executive fulfills all his functions

• argument 1: Policy implementation is often inefficient or delayed. ->Departments often struggle to deliver reforms effectively, with issues of bureaucracy, funding, or poor coordination. -> Despite pledges, NHS waiting lists in England remained high into 2025 under Labour, prompting criticism of Health Secretary Wes Streeting’s delivery pace.-> Shows the executive may have ambition but lacks consistent capacity for efficient service delivery. ->  Poor implementation undermines public confidence in government competence, potentially reducing political engagement and turnout.
• Argument 2 Lack of transparency and accountability -> The executive often avoids scrutiny or limits parliamentary oversight. -> During the COVID inquiry in 2024, revelations emerged about decision-making in Johnson’s Downing Street, showing poor documentation and informal policy-making. -> Highlights a culture of unaccountable governance, weakening trust and legitimacy. ->  A lack of executive transparency weakens the principle of ministerial responsibility, blurring lines of accountability and reducing democratic oversight.
• argument 3 Excessive centralisation around the Prime Minister -> Increasing power concentration in No.10 limits departmental autonomy and stifles cabinet input. -> Under Starmer, many decisions have been routed through his advisers and team (including Sue Gray), marginalising some cabinet ministers in policy development. -> This reduces collective decision-making and can make governance overly rigid or narrow. -> Centralisation undermines pluralist democracy, as decision-making becomes dominated by a small, unelected elite rather than a broad executive team.
• counter argument 1: Delivers swift and coordinated emergency responses -> The executive can act quickly during crises, using its central authority. -> The Starmer government acted decisively in early 2025 to introduce emergency rent controls amid a housing affordability crisis, helping stabilise markets. -> Shows the executive’s ability to respond decisively when speed and coordination are essential. ->  Such responsiveness to public need shows the executive fulfilling its representative function, meeting the demands of constituents in real time.
• counter argument 2: Legislative leadership is usually effective -> Most executive-led bills pass due to party discipline and agenda-setting power. ->  In 2024, Labour passed flagship legislation on industrial policy, clean energy investment, and planning reform with minimal obstruction. -> Demonstrates how the executive drives the legislative process, providing direction and coherence. -> FPTP gives governing parties large majorities, allowing the executive to enact its mandate—enhancing representative democracy.
• counter argument 3 Ministers remain publicly accountable and operationally active -> Individual ministers are responsible for departmental outcomes and answerable in Parliament and media.-> Defence Secretary John Healey regularly appears before Parliament on defence procurement and Ukraine strategy. -> Shows the ongoing strength of ministerial responsibility, with active oversight and visible leadership. -> Ministerial accountability helps protect citizens' interests, reinforcing Parliament’s role in defending individual and collective rights