority in the House of Commons reinforces the executives dominance. Elective dictatorship occurs in conjunction with this situation and that of the governing party, the executive. The party in power will by definition have more seats, i.e. more voting power than all the opposition parties. This means that any legislation or motion proposed by the governing party could be passed unless government MPs dissents, because only a simple majority is required. Due to the strength of the whip system to prevent MPs of the governing party voting against it, in practice government bills are extremely rarely defeated in the House of Commons.� The government proposes usually around 95% of the bills passed. Also from 1997-2005 the Labour party had not lost a bill. Another reason why Britain is considered to be an elective dictatorship is the limited powers of parliament, which has led to the undermining of parliamentary sovereignty. The central issue to why Britain has become an elective dictatorship is the decline in strength of parliament even though it is regarded formally as the sovereign body within the constitution. Recent developments and modifications have meant that Parliament�s effectiveness in holding the executive to account, restraining the executive and scrutinising the executive has become limited.
��������� Firstly after acts like the 1911 House of Lords Act when the lord�s influence over finance was ended has slowly diminished and restricted the power of the lords.� Britain�s membership with the EU has meant vital decisions affecting Britain being made away from parliament. For example

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    They wasnted the Lords to never again block a measure passed by the House of Commons. Therefore in 1990 they drew up a bill to curb the power of the House of Lords by taking away the power to veto. Reform of the Lords was vital as the Conservatives were strongly opposed to Home Rule for Ireland, and would vote against any Home Rule Bill in the Lords. This was necessary as the Liberals had promised Home Rule to the Irish Nationalists, in return for their support, so reform of the Lords had to take place before Home Rule could be brought in. The 1910 Parliament Bill proposed that the House of Lords was to have the power to amend or reject those bills the speaker of the Commons certifies to be true money Bills. The Lords veto was abolished, but could delay it for no longer than two years. Also the maximum period between general elections was to be reduced from seven years to five to make parliament more accountable to electors. Although the Bill was not as radical as it could have been because it did not alter the composition of the Lord. The Bill would easily pass through the House of Commons but to curb the Lords’ power would have to be passed by the Lords themselves. Asquith planned to ask King Edward Vll to create 570 new peers, who would be willing to outvote the Conservative Lords and therefore ensure the parliament bill…

    • 868 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Westminster is the location of the Houses of Parliament, where the majority of political decisions (other than those for devolved states) are made for the nation. The current Westminster electoral system is First Past the Post (FPTP) which is used for general elections every 5 years (due to the new fixed-term parliaments brought in by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition.) The FPTP system is constituency based, each person votes for a representative for their constituency and whichever party wins the most constituencies gains governmental power. First Past the Post works on the basis of a plurality of votes, that is, that the winning party need only gain the most votes out of all parties to gain power, they do not need an overall majority (50%+.) The need for a strong and stable government is through the need for a government to easily be able to pass legislation and for them to be able to withstand a full term in office.…

    • 912 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Power in theory in this system should lie with the commons and the chamber as they should be able to voice their opinions, and fight the policies of government properly but obviously parliamentary control does limit this a huge amount as how can this be true if a party does control power the opposition will be outnumbered and effectively be a lame duck and completely pointless. It means that parliament and the mps who are not inn government or the majority party have to literally sit there and can no longer really help their constituents on the issues that matter to them this certainly limits parliaments main function especially in opposition parties in particular. Secondly there is the argument that in politics and the majority party in particular there is a certain do as your told attitude, there is no more free thinking in parliament on a large scale anymore, mps are merely there to toe the party line as they cannot really step out of line as they may be deselected at the next election. This is a huge threat to there jobs basically but is very effective on behalf of the large party as it means that party whips will have to be used less, as most people in the party know that if they want to go far into the executive then they basically must…

