Question 1

“Instead of the function of governing, for which it is radically unfit, the proper office of a representative assembly is to watch and control the government…”

‘Representative Government’ John Stuart Mill (1861)

Consider whether you agree that the proper role of Parliament is to watch and control the government.

Answer guidance

When the electorate vote in a General Election most of them probably think that they are selecting a Prime Minister and his/her government. If we look at the electoral system more closely, they are only doing that indirectly. An elector can only vote in the constituency in which they live for the various candidates who want to represent that constituency as an MP. The candidate with the highest number of votes becomes MP.

MPs usually represent a political party and the party with a majority of MPs in the House of Commons becomes the government. The leader of that party becomes Prime Minister and the Prime Minister selects members of their party, usually just over a hundred of them, to serve as government ministers. Most of them come for the House of Commons, but a few will be from the House of Lords. Parliament is far too large a group of people, with differing views, to actually govern. It is those ministers and the Civil Service that supports them that form the government. The rest of the MPs in the House of Commons and the vast majority of Lords in the House of Lords are not part of the government. They are the ‘representative assembly’ of the quotation. Although the MPs and Lords, who are members of the governing political party, are expected to support the government in votes and debates, they are not part of the government. They might not support the government, if the government is planning to do something of which they disapprove. They, and the MPs and Lords from other parties, ‘watch and control the government’.

There are many ways in which the Commons and Lords can control the government. They can vote against government proposals in the legislative process for Acts of Parliament and delegated legislation. They can criticise and question government policy in debate. They can ask awkward and probing oral and written questions of ministers. Using the system of select committees, they can carry out detailed investigations of what government departments have done. Taxes must be authorised in an annual Finance Act, and expenditure by the annual Appropriation and Consolidated Fund Acts, which the Commons must agree to pass, and the powerful Public Accounts Committee checks up on how the money is spent. Without money, no government can govern.

In recent years, the government did not have a large majority and with many MPs being opposed to Brexit, those MPs were able to take over the business of the House of Commons, which is usually strictly controlled by the government. Those MPs managed to delay leaving the EU.

At the end of 2019, the Conservative Party held a General Election, which they won with a large majority. One might say that ‘normal service’ was resumed. The government regained control over the House of Commons and the legislation to leave the EU was swiftly passed. It might be concluded that the ability of Parliament to hold the government to account depends upon the size of the government’s majority and the unity of the governing party.

Question 2

What do Members of Parliament do?

Answer guidance

Each MP is elected to represent a particular constituency and it could be argued that is their main job. They can help their constituents with their grievances and complaints and the MP would run a local office, with staff, in their constituency, which they would visit to conduct regular “surgeries”.

In parliament, the MP can stand up for the interests of their own constituency. For example, does their constituency want a new airport built nearby or a new road?

MPs can ask questions of ministers and participate in debates. They play a part in the legislative proposal and can vote, or not vote for government legislation. It has never been thought that MPs are bound to vote for what their constituents’ want, they are not mandated delegates, but must use their own judgement about what is in the national interest. In theory each individual MP may introduce their own legislative proposal, in the form of a Private Member’s Bill, but the chances of this successfully becoming law are slim.

Membership of the numerous House of Commons committees might help an MP protect the interests of their constituency and also make their job more interesting for them as they gain expertise in an area of government.

Nowadays, nearly all MPs are members of a political party, as there are very few Independents. Party members are expected to be loyal and support whatever policies the party has adopted. On issues that their party considers important they are “whipped”, i.e. instructed which way to vote. The party Whips enforce discipline and in extreme cases MPs have the Whip withdrawn. They are not considered to be members of the parliamentary party anymore. This happened to several Conservative MPs in 2019, who opposed Prime Minister Johnson’s policy for departing from the EU.

Most MPs rebel at least once against the Whip on issues that they feel strongly about, but if they want to be promoted, it probably pays to be loyal. Gaining experience on Select Committees also helps. MPs can be chosen by the party leadership to become government ministers and gradually work their way up the various ranks of minister, if they are successful and favoured by their party. MPs in the Opposition parties can become ‘shadow ministers’ and similarly progress their career. Some MPs have no ambition to become ministers, or may never be chosen, and they content themselves with representing their constituency and working for the national interest.

Question 3

How does Parliament control the financial interests of its members?

