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

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LennyBicknel)
    FOR an elected HoL -
    > Representative
    > Accountable/ More legitimacy
    (Genuinely can't think of anymore - I'd add another for the sake of balance if you can think of one)

    AGAINST an elected HoL -
    > Lacks expertise (may be filled with career politicians; not experts as it currently is)
    > Government gridlock (one chamber with one party majority; the other chamber has a different party majority - unlikely to ever agree on legislation)
    > Less independent (increased influence of party whips)
    > May be just as unrepresentative as the Commons currently is
    What examples would you use for the elected second chamber question?
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hw1221)
    Restraints on the government power? And yeah the amount of examples you need to know makes it really hard.
    Sorry that was badly worded... As in, any examples were judges were unable to uphold civil liberties, or an example where they aren't very powerful?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey guys!

    For the Constitution section, on questions regarding the transfer of sovereignty could they ask us to specifically analyse the case of the EU? Or is it likely to be erosion/transfer of sovereignty in general?
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MorganC1)
    Hey guys!

    For the Constitution section, on questions regarding the transfer of sovereignty could they ask us to specifically analyse the case of the EU? Or is it likely to be erosion/transfer of sovereignty in general?
    Constitution is highly likely to be a 40 marker, and I think it would be very unlikely that they base an entire question on the EU. I mean it's edexcel, so who knows, but we'll probably see an erosion of sovereignty with a nice lengthy paragraph with the EU as an example (:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hw1221)
    What examples would you use for the elected second chamber question?
    Well for examples in favour of an elected chamber, it's quite limited, considering it doesn't currently exist, and its only a proposal. Examples for the reasons in favour of a non-elected (the current) chamber could be -

    > Examples of expertise - Alan Sugar and Karen Bradey chosen to become peers due to their knowledge and experience in business.

    > Examples for a potentially gridlocked elected chamber - gridlock has occurred in the USA on numerous occasions (both the upper and lower houses are elected in the USA) e.g. failure for both the Senate and House of Representatives to agree on a budget in 2013 meant that the government went into 'shut down' (effectively, the government had no funding temporarily)

    > Examples of how an unelected chamber can effectively oppose and scrutinize the government - Government defeated over tax credit reforms in 2015; cuts to disability benefit defeated in 2016; Blair defeated over 300 times in the Lords from 1997-2007.

    This is quite conceptual stuff, so examples are a little bit difficult tbh
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hurbad)
    Thats nothing imagine, fasting while doing an exam ?
    you dont have to fast every day during ramadan you know that right ? you can do the days after. also im pretty sure politics is harder than fasting ...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeafeningSilence)
    Constitution is highly likely to be a 40 marker, and I think it would be very unlikely that they base an entire question on the EU. I mean it's edexcel, so who knows, but we'll probably see an erosion of sovereignty with a nice lengthy paragraph with the EU as an example (:
    Ah thank you so much! I feel confident on sovereignty but a 40 marker purely on the EU would be horrible
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    im not even bothering now. no point
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AllanSmith22)
    im not even bothering now. no point
    LMAO, Im just hoping the boundaries are low
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    anyone have an example of a successful select committee in scrutinising the govt? I've just got transport but it's a bit old, thanks
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeafeningSilence)
    Sorry that was badly worded... As in, any examples were judges were unable to uphold civil liberties, or an example where they aren't very powerful?
    The only thing I could think of were that the terrorist suspects in the Belmarsh case were not protected straight away because the judiciary cannot be proactive in upholding civil liberties.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MorganC1)
    Ah thank you so much! I feel confident on sovereignty but a 40 marker purely on the EU would be horrible
    I get what you mean, I'd expect to see questions that could easily lead to the EU, but it'd be awful if they did it soley on the topic. At least with the 25 marker in unit they also referenced devolution.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hw1221)
    The only thing I could think of were that the terrorist suspects in the Belmarsh case were not protected straight away because the judiciary cannot be proactive in upholding civil liberties.
    Ahhh, thank you! I've got the prisoners voting example as well. If in doubt I'll just BS it I guess
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What would you guys put as points to suggest insignificance with the Constitutional Reform Act and the establishment of a Supreme Court? I'm stuck on those.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jennifer Randall)
    How would I plan an answer for a wholly elected chamber?
    (FOR)Increased representation -
    Currently appointed; does not fulfillparliament's function of representing the electorate. Elected Lords would beable to express the views of the public more easily, as they have popularmandate backing them.

    However - Lords is a revision chamber, not a representativeone. Does it need to represent the public?
    + Lords may become just as unrepresentative asthe Commons (e.g. does not resemble makeup of society; FPTP dis-proportionalityrepresents the electorate's votes etc.)
    (FOR) Increased legitimacy -
    Critiques and revisions the lords make will bemore legitimate, as it will have the 'consent' of the public. Lords currentlylacks legitimacy, thereby undermining parliament's functioning of creatinglegitimacy.

    However - If the Lords are elected by FPTP, they may beheralded as equally illegitimate. A vote for both chambers may lead to apathyand a low turnout: lowering legitimacy anyway. Suggested: held every 10-20years instead
    (FOR) Increased accountability -
    Decisions currently unaccountable; elected peerscould be held to account.


    (AGAINST) Parliamentary gridlock -
    If the Lords and Commons have different partiesas a majority, it is unlikely that any legislation would be passed e.g.Labour-majority Lords would not wish to concede to a Conservative-majorityCommons. Fine balance currently exists within the non-majoritarian structure ofthe Lords.

    However, if this is what the electorate want, then it is what the electoratewill get. Representation should come before the effectiveness of parliament (insome people's view)
    (AGAINST) Influence of the whips -
    Just as MPs in the Commons are reduced to 'lobbyfodder' by their whips, peers too may suffer this fate. This will reduce theLords current function of scrutinizing the government, as it will mean peerswill not be as 'independent' as they currently are (party affiliation and ties,plus influence of the whips, is limited in the Lords currently - elected peerswill be subjugated to their party's whips more easily)
    (AGAINST) Lack of expertise -
    Lords may become filled with career politicians,with little expertise outside of politics - would limit its function in scrutinizingand reviewing the government's work.

    However, this is off the basis that peers will be selected forelection in the same way MPs are; expertise could be taken into considerationonce candidates are chosen.
    Conclusion- Statement is false. Unelected peers serve their functionwithin parliament adequately - to scrutinise, not represent.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesporkthief)
    x
    you're a legend, thanks!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UKStudent17)
    What would you guys put as points to suggest insignificance with the Constitutional Reform Act and the establishment of a Supreme Court? I'm stuck on those.
    It was supposed to make it completely independent from politics however the pm still has a say on who to elect as judges so it didn't really work in a way


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mollyadtr)
    It was supposed to make it completely independent from politics however the pm still has a say on who to elect as judges so it didn't really work in a way


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Could say taking power away from the PM from appointments is undemocratic since he is elected and accountable. Also i'll ask again, does anyone have any recent examples of select committee success in terms of scrutinising the government?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    would we need to know the effectiveness of the HOL over the years eg how effective is the HOL
    Also what are people predicting
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    how would people answer: To what extent can the Prime Minister control the Cabinet?

    Anybody got notes or essay plans on that?
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: October 11, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Poll
Which is the best season?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.