    • 1009 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One of the main functions of backbench MPs is scrutinize the government and hold them to account via different ways, and it is this function which proves them to be highly effective. Their role in Parliament ensures and strengthens the democratic legitimacy of the executive, thus giving government the authority and right to exercise political power. Another key role of backbench MPs is to act as cross-section of the larger society and therefore represent their interests in Parliament. However, the increase of power held by the government further supports the Burkean view that an “elective dictatorship” has formed considerably in the UK political system. In addition to this, many people have argued that backbench MPs have limited power in actually calling the government to account due to the party system, which ensures that MPs are dictated by ministers and party whips – who use persuasive methods (the promise of promotions or the threat of expulsion/demotion) reduce the effectiveness within the political system. There are both arguments for and against the effectiveness of backbench MPs, however it is debatable as to which outweighs the other.…

    • 1497 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Since 1945, there has been a single party majority government. Before the coalition, the government could control parliament due to its large majority, however we’ve seen a recent change in the relationship between the executive and legislature. The main issues that arise would be from the small majority of just 76 in the Commons, the lack of support from backbench MPs and fact that Cameron is the first Conservative Prime minister to not have a majority in the House of Lords. The Coalition of the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative party lacks both ideological and tribal unity, which would normally derive from a strong, single party majoritarian government. This provides Parliament with more opportunities to examine and scrutinize the government.…

    • 787 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The UK currently has a system of Parliament whereby there are two chambers who can pass or reject (or, in the House of Lords just delay) bills. The House of Commons is a fully elected chamber and it is made up of representatives from different areas in the United Kingdom. However, the House of Lords is made up of people who have earned the right of being a Lord through merit. They also have a number of hereditary peers (although there will no longer be any hereditary peers appointed. There have been many calls to make the House of Lords into an elected chamber as people say that the fact that it is unelected reduces the democracy of the United Kingdom and that it is unfair to have an unelected as the peers may not actually represent the views of the people.…

    • 707 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As centuries pass and time continues to lapse, more and more countries are handing in their older systems of government for new ones such as democracy. Some countries, however, continue with the dictatorship model, even though logically, this system is as fallacious as it gets. In Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar” and Orwell’s “Animal Farm”, there are plenty of superb examples of dictatorship leading to the downfall of entire communities. Brutus and Caesar from “Julius Caesar” and Napoleon from “Animal Farm” are three great examples of dictatorship causing problems.…

    • 667 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    AP-Suffrage In England

    • 1429 Words
    • 4 Pages

    "Describe the steps taken between 1832 and 1918 to extend the suffrage in England. What group and movements contributed to the extension of the vote?" Several groups, movements and reform bills passed between 1832 and 1918 extended the suffrage in England. The process took many years and the voting rights were first given to the wealthier and more distinguished men, then later to the less wealthy men, and finally to women. The major reform bills that extended the suffrage in England were the Reform Bill of 1832, 1867, and 1884, and the Qualification of Women Act in 1917. (Mazour, Peoples) The suffrage movement began in 1832 when the Reform Bill of 1832 was passed by parliment. The Prime Minister since 1830, Earl Grey, authored the Bill and it was introduced to the House of Commons in March of 1831 by John Russell. The bill was put down several times between 1831 and 1832. These decisions sent the English people into frenzies and riots broke out in many British towns. Finally the bill was passed in 1832 when it was brought to parliament for the third time. The bill gave men who occupied homes with an annual value of 10 pounds the right to vote, but left out large sections of the lower middle class. Although some people were dissatisfied with the new bill because it only gave one in seven males the right to vote, it was a step in the right direction for the British. (Spartacus Educational Website) After the Reform Bill of 1832 was passed a group of citizens formed the Workingman's Association, supporters of which were called chartists. The chartists believed in universal manhood suffrage and the secret ballot. The proposals were made known in the People's Charter, which was denied by the Parliament. The chartists attempted to achieve their goal of universal manhood suffrage by using moral force, petitions, general strikes, physical force, public meetings and chartist newspapers which spread propaganda. These tactics proved to be useless because the parliament would…

    • 1429 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    On the other hand, people may argue with the fact that there is the House of Commons as well as the House of Lords and the House of Commons has more power than the House of Lords has. H of C can make laws and policies without consulting H of L, whereas H of L has to consolidate H of C with the policy or law they want to pass. There has also been some sort of reform in the H of L to make it fairer, there are only 92 hereditary lords left in the H of L so people may say this is an example of the UK not being a democratic deficit.…

    • 1202 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    How democratic is the UK?