Discuss.

Answer guidance

Parliament is the supreme authority in the UK constitution and part of that supremacy is no other person or body can tell Parliament how it should be run. Parliament decides this for itself, which is known as parliamentary privilege. Until 1911 members of the House of Commons were not paid for their work. Parliament then decided that they should be and until recently MPs decided the level of payment for themselves. Parliament, however, has never forbidden MPs from having other jobs and most MPs do.

Resolutions of the House of Commons in 1695 and 1858 have insisted that MPs are not to receive payments to promote any matter in Parliament, such as to take payment to ask a question of a minister. MPs are expected to declare that they have a financial interest when speaking or communicating with other MPs or ministers (1974 resolution). A register of MPs’ financial interests is also maintained, open to public inspection.

This self-regulation did not prove to be enough when in 1994 the “Cash for Questions” scandal erupted. It emerged that a number of MPs were taking money in return for asking parliamentary questions. In response the Nolan Inquiry into Standards in Public Life was set up, reporting in 1995. The Register of Members’ Interests now has to include the contracts that MPs have with outside organisations on whose behalf they act, and MPs were reminded that they must declare financial interests when approaching MPs and ministers. An independent Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards was also established.

In 2009, a Freedom of Information Act 2000 request revealed that some MPs were claiming exorbitant expenses and misusing their allowances. Parliament quickly reacted with the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009 setting up another independent body to control pay, allowances and MPs’ financial interests, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. That body prepared a Code of Conduct for MPs and it is noteworthy that Parliament has ceded control over these important matters to an outside body.

Lobbyists are individuals or organisations who seek to influence the opinions of MPs and sometimes pay for the MPs’ services. Following the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014, lobbyists to ministers or Permanent Secretaries must register with the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists. It is a criminal offence not to do so.

Despite the growing use of independent regulation, Parliament still reserves the right to punish its own members for financial misconduct. Powers to imprison or fine have fallen into disuse, but an MP can be reprimanded, suspended or expelled. The recommendation is made by the House of Commons own Committee on Standards and Privileges, but a majority of the House must agree to impose the penalty.

Question 4

Distinguish between the following different voting systems used in the UK and consider their respective advantages and disadvantages:

• a) First Past the Post
• b) Party List
• c) Additional Member System
• d) Single Transferable Vote
• Which one would you adopt for UK Parliamentary elections and why?

Answer guidance

First, we need to consider what is the purpose of a voting system? There seem to be two main purposes, which could be conflicting aims. Is it to secure an effective Government or representation for all groups in society?

a) First Past the Post or the majoritarian system

This is used for the House of Commons. There are Single Member Constituencies and the candidate who gains the largest number of votes in the constituency wins the seat, irrespective of the number of votes cast for himself or his opponents. The disadvantage of this system is that smaller parties find it difficult to gain seats and the result of an election is often distorted in favour of the bigger parties. Even in the General Election of 2019, when the Conservative Party won a decisive victory, winning 365 out of the 650 House of Commons seats (56%), they did not have a majority of votes across the country. They had 44% of the vote, so I suppose one could argue that the majority of the population did not support them. The advantage of first past the post is that it is a quick and simple system to understand and operate and usually leads to a decisive election result, with a party winning a clear majority, although this did not happen in 1974 or 2010.

b) Party List

This was used for the European Parliament Elections in the UK. Instead of voting for an individual candidate, the elector votes for a party. Seats are allocated in proportion to the votes cast. The political parties provide a list of candidates and in most versions of this system, the party allocates the seats that they have won to the candidates highest on their list. Some countries use a national list, whereas the UK used regional lists, but there are no constituencies. The UK uses a regional “closed list” system. E.g. South West 7, South East 10, London 9 etc.

