effectiveness of commons

8/13/2019 Effectiveness of Commons

1/4

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS e.g FACTORS

AFFECTING EFFECTIVENESS [PARTY SYSTEM, PATRONAGE,

SIZE OF GOVERNMENT MAJORITY]

As we have seen, the House of Commons has several key tasks primarily includingREPRESENTATION, SCRUTINY and LEGISLATION. How effectively the

Commons fulfils these responsibilities is very controversial and a lot will also depend

upon the POLITICAL CIRCUMSTANCES of the day. For example, if the

government has a TINY MAJORITY [JAMES CALLAGHAN; 1976-1979 and

JOHN MAJOR 1992-1997] and the OPPOSITION is increasingly SELF

CONFIDENT, as it was under MARGARET THATCHER and TONY BLAIR

respectively then it will be significantly more difficult for the executive to control the

Commons. This is especially true if, as was the case under John Major, your party is

DIVIDEDand REBELLIOUS.

Generally though Parliament is criticised for not, usually, fulfilling these roles as wellas it should:

REPRESENTATIONIt is in the House of Commons that British people are represented. However, there is a great

deal of debate over how well we are actually represented by our MPs. FIRST PAST THE

POST ensures that the House of Commons is not at all representative of how the public

voted. After all, in 2005 the LIBERAL DEMOCRATSwon 22% of the votes but only

gained a derisory 9.6%of the seats in the House of Commons. Similarly, Labours 35.2%of

the vote gained them an extraordinary 55.1%of the seats in the Commons which is hardly

what the public voted for. Supporters of minority parties, which can fare well in elections

with proportional representation, like the GREENS, BNPand UKIP, are thus excluded from

any influence in the House of Commons.

At the same time, representation in Westminster is complicated by the fact that some parts of

the UK are OVER REPRESENTED. As a result of the WEST LOTHIAN ISSUE

SCOTTISH MPs CAN STILL VOTE ON ENGLISH DOMESTIC ISSUES WHENWESTMINSTER MPs CANNOT DO THE SAME FOR SCOTLAND. Residents in

some constituencies are significantly over-represented than others [the ISLE OF WIGHT

has one MP for 100,000voters; the WESTERN ISLEShave one MP for 22,000voters]. At

the same time MPs are generally WHITE, MALEand MIDDLE CLASSwhich is hardlyrepresentative of MULTI CULTURAL BRITAIN TODAY. For example, in the 2005

Parliament only 2.3%of MPs were from ETHNIC MINORITIES; while only 19.5%were

FEMALEwhich means that on many issues debate may be limited.

MPs also do not need to represent the interests of their constituents in the House of Commons

and, as well as obeying the dictates of the WHIPSmay also decide to vote according to the

influence of PROFESSIONAL LOBBYISTS. This can make the representation of an MPs

constituents a much more marginal affair than it ought to be.


2/4

Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement, and he betrays,

instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.

Edmund Burke [Speech to the Electors of Bristol, 1774]

According to BBC NEWS[30thJanuary 2009], We know that many backbench MPs and

peers, from all parties, are on the payroll of companies, either as directors or

consultants. The nuclear industry has been particularly active in recruiting senior

Labour politicians and former members of the government. We also have an idea of the

sort of money they get. Among former ministers who continue to sit in the Commons,

Alan Milburn earns 30,000 a year from Pepsico, Patricia Hewitt gets 50,000 a year

from Boots and David Blunkett supplements his backbenchers salary of 63,000 a year

by as much as 135,000 with various directorships and consultancies. Many more, as

many as one in five MPs, list their jobs as non parliamentary consultants, which means

that they do not have to declare how much they receive. They must declare an interest

when they speak on matters relating to the company, but they can sti ll vote on legislation

whi ch may affect its business.

Civil servants at the Department of Transport have asked a top aviation lobby group,

FLYING MATTERS, to help win over wavering Labour MPs to support further airport

expansion. This group has already helped ensure that the Conservative Party dropped plans

by senior advisers for a tax on carbon dioxide emissions from aircraft. Flying Matters claim

that their lobbying of politicians, civil servants and the media has persuaded MPs and

ministers to adopt the industry line on airport expansion, despite environmental concerns.

The Guardian, 18th

February 2009

SCRUTINY AND LEGISLATIONOne of the key problems reducing the impact of Parliament over scrutiny and legislation is

the power of the WHIPSand PARTY DISCIPLINE generally. In order for Parliament to

function effectively there has to be TIGHT PARTY DISCIPLINE. The problem with this

is that it DISCOURAGES INDEPENDENCE OF THOUGHT AMONGST MPs since

they will generally support their partys line in order to foster their own CAREER

AMBITIONS. Most MPs, for example, want to achieve ministerial office and party leaders[especially the prime minister] have enormous powers of PATRONAGE so very often onkey issues the parties will simply divide along party lines. This is very often the case on

GENERAL COMMITTEESand in most DEBATESover legislation MPs will be whipped

into supporting the party line. A new MP, in particular, will not want to gain the reputation

of being a troublemaker since it will therefore be unlikely that he will rise up through the

party ranks. For example, the whips told any wavering Labour MP who was thinking about

voting against the LISBON TREATYthat this would be A HANGING OFFENCE.

