Key paper 2 examples

• Devolution: Trailblazer devolution

  • 2023, greater Manchester
  • Control over post-19 skills, education, affordable housing programs and infrastructure investment
  • Level 4 devolution: English regions can have significant control
  • Labour's 'take back control' act which aims to enshrine a robust framework that empowers local communities
• PM and Cabinet

   

  1. Cameron being appointed as foreign secretary in 2023

  • Highlights the extent of power of patronage
  • But ultimately that experience and competence is most important to PMs when appointing a cabinet
  • An attempt to represent One Nation Conservatives in Cabinet
• Backbenchers and debates:

  1. In April 2024, the government paused plans to introduce the Criminal Justice Act due to the threat of rebellion from at least 40 Conservative MPs. The bill, which would have given police the power to forcibly move on rough sleepers, faced significant opposition from high-profile backbenchers like Iain Duncan-Smith and Caroline Nokes. The government's decision to back down highlights how the threat of rebellion can effectively defeat a bill before a vote, as it becomes apparent that the government would likely lose.
• Backbenchers and debates:

  On December 5th, 2023, the government was defeated on an amendment related to the infected blood scandal when 22 Conservative MPs supported a Labour amendment to the Victims and Prisoners Bill, which aimed to expedite compensation for victims. This rebellion, which occurred against a three-line Conservative whip, marked Sunak's first defeat in the Commons. The bill subsequently received royal assent on May 24th. The rebels were significantly influenced by strong local movements and the needs of victims in their constituencies
• Ministerial Responsibility

  Braverman sacked as Home Secretary in November 2023

  • Was sacked by Sunak following a controversial opinion piece in the Times about police handling of pro-Palestinian protests, accusing the police of 'playing favourites' and describing the protesters as 'hate marchers'
  • This was published without being reviewed by Downing Street, violating the ministerial code
  • It was a direct challenge to Sunak's authority and widely criticised by MPs of the Conservative party
  • Shows collective MR as ministers must publicly support with gov't decision or resign
• Ministerial Responsibility

  • Could be argued that the example of Braverman does not simply show collective ministerial responsibility being enforced because she had previously made many controversial comments
  • 'Multiculturalism has failed' + grooming gangs were 'almost all British-Pakistani' + homelessness was a 'lifestyle choice'
  • These comments were not directly aligned with government messaging, yet she wasn't sacked
  • Better argument to say that Sunak's sacking of Braverman was due to growing pressure from the public and media rather than the ministerial code being enforced
• PMQs

   

  • Prime Minister Theresa May faced intense questioning over the treatment of the Windrush generation, exposing the government's mishandling and leading to significant policy changes and the resignation of the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd.
  • Prime Minister Boris Johnson was questioned extensively about the government's handling of the pandemic, including the procurement of PPE, the speed and efficiency of the vaccine rollout, and the decisions on lockdown measures. These sessions provided critical scrutiny and pressured the government to improve its response.

   
• Select Committees

   

  • Home Affairs Committee in 2016: The committee investigated the issues surrounding the handling of sexual abuse allegations against the late Sir Cyril Smith and other public figures. Their scrutiny led to changes in how such cases were investigated and managed, improving the protection of vulnerable individuals.
•  

  The Liaison Committee

   

  • In June 2023, the Committee launched an inquiry into the strategic thinking across government departments, aiming to ensure thorough oversight and improvement of long-term planning and delivery on critical issues like net zero commitments, international security, and the impact of AI on the economy. This inquiry is a prime example of how the Committee scrutinizes and influences government strategy, ensuring that Parliament can provide cross-party oversight on significant issues
• Quality legislation

   

  • Employment Rights (Flexible Working) Act 2023: This legislation allows employees to request flexible working arrangements from the first day of employment, rather than after 26 weeks. Employers must provide a reason if they reject such requests and respond within two months. This act aims to provide greater flexibility and work-life balance for employees
• Special advisors having an important role in Downing Street

   

  • Unelected and directly hired by the PM
  • Despite being unelected, special advisor Dominic Cummings held a very significant amount of power in Boris Johnson’s government, arguably far more than any cabinet minister or other member of government. Boris Johnson even took a significant hit to his government’s popularity to defend Cummings after he broke COVID rules by driving from London to Barnard Castle.
• Arguments for why the PM isn't presidential

   

  • Sunak has given significant control to both Chancellor Jeremy Hunt and Foreign Secretary David Cameron, with both being given the autonomy to shape policy and dominate government messaging in their areas of policy.
  • Cameron has led the UK in peace negotiations on the Israel-Palestine conflict and the coordinated UK-US response to Houthi attacks in Yemen.
  • Hunt has announced key economic policies himself, rather than the PM doing so beforehand in the media. For example, he announced the National Insurance tax cut in the 2023 Autumn Statement.
• Arguments for the Supreme court not being too powerful

   

  1. The Illegal Migration Bill was introduced by Home Secretary Suella Braverman in March 2023 with a section 19 note stating that there was a likelihood the provisions of the bill would be incompatible with the Human Rights Act and international law, but that the government wanted to proceed with it nonetheless.
• Arguments for the Supreme court not being too powerful

  • In the prorogation case, the Supreme Court simply prevented Boris Johnson from avoiding parliamentary scrutiny through using the power to prorogue for the government’s benefit, therefore legitimately upholding the sovereignty of Parliament.
  • Moreover, the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, which was introduced to repeal the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, also included an ouster clause, explicitly removed the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review in relation to the dissolution of Parliament.
  • Shows the limits of the SC...
• Arguments that the Supreme Court does act with sufficient judicial independence and neutrality

  • It can be argued that the Supreme Court was operating with sufficient judicial neutrality and independence in these cases. Even though they may have made the Brexit process more difficult, they were simply upholding the constitution.
  •  Rather than the Supreme Court seeking to interfere in political and stop the wishes of a democratically elected government, they were simply upholding the law against a government that was seeking to act ‘ultra vires’.
• Arguments that the Supreme Court does act with sufficient judicial independence and neutrality

   

  • In the Article 50 case, they were right to require Parliament’s consent as triggering Article 50 and starting the process of leaving the EU involved the removal of rights conferred by parliament (passing the 1972 European Communities Act
• • After the 2019 election, just 34% of the House of Commons and 29% of the House of Lords are women, compared to over half of the population.
  • After the 2019 election, just 10% of the House of Commons and 7% of the House of Lords are from minority ethnic backgrounds, compared to over 18% of the general population.
  • After the 2019 election, 22% of the House of Commons and 57% of the House of Lords went to private schools, compared to just 7% of the general population.
  • Further, 85% of the House of Commons went to university, compared to 42% of the population, and 19% went to Oxbridge