The United Kingdom Political Institutions - Essay Example

United Kingdom Political s United Kingdom is one of the s that are traditionally known for continued stability in their political institutions. Recently, United Kingdom has remarkably experienced rapid change in most if not all of its political institutions (Judge 25). There are several reforms that have been witnessed that include; the functions of judiciary, the nature of political parties, the oversight and security of the executive, operation of political parties, distribution of policy aptitudes between unelected and elected players, the way of electing representative members and the way territorial power is organized. Political power has been devolved to new ranks of government, the judiciary has been mandated to review the government actions with a lot of powers, introduction of new systems of electing representatives have been devised, second chamber membership has been reorganized, authority over monetary control has been delegated to an independent body, access to formal information has been slackened and the way political parties are being funded has been reviewed. There are some consequences that have been observed as a result of these reforms on Britain’s political structure, though they endure silence regarding their impacts. Some are devoted to impacts of reforms, but pay attention to individual bodies or institutions, instead of looking at the impacts of several reforms realized jointly. Even though these tremendous changes have been witnessed, there are several reforms that need to be tackled due to everyday emergence of new political shifts. This stands to be the right time to ask some questions regarding institutions and policies that need changes to sustain development in the United Kingdom for the next reasonable century. This latter will try to outline some few changes needed in some institutions to foster growth. The United Kingdom has several structural flaws, witnessed in years of insufficient durable skills investment, innovation and infrastructure. Investment failure is firmly grounded as a result of inability to acquire even planning, tactical vision and partisan consensus on the required policy outline to support development and growth. Radical changes are needed especially in the parliamentary sectors. Britain parliament has always been mandated to oversee most of infrastructural developments geared towards Britain realizing its economic development. At the same time, Parliament also steers infrastructural development in Africa especially to African countries who are members of the European Union. According to parliamentary reports, economic infrastructure responsible for water, communications transport and power is the main engine to kick out poverty. It supports economic development and significant economic growth. Accessing necessary infrastructure still remains a challenge with a reasonable number of Africans still in dire need for these infrastructures. United Kingdom government through its parliament spend billions of dollars in funding these developments of which is appropriate since Africa is also a major business partner; the question procedures involved in undertaking these transactions. It is not breaking news to hear of funds embezzlement set for such projects, this triggers a lot of question in a common citizen’s mind on how tax pay is being spent. The parliament has been awarded power to oversee these projects but they still do face a lot of challenges. For parliament to realize effective outcome, one of my major recommendations is the formation of an infrastructure commission and board management. This board’s strategy is to give independent skilled intelligence to parliament to aid it in prioritizing infrastructure development. Stronger support can be fostered through the infrastructure management commission whose mandate would be to ensure implementations of these priorities. At the same time the commission should have authority to share these benefits with those who stand a chance of losing from these developments. A financial institution should also be mandated to oversee financial requirements and also work in collaboration with non-governmental organizations to manage, reduce and share risk. The most effective legislative organ in United Kingdom is the House of Commons (Carmichael and Brice 99). It is well known that House of Commons plays a critical role in the United Kingdom political arena. Due to its numerous functions, it is therefore necessary to have an independent elected body or chamber whose role is to represent the nation’s views as a whole. On the other hand, various electoral traditions are in use worldwide, among them, first past the post abbreviated as FPTP is considered the least fair. At the same time the least representative mode of electoral system. With FPTP, approximately a third of dully elected members of parliament manage to garner the support of more than half the number of their constituents. Election outcome is usually decided by a minute minority of swayed voters who happen to reside in major battle ground constituencies; this is approximated to be about 1.7 per cent of the electorate. As a fact, trust in our politicians and voter