    • 2136 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Democracy is a very general term used to describe various political systems that are organised on the basis that the government should serve the interests of the people. It is expected in a democracy that citizens should influence decisions, make decisions themselves and that the government is accountable to the people. It is also expected that the freedoms of citizen’s are protected, minorities are protected, governmental power is controlled and dispersed more widely. This indeed is the model of democracy many countries try to emulate today. If we are to consider the UK’s own version of democracy, it is important to see how exactly it has developed. We should start on the 15th of June 1215; King John is forced to sign the Magna Carta, a document establishing that the King would not rule with absolute power. Then on the 1st of January 1295 Edward I becomes the first Monarch to call Parliament where two representatives, along with nobles and clergy, from each area are called to air grievances against the crown. The foundations of Britain’s Parliamentary democracy have been laid. What follows are several significant events: the Peasants revolt of 1381, Acts of Union in 1536 and later in 1709 joining Scotland, Wales and England into a United Kingdom, the English Civil War of 1651 where the Parliamentarians defeat the royalists and Oliver Cromwell forever establishes that the monarch cannot rule without Parliament’s consent and finally the Representation of the People Act of 1969, making all British Citizens at the age of 18 and above eligible to vote. These are the main events that have each contributed to the development of British democracy from the old Feudal system to the modern representative, parliamentary democracy that the UK is governed by today. If we are to look at Britain’s political system now, it can be argued that the UK is democratic in the aspects of representation and accountability, however undemocratic in the aspect…

    • 2136 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1999 Labour reformed the House of Lords; Labour removed 600 hereditary peers and reduced it to only 92 hereditary Lords in the House of Lords. However, the labor government did propose a system of “elected peers”, where the public could choose peers to sit in the House of Lords. This proposal was never fully implemented into the UK constitution. Until this proposal is full entrenched it is argued that the Lords are not democratically legitimate as all policy making institutions must have legitimacy. Therefore, there is much that can be done towards constitutional reform.…

    • 626 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Evidence for the statement is that usually a strong effective government chosen by the voters is produced. This helps Britain move forward and progress with new laws and policies. In 1997 one of the strongest governments was formed. Tony Blair leading the Labour party was elected to power with a huge 63% of the seats. This helped Blair do things like taking troops to war five times, more than any other PM in history. Without the hugely strong government it is less likely he could have done this.…

    • 1268 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The House of Commons holds both legislative functions and is also designed to hold the executive accountable. It can be argued that due the introduction, and reforms, of select committees and the regular questioning of ministers the House of Commons is effective. However, it could also be argued that party loyalty and whips have become more important than effective scrutiny.…

    • 843 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Electoral System In Canada

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages

    A good government is a reflection of its citizens. The mechanics of a good government distinguish it from different governments around the world. However, how a government elects its leader is a big part of the way it runs in general. Many governments have different systems in which they elect their leader. In North America, electing a leader is a big responsibility for the citizens of that country. Particularly in Canada, our electoral system has been the same for many years and relies on the citizens to make a decision. Canada uses a system called first-past the-post or single member plurality . This system consists of a simple objective; to receive a majority of the votes . This system has worked well for many years without any major issues.…

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Executive Branch

    • 1240 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The United States executive branch has been looking more like a dictatorship every time there is a foreign debate or problem. The only thing that would be alright about having a dictatorship would having the dictator only being able to take office for only six months. Being in office for six months seems really short for a tyrant, the United States would need to rebell against the dictatorship to have an election to elect a new tyrant. Having to wait a four year term for the president to leave office seems to long for some people so it could ultimately lead up to some type of tyranny or dictatorship. Janet Napolitano, an american writer adds that, “The executive branch of the government no longer respects the legislative.”(Napolitano) Janet is saying that there is another reason…

    • 1240 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays