Evaluation of the House of Lords and Commons- ocr spec

1. Strengths Weaknesses
Has always acted independently-
chair is by tradition an MP (Margaret
Hodge)
Cannot enforce it’s
recommendations-
Full access to details of government
financial arrangements
EXAMPLES
(PAC) report into tax avoidance, the
inquiry heavily criticised the HMRC
over its inability to tackle corporate
tax dodgers and the big accountancy
firms that help big businesses pay as
little tax as legally possible, through
loopholes in the law.
Overspending in education
Highly respected by policy makers

2. HOC DEPARTMENTAL SELECT
COMMITTEES
STRENGTHS
 Act largely independent of party
control – remain neutral
 Power to call ministers, civil
servants and outsiders as
witnesses to their hearings
 May call for official documents
 Given time for extensive
questioning
WEAKNESSES
 Relatively little research back up
 No ability to enforce
recommendations
 Sometimes under pressure of
party whips
 Examples- transport committee
recommends third runway at
heathrow but not east london.

3. Hoc legislative committees
(mostly public bill committees)
Strengths
 Have the oppurtunity to examine
legisaltion in detail
weaknesses
 Nearly always divide on party
lines and so are not independent
 Lack expertise and research
back up
 If they take too much
time, government can curtail
their debates
 Their decisions may be
overturned by the whole house.

4. Hol public bill committees
Strengths
 Many members have specialist
knowledge, experience
 Relatively free from party control
 Can be obstructive and so gain
concessions from the parliament
weaknesses
 Proposed amendments can be
overturned in the hoc
 Government can re present
proposed legislation in the next
parliamentary session, in which
case committees are powerless
to interfere
The Lords has rejected the
establishment of a Commons-
style backbench business
committee as peers raise
issues of cost and
transparency.

5. House of commons- relationship
Factors in the governments favour
 Normal to enjoy a majority of MPs.
Governing party usually wins an
overall majority at a general
election.
 Patronage- most MPs hope to be
promoted to ministerial office. Thus,
they need to demonstrate to the PM
that they are loyal party members
 The government whips have a
number of methods by which they
can persuade their own party’s MPs
to support the gov, even if they have
reservations.
Factors in the Commons favour
 Ultimately the commons can vote
against a government
proposal, either a whole bill or an
amendment to a bill
 The departmental select
committees tend to act
independently of MPs party
allegiances. Reports from these can
be critical and can force changes in
gov policy.
 Government must make itself
accountable to the house of
commons.

6. House of lords- relationship
Factors in the governments favour
 The lords has more limited power
than the commons. Under the terms
of the parliament act 1949, it cannot
interfere with any measures involving
the public finances and can only delay
proposed legislation for one year (and
cannot veto it) Any amendments
proposed in the Lords must be
approved by the Commons. This
means the government can block
most amendments.
 The Salisbury convention
 Government maintains a great deal of
control over the business of the Lords
and so can manipulate timetable
Factors in the Lords favour
 Government does not enjoy a
majority in the Lords
 Most peers are not pro
politicians. They can be
independently minded
 The Lords can not veto
proposals but can delay and
obstruct them. This gives the
lords some influence over
government

7. Evaluation of the HOC
Reprentation
POSITIVE-
 Most MPs are active in
representing constituencies +
pressure groups + associations
NEGATIVE
 Not socially representative
 Party loyalty means they may not
represent national or group
interests
 Does not accurately represent
support for parties among the
electorate
Calling gov to account
POSTITIVE
 MPs question ministers at question time
sessions.
 Liasion Committee also questions PM
twice a year.
 Ministers are forced to present all policies
to the commons before making other public
announcements
 Select committees are independent. They
examine gov and are often very critical.
NEGATIVE
 PMQs have become a media sideshow
with little relevance to real policy
examination
 MPs are reluctant to be critical as they
would appear disloyal

8. Evaluation of the HOC
cont…
Scrutiny
POSITIVE
 Select committees have proved to
be effective in scrutinizing policies
of gov departments and
publicising shortcomings.
NEGATIVE
 MPs are given little time to
scrutinise proposed legislation, so
laws are often purely drafted
 Because legislative committees
are whipped in to party loyalty,
MPs are not independent minded
in their scrutiny function.
Legislating
POSTITIVE
 Commons should make legislation
legitimate, so granting consent on
behalf of people. This operates well
and laws are generally respected
because they have been legitimised in
parliament
 Commons retains power to block
legislation which is against the public
interest or which represents an abuse
of power
NEGATIVE
 The procedures of Parliament in
respect of passing legislation are
ancient and considered to be
inefficient and ritualised.

