The appointed legislature is the House of Lords, and they constitute the unwritten constitution, acting as an extra safety measure, also with the ability to criticize and approve laws. The judiciary upholds the law and represents such as the UK courts of law. The crown is the monarch, and Her Majesty’s role is to represent the United Kingdom as a symbol of ceremony and tradition, and sign bills into law. The most essential element that distinguishes the Westminster model is the executive power that is given to the largest party after a first past the post election. Additionally, with the fusion of powers, the party that controls the legislature also directs the executive branch.
The head of state and theoretical source of executive and legislative power in the UK is the British monarch, currently Queen Elizabeth II. In theory, the British sovereign can dissolve Parliament whenever they desire. They can in theory choose any British citizen to be Prime Minister, even if they are not a member of the House of Commons or House of Lords. Theoretically, the Sovereign possesses the ability to refrain from granting Royal Assent to a Bill from Parliament, in addition to being able to declare war and appoint ministers. In practice, the head of state is a largely ceremonial role, with powers restricted by convention.
Something based on this belief may well be valid but with numerous pieces of evidence that suggest the traditional role of the British Prime Minister is becoming more presidential and modern society adhering less to written convention, it has become far less clear who wields the most domestic power outside of conventional parameters. Both the UK Prime Minister and US president are the key figures in their countries politics. The UK Prime Minister has no formal written role but is rather a product of convention and historical evolution. His main powers include those of patronage, the control of the cabinet and its agenda, and the overall direction of government policy, both of head of government and leader of the party in power. In contrast, the US president has an official outlined role.
It is perhaps largely the power of Blair's mandate in conjunction with the vice-like control of the party whips over MPs that has led to comments such as that of Lord Hailsham that we live under an "elective dictatorship." The power of the executive however, is based on long-standing constitutional principles and practise. The concept of 'Queen in Parliament' has long been used to describe the legislative sovereign created in the fusion of parliament and the executive. The executive has come to govern through parliament, requiring in effect its assent for legislation, while drawing from it, as the nation's chief representative body, the legitimacy it requires to sustain its authority. It comes as a surprise to many, given the ostensible thirst for power of the Blair administration, that since coming into power in 1997 it should have undertaken admittedly moderate reforms with the aim... ... middle of paper ... ... to hold the government to account - if it were able to tie it down to its mandate - but the government's domination of parliament has led it to control parliament's means of scrutiny and opposition.
Introduction A parliamentary system of government is one in which government governs in and through the assembly of the parliament, thereby fusing the executive and legislative branch of government. Heywood (2000:313). Although they are formally distinct, the assembly and the executive are bound together in a way that violates the doctrine of separation of power. The British Parliament is one of the oldest parliaments in the world. This study is concerned with understanding the efficiency and effectiveness of the parliament in producing legislation.
The head of government within this system is the Prime Minister, who serves as head of both the executive and legislative branches. Prime Ministers achieve power through their political party, who typically achieve the highest percentage of seats after an election, and are ultimately selected by the Parliament to serve. Essentially, this takes the responsibility of citizens from appointing the Prime Minister by allowing the elected Cabinet from selecting the preferred candidate. The British Parliamentary system & American Presidential: Net Benefits & Negatives Within the framework of the both of these political systems, contrasting differences exist but irrespective of this, we must consider the negatives and positives each system helps create for the respective constituencies they were created to represent.
These parties are awarded a constituent power at a public and regional degree in the countries exploiting this system. Western Europe and Latin America are the demonstrative examples where PR is dominant according to Andrew Reynolds and Ben Reilly (2002). Besides, imposition of this system would provide the voters with a greater amount of viewpoints, so that the candidates of Minor Parties would have more possibility to get a seat at Westminster (Amy 1997). Participation in solving governmental issues would help to develop some new concepts, which don’t a... ... middle of paper ... ...re Proportional Representation can suitably replace First Past The Post in the election of British Government and I believe that imposition of PR will influence the further prosperity of the government and the country as a whole. Works Cited 1.
The Extent of the Prime Minister's Power and Authority In society today people think that the most powerful person in the British government system is the Prime Minister, Tony Blair. However, to what extent does he have power and authority? The Prime Minister doesn’t govern the country alone; the Cabinet as a whole discuss most matters. You could then say that we have Cabinet government as they do supposedly collectively make decisions on matters. The position however of power in one government may differ from that of another, Margaret Thatcher for example rarely used Cabinet at all, John Major on the other hand used it regularly and considered there opinions vital in the decision making process.
This essay reflects about these questions and explores the reasons of this hidden royal influence over the British politicians. Due to the length of the essay, it focuses on the last decades of Elizabeth II’s reign, though other royal personalities have also been considered. In the first place, this essay briefly defines the slippery concept of constitutional monarchy. It introduces the topic with some notions about the historical background and the scope of powers the Crown enjoys. Secondly, it shows some recent cases where the Royal House has used its influence in an obscure way.
Power of the Prime Minister The Prime Minister is the head of government in the British Isles and is therefore supposedly the most powerful person in the Isles. The Prime Minister is appointed by the currently reigning Monarch after a general election and is, according to tradition, usually the leader of the political party which wins the most seats in the House of Commons in the aforementioned general election. The Monarch is not obliged by law to appoint the leader of this party however previous Monarchs have set a precedent by which the Monarch is expected to abide. If the King/Queen were to try and appoint anyone other than the leader of the largest party it is likely that that person would forward a motion to abolish the Monarchy. In this essay I will be looking at and assessing the power the Prime Minister possesses.