Strengthening Parliament - Term Paper Example

i. Introduction United Kingdom is a sovereign democracy, with the Queen as head of the Norton has asserted that ‘parliament is the essential and definitive link between citizens and government’1 (Norton, 2000). The British Parliament consists of two houses which are called House of Commons and House of Lords. The House of Commons has elected representatives headed by the Prime Minister. Members of the house are elected for a limited term. Members of House of Lords are non elected and serve for life, barring Bishops and Archbishops of Church of England. The HOL2 is characterised by ‘peers’ and has significant powers vested on it. The power of veto is especially significant because all the bills need the approval of the second chamber before they can be considered passed by the parliament. In the recent years, the role of peers has become contentious and the urgent need to address this issue is increasing being felt. ii. Historical Significance The members of HOL, traditionally represented the nobility who were consulted by the monarchy in the administration. But the end of 16th century, they had become powerful lobby and the hereditary peers had started exerting considerable influence in the overall administration processes. The reforms of 1832, substantially curtailed their powers and gave more teeth to the Lower House and set in a process of democratic franchise that was more people oriented. During the 2oth century, HOL has undergone tremendous changes and has moved from ‘co-equal to subordinate’3 (Jones, 2001, p392). While the Reform Act gave more constitutional validity to Lower House, the HOL, despite its diminished powers, was able to assert its limited authority through its veto power or power to delay bills. iii. Constitutional Relevance and Functions of HOL In the recent times, the relevance of HOL has come under increasing assault from various political and non political quarters. The relevance of non elected members of HOL is questioned because they are not seen to represent common man. The functions of HOL are same as that of House of Common. But the constitutional justification of HOL, in playing an intrinsic part in passing of bill, has become extremely controversial. HOL is made up people coming by virtue of hereditary entitlement, ecclesiastical positions (church) and patronage. They come from diverse but elite social background and most importantly, their age, gender and socio-political ideology are factors that do not instil confidence amongst the common man, who may deem their decisions as non representative of their wishes. The HOL is dominated by conservatives and since, they serve the house for life, their decisions may be considered biased by the oppositions. This is primarily the reason for reforms in the constitutional structure and relevance of HOL. Then again, the presence of HOL can be considered as principal body that can serve as effective measure to control and check the democratically elected government. In the absence of any written constitution, the Prime Minister of United Kingdom, seems to have sweeping powers. The major issues have been discussed at length on the floor of the house and decisions made accordingly. Barring the few prime ministers, the rest of the prime ministers, have followed a set code of collected decision making. But sometimes, with strong conviction of their own on certain issues, they had gone ahead with them with total disregard to public opinion or that of their colleagues. In such cases, the role of HOL becomes important. iv. Need for reforms In April 2008, the British MPs voted in favour of wholly elected House of Lords and ‘Jack Straw, the Leader of the Commons, called the result a "historic step forward" while Sir Menzies Campbell, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, predicted that it would make the second chamber "fit for a modern democracy"’4 (Telegraph, 2008). While the votes may not become law but it clearly shows that HOL, indeed, needs to undergo drastic changes. iv(a) Political legitimacy In the olden times, members of HOL wielded considerable political powers as they came from nobility. Their life long membership also went a long way in ensuring entitlement, even to undeserving candidates. After vesting more constitutional powers to the Lower House and establishing strong democratic processes, the powers of the HOL were curtailed. The political biases found amongst the members of HOL as a result of basic flaw in the composition of HOL, was the major reason for questioning the political legitimacy of HOL. iv(b) Recent experiences of UK The power of veto of HOL was replaced by its power to delay the bill by 2 years (1911), which was further reduced to one year in 1949 Parliament Act. The HOL has refused consent to some of the bills and delayed them but which were later passed without its consent. In the recent past, four major bills: The War Crimes Act, 1991; The European Parliament Election Act, 1999; The Sexual (Amendment) Act, 2002; and The Hunting with Dogs Act, 2005 was passed without the consent of the seniors. The Blair government was able to make significant inroad into the major constitutional reform proposals and were seen as highly significant as the Britain is a unitary state with all centralized power vested on the central government not having much transparency in its working processes. In 1997, removal of voting rights of hereditary peers in the House of Lords and cutting down the numbers of hereditary peers to 92 are major reforms in the composition and functions of HOL that Blair was able to implement. iv(c) Impact of democratic Processes The political ideologies and democratic pattern of a state are strong indication of the government to represent the common man. The democratic system is the most popular way of reflecting and incorporating the welfare of the masses. In UK, the members of Lower House are elected for a fix period by popular votes and the leader of the party that comes to power becomes Prime Minister. The cabinet, comprising of ministers, forms a collective political executive. The prime minister delegates and distributes responsibilities of various departments amongst various ministers who are chosen by him. ‘Since the power of the cabinet rests on the support of the majority party….places constraints on the power of both the PM and the Cabinet’5 (Jones, 2004, p129). The executive follows democratic pattern of working. All the major issues are discussed at length on the floor of the house and decisions made accordingly. Hence, it becomes important to uphold democratic functioning in the parliament. Conclusion The HOL has significant number of members and if they do not correctly represent the interests of the common man, especially in terms of gender and social background, the purpose of democratic process is defeated. It is true that the experience of the seniors does go a long way in supporting the decisions and issues of the House but it also cannot be denied that the hereditary peerage may not always come up with the same high standard of ethics and knowledge. It is therefore, vital for democratic process to improve and improvise the composition and functioning of HOL through appropriate reforms so that they do indeed serve their right purpose of representing common man. (1192) Reference Norton, Philips. (July 2000). Strengthening Parliament. The Report of Commission to strengthen Parliament. Published by Conservative Party, London. Jones, B. (2001) Politics UK (4th edition) (London: Longman), p.392 Telegraph. (19 April, 2008). Would a Wholly elected House of Lords strengthen British democracy? Available from: < http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/yourview/1544817/Would-a-wholly-elected-House-of-Lords-strengthen-British-democracy.html > [Accessed 8 December, 2008]. Jones, Bill et al,(2004), Politics UK. 5th ed. Essex, Pearson Education Limited. Read More