Damn your principles; stick to your party

Benjamin Disraeli, [Conservative Prime Minister, 1867-8, 1874-1880]


3/4

This therefore means that MPs do not always sufficiently examine proposed legislation and,

particularly on general committees, simply vote according to their party line. The most

shocking thing about the Commons is the way in which laws are made. If you want to

see what it is like sit on a general committee! The government has a majority on that

committee and it selects a tame majority. I am not easily shocked but I was when I sawgovernment party MPs spending their time on a standing committee writing their

Christmas cards. [Tony Wright Labour MP]

For the average backbencher, the whip is the street-corner thug they need to get past on their

way home from school. Treat him with respect, and life will be fine. If you cross him, watch

out. Occasionally, whips can get literally physical: the Conservative Derek Conway (At my

secondary modern, if someone hit you, you hit back as hard as you could) was once seen

trying bodily to pick up a fellow MP to push him into the right division lobby. David

Lighthorn, another Conservative Whip, was notorious for his ability to use his twenty stone

weight to pin reluctant MPs to the wall. But usually their methods are slightly more subtle.

They have favours to dispense, places on fact-finding missions to Switzerland or Australiawith accommodation in comfortable hotels or trips to places in the Indian Ocean to promote

British ideas of democracy. Tess Kingham, a former Labour MP, has said the whips

behaviour is an affront to democracy.

Jeremy Paxman The Political Animal [2002]

At the same time it is not easy for an MP to operate outside the confines of party discipline,

because the vast majority of bills and debates in the House of Commons are INTRODUCED

BY THE GOVERNMENT.

SIZE OF PARLIAMENTARY MAJORITY:If the government has a LARGE PARLIAMENTARY MAJORITY and the party is

UNITEDthese problems will become a lot worse because the government will have a huge

cohort of MPs READY TO SUPPORT THEM IN VOTES OR COMMITTEE; whenever

they are required. This is a point that GEORGE GALLOWAY made to JEREMY

PAXMANin an unpleasant exchange between them on General Election Night, 2005:

PAXMAN: I put it to you Mr Galloway that Nick Raynsford had you to a T when he said

you were a demagogue.GALLOWAY: Sorry?

PAXMAN: Nick Raynsford. You know who I mean? Nick Raynsford. Labour MP?

GALLOWAY: No, I dont know who you mean.

PAXMAN: Never heard of him.

GALLOWAY: Ive never heard of Nick Raynsford, no.

PAXMAN: What else havent you heard of?

GALLOWAY: Well, Ive been in Parliament a long time . . .

PAXMAN: He was a parliamentary colleague of yours until very recently.

GALLOWAY: Well, most of them just blend into the other, Jeremy; theyre largely a

spineless, a supine bunch.


4/4

PARLIAMENTARY SUCCESS AGAINST THE EXECUTIVEHowever, it would be misleading to argue that Parliament is failing in all of its functions! A

lot depends on the PERSONALITY OF AN MP and not all MPs slavishly follow the

dictates of the whips and instead they try to represent what they regard as being the interests

of the wider community. For example, a large number of Labour MPs DID DEFY THE

WHIPin order to defeat the 90 DAY TERROR BILLin the Commons, while the prominent

Labour MP, GISELA STUART, has been forthright in her refusal to support the LISBON

TREATYbecause she thinks it is undemocratic. Equally, when TONY BENNwas an MP

he made clear that his first loyalty was to his constituents and his principles rather than the

party whip. Such independent-minded MPs can inject a real spark into debate and their role is

MAGNIFIEDwhen there is all a SMALL PARLIAMENTARY MAJORITY since then

everything has to be thoroughly discussed and debated before it can be pass the Commons.

This helps to explain why the MAASTRICHT BILLwas so thoroughly debated in 1993

because every single vote mattered, since Majors parliamentary majority was so tiny.

Some very far-reaching PRIVATE MEMBERS BILLS have also been introduced by

backbench MPs highlighting how a determined MP can really bring about significant changes

in society in spite of the parties control of the Commons. This was true of DAVID

STEELS BILL TO LEGALISATION ABORTIONin 1967and MICHAEL FOSTERS

BILLthat ENDED FOX HUNTING WITH DOGSin 2004.

It is a similar story, as we have seen, on SELECT COMMITTEES since if there is a

focused, non partisan and charismatic chair, such as JOHN MCFALLon the TREASURY

SELECT COMMITTEE the government really can be discomforted. PRIVATE

MEMBERS BILLScan also achieve a lot if an MP has the necessary tenacity to succeed.

Equally, courageous and determined backbench MPs, like NORMAN BAKERcan use theCommons to gain high profile publicity for issues of major public concern such as the

ALLEGED MURDER OF DAVID KELLY.

effectiveness of commons

Documents