220 likes | 353 Views
The Rise of Parliament?. Philip Cowley. How to get it wrong. The Executive in Britain is now more powerful in relation to Parliament than it has been probably since the time of Walpole… The whips have enforced party discipline more forcefully and fully than they did in the past.
E N D
The Rise of Parliament? Philip Cowley
How to get it wrong The Executive in Britain is now more powerful in relation to Parliament than it has been probably since the time of Walpole… The whips have enforced party discipline more forcefully and fully than they did in the past.
How to get it wrong II Labour backbenchers — the most supine Members of Parliament in British history — must decide where their loyalty lies. – Roy Hattersley (2005) The House of Commons… had [1995] yet to adopt that posture of slavishness and ineffectuality that now characterises it. - Simon Heffer (2005)
The rise of the Lords • Effectively dead in 1950s • More than 400 defeats since 1999 • Russell and Scaria: 40% stick • Forget Tony’s cronies • Hung (28%) – and will stay so (until election)
MPs now more likely… • to come from their constituency • to live in their constituencies • to have staffed offices in their constituency • to spend time in the constituency • to receive mail (and emails) • to be writing to their constituents
…and more likely to defy the whip • A majority of 60+, but four defeats • Free votes and other retreats • Rebellions runs at 27% in first session • Other victories by single figures • Other victories thanks to Conservative support
Getting it right… Still there, for example, are 56 of those who voted against the Government’s last Prevention of Terrorism Bill, introduced just before the 2005 election, and easily enough to defeat the Government should they mishandle similar legislation now, even after the recent terrorist attacks.
A change of leader? • A honeymoon period (Callaghan, Major) • But… (Callaghan, Major) • Policy direction • Policy narrative • Policy formulation and inclusion
Who represented not their country but themselves, and always kept together in a close and undivided phalanx, impenetrable either by shame or honour, voting always the same way, and saying always the same things, as if they were no longer voluntary agents but so many engines merely turned about by a mechanic motion, like an organ where the great humming basses as well as the little squeaking trebles are filled but with one blast of wind from the same sound board?
Who represented not their country but themselves, and always kept together in a close and undivided phalanx, impenetrable either by shame or honour, voting always the same way, and saying always the same things, as if they were no longer voluntary agents but so many engines merely turned about by a mechanic motion, like an organ where the great humming basses as well as the little squeaking trebles are filled but with one blast of wind from the same sound board? -- 1698