The Student Room Group

Edexcel Government & Politics - Unit 2 Governing the UK (09/06/16)

Scroll to see replies

Original post by xxvine
I'm actually panicking
My book has so much missing that could be beneficial
Like now effective backbench MPs are etc....
I use the 'essentials of U.K. Politics by Andrew Heywood. I feel like there is so much missing


My politics teacher wrote our textbook..
Original post by jonnyiw
Believe they are they same, primary legislation means passed by parliament, and a statute law is also a statute made by parliament.


Thank you!!!
Original post by alevelpain
My politics teacher wrote our textbook..


Which one? Trying to see if I can view it online or somethings
anyone got any examples of judicial activism?
Original post by xxvine
Which one? Trying to see if I can view it online or somethings


Unfortunately it's only available through our school, sorry :frown: what do you need? I can try to help
Original post by xxvine
I really don't want backbench MPs to come up
It's not even in my book lol
Like a dedicated section on how effective they are
I use the Heywood book


Look at the essay plan I quoted before and you can improvise from there, what I put in there is six paragraphs which can be used for a 40mark and you can still do it for a 25mark but with 4 of them
Heywood book?! I've never heard of that is it useful


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by xxvine
For parliament do we need to know parliaments relationship to gov


4 sure


Posted from TSR Mobile
Doesn't everyone use this textbook?ImageUploadedByStudent Room1465241854.282260.jpg


Posted from TSR Mobile
I posted this before but still confused is this right or?

Still unsure about ECHR/HRA 1998 and its relationship to judges/how they use it/it increases there power... so as I understand it judges can: Issue a comment of non-compliance if a law goes against the ECHR law e.g bel marsh case 2005? and then parliament decides what must be done? If a government body acts against the ECHR victims can take the body to court e.g Abu Qatada 2009? If the ECHR brings in a new law and the UK does not have a law against it but has by convention done different they must pass primary legislation before they can repeal the law set by the ECHR? PLEASE CORRECT cos Im very confused
Original post by mollyadtr
Look at the essay plan I quoted before and you can improvise from there, what I put in there is six paragraphs which can be used for a 40mark and you can still do it for a 25mark but with 4 of them
Heywood book?! I've never heard of that is it useful


Posted from TSR Mobile


No but that's the text book we use!!
My school sucks so much
It's called essentials of Uk politics by Andrew Heywood. He apparently writes the exam yet he left a bunch of stuff out the textbook

What I seem to be missing is how effective back bench MPs are
How effective is parliament
How effective is the commons

They're is stuff in the book about the lords and second chamber
Original post by mollyadtr
Doesn't everyone use this textbook?ImageUploadedByStudent Room1465241854.282260.jpg


Posted from TSR Mobile

I use the essentials of uk politics by Andrew Heywood
My govpol teacher said not to buy any revision guides because we're too good for them. 2 days before my exam and I regret it dearly :tongue:
Original post by alevelpain
Unfortunately it's only available through our school, sorry :frown: what do you need? I can try to help


What I seem to be missing is how effective back bench MPs are How effective is parliament How effective is the commons
Original post by Vinidor
I posted this before but still confused is this right or?

Still unsure about ECHR/HRA 1998 and its relationship to judges/how they use it/it increases there power... so as I understand it judges can: Issue a comment of non-compliance if a law goes against the ECHR law e.g bel marsh case 2005? and then parliament decides what must be done? If a government body acts against the ECHR victims can take the body to court e.g Abu Qatada 2009? If the ECHR brings in a new law and the UK does not have a law against it but has by convention done different they must pass primary legislation before they can repeal the law set by the ECHR? PLEASE CORRECT cos Im very confused


For the bel marsh case the prisoners used judicial review to appeal to the court on the lines that the law parliament passed infringes on their rights stated in the echr...parliament never wants stuff like this to happen cause it limits what they can do..as all eu law succeeds uk law they have to change the law if the eu court for human rights thinks it contradicts the rights started in echr
It's similar to the factortame case with eu fisheries law contradicting our own law and the result of that was eu law won so we weren't allowed to keep our law to do with fishing in place anymore....
Did that help a little bit? I'm not doing judiciary so I'm not sure about the judges bit but I know they dedicate their lives to protecting civil rights /echr


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by xxvine
I use the essentials of uk politics by Andrew Heywood


Is it a good book?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by xxvine
What I seem to be missing is how effective back bench MPs are How effective is parliament How effective is the commons

MPS:

Scrutiny ->PMQs, written questions, rebelling, ministerial questions HOWEVER just for show, not effective at all (do up your tie etc.)

Representing-> they represent their constituents interests -> Burkean Trusteeship-> means their problems relayed to Commons -> Ann Main -> also worklocally to help people, such as collections HOWEVER whip means thatyou have to follow party line

Private MemberBill -> means they can legislate -> Assisted Dying in 2015 and there wasalso legalising abortion in 1967 HOWEVER Private Member Bills are ineffective as only a minority go through due to a lack of debatingtime, bad system and reforms were proposed

SelectCommittees -> have one per department and look over the departmentalmanagement and policies -> vital as allows greater scope than normallyallowed -> can bring witnesses to talk -> report written then publishedto house with recommendations -> Mrs Dunwoody made determined attacks onboth the management of Rail track and government plans for the privatisation ofthe air traffic control system -> shows they can be effective
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by mollyadtr
Is it a good book?


Posted from TSR Mobile

Noooooo
Look at the things I'm missing😩
Original post by alevelpain
Scrutiny ->PMQs, written questions, rebelling, ministerial questions HOWEVER just for show, not effective at all (do up your tie etc.)

Representing-> they represent their constituents interests -> Burkean Trusteeship-> means their problems relayed to Commons -> Ann Main -> also worklocally to help people, such as collections HOWEVER whip means thatyou have to follow party line

Private MemberBill -> means they can legislate -> Assisted Dying in 2015 and there wasalso legalising abortion in 1967 HOWEVER Private Member Bills are ineffective as only a minority go through due to a lack of debatingtime, bad system and reforms were proposed

Thanks
Is that for how effective back bench MPs sre
Original post by xxvine
Thanks
Is that for how effective back bench MPs sre


yeah sorry look again i edited it
I have a good checklist for people to use, it doesn't cover the judiciary however.

For all the other topics though I find it a good guide.

Quick Reply

Latest