Back
to top
Public law essay help!!
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Hey guys, I have just been given my first essay in public law and I'm not sure how to structure it. The question is a statement on how delegated legislation threatens parliamentary sovereignty and rule of law. I need to explain and evaluate this whilst looking at parliamentary controls. I'm not sure what the structure is supposed to be like. I've started off with defining the key principles but where do I go from there? How many arguments do I need on both sides before coming to a conclusion? Any advice is appreciated! Thank you!!
0
reply
Report
#2
first of all you need to explore the correlation between the parliament and legislation, how has this relationship shaped in the past. having done that you'll acknowledge the emerging delagated legislation and how it affects the said connection. remember to cover the reasons for delegated legislation.
0
reply
(Original post by Rootkit77)
first of all you need to explore the correlation between the parliament and legislation, how has this relationship shaped in the past. having done that you'll acknowledge the emerging delagated legislation and how it affects the said connection. remember to cover the reasons for delegated legislation.
first of all you need to explore the correlation between the parliament and legislation, how has this relationship shaped in the past. having done that you'll acknowledge the emerging delagated legislation and how it affects the said connection. remember to cover the reasons for delegated legislation.
0
reply
Report
#4
i'll take a wise guess here that you don't know the structure and the arguments because you haven't done your research yet. you really have to do that first - read some articles. what are the issues with delegated legislation(?). who says it threatens parliamentary sovereignty and rule of law and do you agree with them? who says it doesn't threaten because there are controls(?). have you written an essay at uni yet? there isn't a magic number as to how many arguments you make. you just have to explore the issues, create an argument for why you agree/disagree with the statement in the question, explore the counter argument and plug any potential holes in your argument. in this case you'd potentially have threatening, non-threatening, potentially threatening, conclusion.
1
reply
(Original post by Joleee)
i'll take a wise guess here that you don't know the structure and the arguments because you haven't done your research yet. you really have to do that first - read some articles. what are the issues with delegated legislation(?). who says it threatens parliamentary sovereignty and rule of law and do you agree with them? who says it doesn't threaten because there are controls(?). have you written an essay at uni yet? there isn't a magic number as to how many arguments you make. you just have to explore the issues, create an argument for why you agree/disagree with the statement in the question, explore the counter argument and plug any potential holes in your argument. in this case you'd potentially have threatening, non-threatening, potentially threatening, conclusion.
i'll take a wise guess here that you don't know the structure and the arguments because you haven't done your research yet. you really have to do that first - read some articles. what are the issues with delegated legislation(?). who says it threatens parliamentary sovereignty and rule of law and do you agree with them? who says it doesn't threaten because there are controls(?). have you written an essay at uni yet? there isn't a magic number as to how many arguments you make. you just have to explore the issues, create an argument for why you agree/disagree with the statement in the question, explore the counter argument and plug any potential holes in your argument. in this case you'd potentially have threatening, non-threatening, potentially threatening, conclusion.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
