Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

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

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1080

Hurbad

Guys do you think we need to know the stages the bill goes through before becoming an Act/law ?

Reply 1081

Foji

Original post by romaiseb

Yes for B.O.R: - Current HRA is more of a 'criminal's charter' - e.g. Abu Qatada "right to family life" meant he could not be extradited immediately despite being a radical Islamic cleric - doesn't really uphold the basic rights of normal citizens e.g. "Right to free speech"
- British Bill of Rights will uphold traditional British values
- HRA is enforced by an external court = strains parliamentary democracy & is not liked by euroskeptics who believe it is a European convention adopted into UK courts

No: - European Human Rights will not longer be able to be reviewed in UK courts - must resort to the European court of justice (which is much more costly)
- increased politicisation with conflict on what should and shouldn't be included in the Bill of Rights
- Leads to judicial tyranny

It's not an essay I have done but these are some of the points I would put in the essay - Any more points and further examples would be appreciated

How would british bill of rights lead to judicial tyranny sorry?

Reply 1082

hunter0raf42

Constitution Codification - Args for and against are outline brilliantly in this govt report

They are summarised in couple of pages in bullet points; Just head to page 20/21

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmpolcon/463/463.pdf

Reply 1083

IRoranth

Remember when talking about flexibility as an advantage for not having codification, refer to gun laws in UK vs US- add examples, e.g. Dunblane Massacre in 1996 (UK) led to two new laws banning handguns, whereas, with the Sandy Hook Massacre 2012 (US), there were no changes, because their constitution is difficult to amend.

Reply 1084

romaiseb

Original post by Foji

How would british bill of rights lead to judicial tyranny sorry?

The judiciary will be able to use the British Bill of Rights to scrutinise the government legislation and declare it incompatible if it doesn't go along with what the B.O.R says.

help?

Original post by Hurbad

Guys do you think we need to know the stages the bill goes through before becoming an Act/law ?

Briefly - you might be asked to assess the legislative function of Parliament - so you would mention how legislation is effectively scrutinised by public bill committees in the committee stage, and how the bill can be amended by the House of Lords after the third reading, etc; however amendments can be ignored, and because public bill committee members are proportional to the strength of parties in Parliament, there may be insufficient scrunity of legislation (that is backed by the government). These are just some points you might need to know.

Reply 1087

Tresyen

Original post by mollyadtr

Here are some predictions we can try and discuss and see if they're relevant or what else could be a potential
ImageUploadedByStudent Room1465212388.491696.jpg

ImageUploadedByStudent Room1465212388.491696.jpg

Posted from TSR Mobile

Is that for the resit?:

Reply 1088

ArcticSlayer

Do you think its safe to skip Prime Minister and coalition government? Does anyone think a coalition question is likely?

Reply 1089

Tresyen

Original post by Sarpedon

help?

Are you doing the resit?

Reply 1090

Sarpedon

Original post by Tresyen

Are you doing the resit?

No, first time. Please tell me can I only revise 2 topics instead of 3? 3 is too much!!

Reply 1091

hunter0raf42

So Ive seen a lot of requests for Plans on British Bill of Rights, is it needed? etc. Heres my plan, its qutie similar to should we codify our consitution:

ARGUMENTS FOR A B.B.O.R;

-To foster a healthy sense of democracy it must be present in intelligble form for all people to understand and not just be an amalgomation of various conventions and perogatives that only a hanful of elites understnad,, see America!
-There is a lack of clarity over issues that may oft be national importance such as whether Parl. needs to be consulted about armed conflict (conventions vs. perogative). It is dangerous and impractical
-The belief in Parl sovereignty is an anachronism in todays democratic world where whips and PM patronage usually decide what legislation is passed. It is an untellable doctrine that Parl has no control and there needs to be a bill that outline basic rights that can not be circumvented by a Parl
-The debate for a new BBR would not only have an educative impact but it would also definein clear terms how minister et al. have to behave and this might reinvigarate public debate and begin to grow trust in poltiicians once again.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST;
-Codified consts. such as a BBOR have usually arisen out of poltiical revolution and remain rigid ,, see Anerica, the UK has its own which has evolved and adapted to changing social and poltiical insitions ,,, its flexibility must not be overlooked
-If it was given 'Higher Law' it would result in unelected and unaccountable judges being the final arbitars on what is lawful which would contradict and annul the democratic principle of Parl Sov.
-It would poltiicise the judiciary (see America and Obamacare in SC by Repub)
-There are already suffiecinent checks and balances on the exec. from Parl (Select Comms/Oppostion) and Parl and the Exec from the Judiciary via HRA and Judicial Review. NO MORE NEEDED
-It would be impossible to get poltiicial cosensus on this document and it might allow the Party in power excessive advantage to build it to suit their needs

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 1092

tom476zf

how many points for the 25 marker if its a one sided argument?

Reply 1093

zzinah

does anyone have an essay plan or an essay regarding the strengths and the weaknesses of adoptinng a codified constitution in the UK, or if it has already been discussed, what page is it on?

Reply 1094

Sarpedon

OH MY FŪCK! THANK CHRIST, THE EXAM'S AT 13:30, NOT 09:00!!!!!!!!! Still staying up all night to revise...

Reply 1095

IRoranth

Original post by Sarpedon

No, first time. Please tell me can I only revise 2 topics instead of 3? 3 is too much!!

Original post by ArcticSlayer

Do you think its safe to skip Prime Minister and coalition government? Does anyone think a coalition question is likely?

I haven't started revising that bit yet D= but yeah, you never know- even though the majority of coalition Qs were in 2012/13, they could totally bring it up again =( revise it in case.

Reply 1096

ArcticSlayer

Original post by IRoranth

It's way too risky to only learn 2, even though constitution and parliament and usually in separate sections- they could change it around this time- I wouldn't risk it- definitely learn three. I'm doing Const, Parl and PM/Cabinet.

Don't worry because constitution and parliament have similar pieces of info in them =]

I haven't started revising that bit yet D= but yeah, you never know- even though the majority of coalition Qs were in 2012/13, they could totally bring it up again =( revise it in case.

Ugh there isn't much time. I might need to skip a topic altogether.

Reply 1097

IRoranth

Original post by ArcticSlayer

Ugh there isn't much time. I might need to skip a topic altogether.

I didn't revise coalition bit for political parties in unit 1, lol, that was a huuuuge risk, i'm so glad it didn't come up.
Anyways, good luck! Hope you do really well =D

Reply 1098

Louise12307

Anyone got any predictions for PM and Cabinet? I have done plans for powers of the PM, importance of the Cabinet and presidentialism. Any others I should be aware of?!

Posted from TSR Mobile