turnout is really declining. There is dire need for reform to do away with this culture. Parliament should come up with a way to ensure that MPs may be recalled in case of failure to deliver. At the same time, voters are re-engaged in democratic electoral process. Various key decisions made by 5-4 divide accordingly make it seem to be court of one. Time has come to come up with a less dysfunctional piece. For instance, most important decisions are as result of swing justice. Antony Kennedy deciding on behalf of the nation. Health care bill is one of the bills that were meant to restructure the entire health care nationwide with the decision made by just five members of the jury (Gibson and Janardan 21). This has involved changing moments in political seasons from Bush v Gore witnessed in 2000; during this period, it perceived that the Supreme Court precisely selected the next president. Recent opinion polls have also indicated that most citizens are not satisfied with the way the Supreme Court carries out its activities. The polls reflects that only 45% of the citizens are satisfied with overwhelming 61% not impressed with how the supreme court handle matters. Recently proposed reforms indicate that such sclerotic and concentrated powers should not be left to only a nine member bench. Analysts argue that even if the nine were given the mandate, these are not same legal nine decisions that legal experts would settle on. While these posts are filled on the basis of intelligence, the irony is that, since the positions are limited, confirmation wrangles have turned to be increasingly intense; this has forced presidents to be more risk-adverse. Nominees are always chosen on the basis that none has ever mentioned or published anything slightly provoking, leave alone enticing. Congress should push for expansion (Segal and Harold 22). Probably we would end up steadily with a bench of 19, minus the president denied the opportunity to settle on more than 2 brand new justices in a given term. If fully manned, the court probably would have an increased consistent turnover. This may give room to broader variety of diversity and increased opportunity for each president to submit a member to the Supreme Court. Court expansion may as well allow Congress to pressurize justice to embark on sensible nature of spending periods of time seated on lower courts. The House of Lords also known as the Upper House is the second chamber of parliament. The Upper House does not have equal powers as the Commons, but it holds the authority to review and pore over legislations and government activities (Ballinger 12). Its broad expertise and liberated minds plays a great role in checking the powers of executive, but is likely to exercise its powers by questioning ministers to rethink once than to reject the whole points of legislation. Based on this, some critics argue that: if one holds the power to aid in deciding how United Kingdom Is governed, the he or she is supposed to be elected by the public. This simply shows the act of democracy. Over centuries, the British government has been on frontline to reform the House of Lords. In the year 2012, an attempt to alter the House Lord bill flopped, but the issue can’t just get a way simply that way. It is unrealistic to condone multitude of unelected political actors pass bills that the citizens have to obey. The public is very ready with a greater percentage hoping that the reforms come sooner than soon. My view is that we should have 100% voted House of Lords. This is simply because, if one has the powers to enact a law, then he or she is supposed to be chosen by citizens who are to leave by those laws. Elections should also be based on Single Transferable Vote to enable voters decide between minor parties and independents, candidates, to evade vote wastage and improve representation. Some people also have the feeling that there should be no slot for Bishops of any faith community in England. Clear procedures should be introduced to ensure presentable House of Lords. United Kingdom should reform most of its political institutions if at all it is in the race of securing a sustainable economic development (Jordana 24). Democracy can as well be realized through these changes, if things remain the way they are currently, then United Kingdom should not mention democracy in its politics. Works Cited Ballinger, Chris. The House of Lords 1911-2011: A Century of Non-Reform. Oxford: Hart Pub, 2012. Print. Carmichael, Paul, and Brice Dickson. The House of Lords: Its Parliamentary and Judicial Roles. Oxford: Hart Pub, 1999. Print. Gibson, Rosemary, and Janardan P. Singh. The Battle Over Health Care: What Obama's Reform Means for America's Future. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2012. Jordana, Jacint. The Politics of Regulation: Institutions and Regulatory Reforms for the Age of Governance. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Pub, 2004. Print. Judge, David. Political Institutions in the United Kingdom. Oxford [u.a.: Oxford Univ. Press, 2005. Print. Segal, Jeffrey A, and Harold J. Spaeth. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. Cambridge [u.a.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002. Print. Read More