This the nearest there is to a proportional system and does secure representation for minority parties, such as the Brexit and Green parties, in the UK European Parliament elections. The disadvantage is that the voter cannot vote for their favourite candidate and loses a constituency MP to represent them. To counteract this, in the UK, MEPs were ‘allocated’ to particular parts of their region e.g. MEP for Bristol. The main disadvantage of Party List is that, if many parties gain seats it can be difficult to form a stable government, leading to frequent and maybe unstable coalitions. This is not a problem in the European Parliament elections, as the MEPs are not required to form a government.

c) Additional Member System

This is used for the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Greater London Assembly. Some MPs are elected by First Past the Post and some by Party List. This does secure a more representative parliament, with better representation for smaller parties. It can lead to coalition government, but not as often as a pure party list system. It retains constituency MPs, but there may be a problem with having two types of MP, with differing status.

d) Alternative Vote

Single member constituencies are retained, but instead of just putting a cross next to their chosen candidate, the elector numbers all the candidates standing in order of preference. If no candidate secures more than 50% of first preferences, the candidate who came bottom on first preferences is eliminated and second preferences for that candidate are redistributed. Bottom candidates continue to be eliminated until one candidate gains more than 50% of the vote. This ensures that the MP has majority support in the constituency and helps smaller parties, that might finish second under the first past the post system.

e) Single Transferable Vote (STV)

This is used for elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly. Single Member Constituencies are replaced by multi-member constituencies (usually about 6 MPs). Electors place each candidate in order of preference. Those candidates who obtain a minimum number of votes (the quota) are elected. The exact method of calculation can vary, but, typically, first preferences are counted first and the quota would be determined by dividing the total votes cast by the number of "seats" available for the constituency. Once a candidate has reached the quota, his/her "surplus votes" (i.e. votes above the quota) are distributed to the other candidates, according to the second preferences. This process continues, going down the preferences, until enough candidates are elected. This again gives some help to the smaller parties, but might seem complicated and slow.

One of the smaller political parties, the Liberal Democrats has long been disadvantaged by the First Past the Post system. Nationally, they receive a fair number of votes, but do not win many seats. When they joined a coalition government with the Conservatives in 2010, they insisted upon a referendum upon changing the voting system for elections to the House of Commons. This was held in May 2011, but heavily defeated. The choice was remain with First Past the Post or change to Alternative Vote. It seems voters prefer the system that they know or maybe they would have preferred one of the other systems, but they did not get a chance to vote on them.

Question 4

Andrew, who is not a member of a political party, wishes to stand for Parliament. Explain to him how he should go about doing this and explain the legal rules to which he will be subject during his election campaign.

Is Andrew likely to succeed in getting elected?

Answer guidance

There are few qualifications to stand as a candidate. Since the Electoral Administration Act 2006 Andrew must be at least 18 years old. He is disqualified if he is already a member of the House of Lords or has succeeded to a peerage, although it is possible for him to disclaim under the Peerage Act 1963. He must be a UK citizen, an Irish citizen or a Commonwealth citizen with a right to remain in the UK. Undischarged bankrupts and those convicted of treason are also not eligible. Under the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975 judges, civil servants, members of the armed forces or police and members of legislatures outside the Commonwealth cannot be MPs.

Therefore, is quite likely that he can stand as a candidate, but he will need some money, as £500 is required as a deposit. This deposit is returned if Andrew receives 5% or more of the total votes cast in the constituency. Ten electors for the constituency in which he intends to stand must sign his nomination paper, but there is no requirement that Andrew must live in or come from that constituency. He could be an Independent or he could form a political party. Then he would need to register his party under the Registration of Political Parties Act 1998. Financing his campaign could be a problem, so he would need to register as a political party to receive donations from supporters, which must be put on a public register under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.

The amount that he can spend on his campaign in the constituency is subject to strict limits and all expenditure must be recorded. He has to nominate an election agent, which could be himself, to do this. If his political party spends money helping to get him elected in his constituency, say by sending a high-powered delegation, this expense must be recorded against his personal limit: R v Mackinlay [2018] UKSC 42. After every election, some MPs are taken to court for spending too much. It is unlikely that he could publicise his campaign on the TV and radio, because broadcasts are limited to the main political parties. Political advertisements are not allowed under the Communications Act 2003. According to the European Court of Human Rights, this does not infringe the right to free expression: Animal Defenders International v UK [2013] ECHR 362.

If Andrew stands as an Independent, he is very unlikely to get elected. Joining one of the major political parties would give him a much better chance. Although individual constituency parties select their candidates, all the political parties have a good measure of control over who is selected. First, Andrew would have to work hard for the party to be placed on their approved list of candidates. Then he would have to travel to various constituencies to persuade them to adopt him as a candidate. Ideally, he would like a ‘safe seat’, where his party has a good chance of winning, but he might have to fight some unwinnable seats first.