9. Deliberation
POSITIVE
 Commons is seen at its best on
great issues of the day ie war in iraq
2003, terrorism and on funding of
higher education.
NEGATIVE
 Commons is given little time for
debate, so programme is crowded
 Debates tend to divide along party
lines and so lose their authority
Checking government power
POSITIVE
 The commons retains it’s power to
veto legislation and this represents
a discipline upon govs.
NEGATIVE
 Party loyalty and discipline means
that many MPs are reluctant to
challenge gov. Gov rarely loses a
major vote.

10. Evaluation of the HoL
Representation
POSITIVES
 Lords more representative than
Commons- many sections of
society represented by peers. Ie
Lord Puttnam
NEGATIVES
 Unelected so could be said to be
representative of no one. Not
socially representative
Calling gov to account
POSITIVES
 Peers are more independent
minded than MPs and can be
more active in their questioning
and criticisms of ministers
NEGATIVES
 No departmental select
committees, so a valuable
means which can call gov to
account is missing

11. Cont…
scrutiny
POSITIVE
 The legislative committees in the
Lords can be more effective than
their counter parts in the
Commons. These Committees
divide much less along party lines
and are more independent
 The peers often have special
expertise
NEGATIVE
 It cannot force legislative
amendments through
Legislation
POSITIVE
 Laws must go through hol to be
passed. Therefore knowledge
that laws have been scrutinised
NEGATIVE
 As an unelected body, lords can
not provide legitimization to
legislation

12. ……..
Deliberation
POSITIVES
 Hol has more time to deliberate
on important issues
 Lords has vast range of
knowledge and expertise
NEGATIVES
 Lords has weak legislating
powers- debates may be purely
symbolic
Checking gov power
POSITIVES
 Can not be controlled by gov so
acts in dependent way
NEGATIVES
 Gov can bypass obstruction of
Lords. The elected government
and HOC will ultimately win over
the unelected Lords.

13. 2010 reforms –
• In June 2010, the BACKBENCH BUSINESS COMMITTEE was set up with a chair elected by MPs.
The committee controls the debates in the main chamber on 27 days per year and may select any
topic. Topics in 2010 included war in Afghanistan and the concept of ‘big society.’ Committee also
schedules 8 days of debate in westminster central hall.
• From 2010 onwards, the chairs of departmental select committees are elected by backbench MPs.
Takes away power from party whips and leaders
2010 proposed reforms –
• A house business committee to be set up which will control day to day business of the house.
• Constituency boundaries to be redrawn
• Constituents to be given power to recall their MPs . A petition would force a by-election
• Size of the house to be reduced by 10%. Money saving and will streamline Commons.
Other proposals-
• Proposed change of electoral system to AV
• Calls for select and perhaps legislative committees to examine proposed laws before they are debated
in the house. Save time and improve quality of legislation.
• Some have argued for a more streamlined procedure for the passage of legislation, possibly by cutting
out one or two of the three main stages by which a bill is debated.

14. REFORM OF THE HOL
Reform Advantages Disadvantages
Abolition • Save money
• Streamline legislative process
• Remove obstructions to efficient
government
• Hoc would face up to responsibilities
• Important check on gov power would
be lost
• Deny worthy individuals the
opportunity to engage in politics
• Expertise of 2nd chamber would be
lost
All appointed • Many individuals could be brought in
to politics
• Opportunity to manipulate
membership to ensure political and
social balance
• Would result in a more independent
body than elected chamber
• Might put too much patronage power
in to the hands of party leaders
Fully elected • Most democratic
• Members fully accountable
• House would have more authority and
so more effective check on gov power
• Proportional representation, reflect
strengths of parties more accurately
• House might become too influentional
and so obstruct gov excessively
• Unneccessary to have two elected
chambers
• People might become apathetic if too
many elections.