The House of Commons

Controlling the Parliament and the House of Commons 'The government controls parliament but it cannot always rely on getting its own way.' A tendency to ignore the protestations and activities of parliament in issuing central, top-down directives and 'memos' is a criticism often levied at Tony Blair's Labour administration. It is seen to signify a consolidation of executive power, often represented in the media as control-freakery on the part of the Prime Minister. Although any apparent increase in the power of the executive would be accentuated by the immense size of the 179 seat Labour majority, the present government is widely seen to have taken up a continuing trend towards centralised government, often revolving around Downing Street. 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."

"Much of this is a ritual, since the Governing majority in the House of Commons nearly always has its way" (Neil McNaughton in "Success in Politics"). Even if pro... ... middle of paper ... ...best interest of the public. An effective political organization should be up to date with current political affairs from all round the world and what is more important; should answer to current needs of the public and be able to protect the country in any circumstances. Strong leadership is one of the most significant attributes of effective political organization. Lack of it could be observed during government under John Major.

Why the Executive is Able to Dominate Parliament in the British Political System The executive has always been a fundamental body in the British political system, the executive’s dominance is a result of party politics and of reformation designed to undermine the bodies responsible for scrutinising the Government. Patronage has always been essential in maintaining the power of the executive, especially the Prime minister. Discipline is promoted in the governing body with the use of whips to enforce party policy and encourage ministers to toe party line, the use of pagers has recently been adopted by the Labour Party to ensure Labour MPs are sure of the parties’ policies and developments that have occurred. As appointments to the executive are controlled by the Premier party loyalty is seen as imperative in order to “climb the political ladder.” By encourage obedience regarding supporting party policy the Governing party reduce backbencher desertion and show a unified front towards both the public and opposition, which obviously strengthens the executives grip on power. Although party whips main job is to inform and ensure that all parties in the House of Commons are satisfied with its business timetable, their second role is of greater significance to their importance in supporting the executive.

In today 's government political parties are a large part of government operations and how decisions are made in the government. In Madison 's The Federalist, No.10 Madison talked about how factions can control and cause harm to the government. A solution to this control was the use of a republic in order to limit the power of factions and keep them from having complete control. In our government however, factions have become a major part of the government system with political parties having complete control over the different branches of government. The use of this two political party system creates many problems within our government as the two parties fight for control over legislature and control over the government.

Though it is unelected, the Lords fulfill a fundamental democratic requirement; as the upper chamber within a bicameral legislature, it acts as a constitutional check and balance on executive power. This being said, Tony Blair forced the Hunting Bill of 2004 through the Lords as a Parliament Act; the very rarely used route by which Bills can become law without the assent of the House of Lords. In this way Westminster Parliament failed to ensure executive accountability. In terms of scrutinizing the executive and actions of government, the House of Commons has a number of opportunities at its disposal, mainly in the form of debates and questions. The Commons is notorious for its constant debate; the Commons can express its views on foreign policy and international crisis, for example the 1956 debates of the Suez crisis and the emergency debate on the Falklands following the Argentinean invasion in 1982.

The leader of the Official Opposition party is in charge of leading the debates against the majority government’s policies, and proposes alternative legislature that reflects their party’s ideals. As a result of the parties raising issues and generating public debate, awareness is driven upwards and the public becomes educated by forming their own opinions on such matters. In short, the Official Opposition opposes the majority government party, and the public reacts. This way, the public who is represented by the Opposition still gets represented fairly in matters that concern them. Opposition parties are essential for a democracy to thrive because “without opposition, a government tends to drift towards complacency and presumptuousness and fails to search for alternatives” (Hoffmeister, 2011: 17).

For a majority government, party discipline becomes an even more important issue as it is directly related to the term of the Prime Minister (PM). Under the rule of maintaining the confidence of the House, the PM must gain the support of the House in order to stay in his role. This is where high party discipline comes into place. With it, the PM will not have to worry about being dismissed by the Governor General. Should the high party discipline deteriorate and gives away into a low one, such as the one in the States, the government will be in a constant potential risk of collapsing into paralysis.

These institutions play a large part in the challenge of democracy, but not by themselves. They show through the microscope of political culture. Political culture can be described as the set of beliefs and opinions people share about their government and social responsibilities. In the United Kingdom, it can be measured by what people think of the government and what they are doing to improve it. These problems play the largest role in the challenges because they are affected by all three compartivist ideas.

In essence the judge would only be able to reflect the view of the legislature through his interpretation of the laws that had been reconfigured by the legislative branch. The current unbalance of power within Great Britain’s government shows how the government can be viewed as a parliamentary-dictatorship due the prominent power that the Prime Minister has over the rest of the government through controlling both the executive branch and parliament, which is composed of both the House of Lords and The Commons. After more substantial reform the government in the United Kingdom has come to a more unified status; however, there is still arguably a parliamentary dictatorship in Great Britain despite recent reform due to the control of the prime minister though policy making and implementation. Great Britain is arguably a parliamentary dictatorship due to the immense power that the Prime Minister and his party have over government relative to their opposition. The Prime Minister’s hold of office depends upon his party having the m... ... middle of paper ... ...as a overwhelming influence on how the government operates.

The Effectiveness of the House of Commons as a Check on the Executive What is meant by the effectiveness of the commons check on the executive is basically, how able is the house of commons to prevent the Government (executive) from getting its own way or forcing its will upon the people of Britain. In theory the commons level of effectiveness is constant as each Member of Parliament has an opinion on every bill or motion that is put forward that is based on conscience. This is not practicable, however, as the party system and the party whips change this. The whips tell MPs which way to vote and can impose sanctions upon those MPs who rebel against the government. Therefore when considering the effectiveness of the commons as a check on the executive one must consider how that effectiveness can change with each general election.