amazon.co.ukParliament
A* A-level Politics revision on Parliament for AQA 7152 and Edexcel 9PL0: structure, functions, the legislative process, scrutiny of the executive and the Lords reform debate — with full 25- and 30-mark model answers.
🎯 Learning Objectives
- Describe the structure and composition of the Commons and Lords, and explain Commons primacy (AQA 3.1.2.1; Edexcel P2 2.1)
- Explain the functions of Parliament: legislation, scrutiny, representation, recruitment, deliberation and legitimacy (AQA 3.1.2.2; Edexcel P2 2.2)
- Outline the stages of the legislative process and analyse how government and backbenchers shape bills (AQA 3.1.2.3; Edexcel P2 2.3)
- Analyse the mechanisms of scrutiny — questions, select committees, debates and votes — and assess their effectiveness (AQA 3.1.2.2/3; Edexcel P2 2.4)
- Evaluate how effectively Parliament holds the executive to account (AO2/AO3)
- Evaluate arguments for and against a fully elected House of Lords (AO2/AO3)
📋 Key Definitions and Core Concepts
Bicameral parliament: A legislature with two chambers; the UK has the elected House of Commons and the unelected House of Lords.
Confidence and supply: A minimal governing arrangement in which a minority government wins confidence votes in return for support on budgets (supply) — e.g. the Conservative–DUP deal, 2017–19.
Royal assent: The monarch's formal approval of a bill, converting it into an Act; by convention assent is always granted — last refused by Queen Anne in 1708.
Salisbury Convention: The convention that the Lords does not block at second reading, or wreck, government bills enacting manifesto commitments.
Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949: Statutes limiting the Lords: money bills can be enacted without Lords consent after a month; other bills after two sessions and a one-year delay, with the Commons able to override.
Select committee: A small cross-party committee (usually 11–15 members) conducting in-depth inquiries into a department's spending, policy and administration; chairs elected since 2010.
Public bill committee: A legislative committee that examines a government bill line by line after second reading; its membership reflects the Commons party balance, so government majorities usually prevail.
Private Members' Bill: A bill introduced by a backbencher (via ballot, presentation or the ten-minute rule); rarely passes without government time, but can be landmark — e.g. the Abortion Act 1967.
Whip: An MP or peer responsible for party discipline — ensuring attendance and voting with the party; a three-line whip marks a compulsory vote.
Backbencher: An MP or peer holding no ministerial or shadow office; the source of private members' bills, committee work and backbench rebellions.
Parliamentary privilege: Freedom from legal liability for words spoken in Parliament (Article 9, Bill of Rights 1689), protecting frank debate and witnesses.
Second reading: The stage at which a chamber debates the general principles of a bill and votes on whether it proceeds.
📌 Key Points
Commons primacy: democratic mandate + Parliament Acts 1911/1949 — the Lords can delay and amend but not defeat (with rare exceptions).
Salisbury Convention: the Lords does not veto manifesto bills (tested by the Brexit amendments, 2017–19).
Functions: legislation, scrutiny, representation, recruitment of ministers, deliberation, legitimacy.
Scrutiny tools: PMQs, ministerial and urgent questions, departmental select committees (chairs elected since 2010), the Liaison Committee.
2019: May's record Commons defeats (three rejections of her Brexit deal) — the strongest modern evidence of Commons power.
Royal assent is a formality — last refused 1708; the Lords' veto was curtailed by the Parliament Acts.
Structure and composition of Parliament (AQA 3.1.2.1; Edexcel P2 2.1)
Parliament is bicameral: an elected House of Commons (650 MPs, one per constituency, elected by FPTP) and an unelected House of Lords (around 800 members). The Commons supplies the government and holds primacy: ministers are overwhelmingly drawn from it (the prime minister must, by convention, sit in the Commons), it alone approves taxation and it alone can remove a government through confidence. The Lords' powers were curtailed by the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949.
| House of Commons | House of Lords | |
|---|---|---|
| Members | 650 MPs elected by FPTP | c. 800: life peers (independent commission plus PM patronage), 92 hereditary peers (internal by-elections under the House of Lords Act 1999), 26 bishops (the Lords Spiritual) |
| Mandate | Democratic — elected | None — appointed, inherited or clerical |
| Legislative power | Full; approves money bills; can override the Lords via the Parliament Acts | Delay (one year) and amendment; cannot block money bills or manifesto commitments (Salisbury Convention) |
| Government role | Supplies the PM and most ministers; confidence role | Contains a few ministers (e.g. the Lords' Leader); no confidence role |
The Commons' work is organised around the Speaker (elected by MPs, expected to act impartially and holding a casting vote), the chamber's daily business, and constituency work — MPs spend much of the week on casework. The Lords' strengths are expertise and independence: peers face no re-election, so crossbenchers and former judges, medics and officials revise legislation with specialist knowledge. Its weaknesses are legitimacy (no mandate) and size. The hereditary element survived the 1999 Act by political compromise — a standing criticism in Lords reform essays.
Reform history matters here: the Parliament Act 1911 followed the Lords' rejection of the 1909 People's Budget, establishing Commons financial primacy; the 1949 Act shortened the delay from two years to one; the House of Lords Act 1999 removed most hereditary peers. Composition and power have shifted together — a useful analytical thread in essays.
Functions of Parliament (AQA 3.1.2.2; Edexcel P2 2.2)
Parliament performs six overlapping functions:
- Legislation: passing, amending and debating bills — the core law-making role (see the legislative process below).
- Scrutiny and accountability: questioning ministers, committee inquiries, debates and votes that hold the executive to account.
- Representation: MPs represent constituencies and interests. The classic debate is trustee vs delegate (Burke): MPs exercise judgement, or follow constituents' views. Descriptive representation — how far Parliament mirrors society — has improved (the 2024 Commons contains record gender and ethnic diversity, with over 40% women) but still lags the population.
- Recruitment of ministers: government is formed from Parliament, giving MPs a route to office and ministers a parliamentary base — a fusion of executive and legislature that also defines the UK's weak separation of powers.
- Deliberation: debating the major issues of the day — opposition days, emergency debates (e.g. the 2019 Brexit debates) and backbench business committee time.
- Legitimacy: by consenting to taxation and legislation, the elected chamber confers democratic authority on government — the deepest source of Commons primacy.
- Financial control: the Commons alone grants supply (taxation and spending); the Public Accounts Committee examines audited departmental spending — though the executive's Budget proposals are rarely amended, a historic vestige of Crown control of finance.
Evaluation point: the functions sometimes conflict. Effective scrutiny can slow legislation; representation can clash with party discipline (the whips). A strong essay weighs these tensions rather than listing functions — and notes that some functions (scrutiny) are stronger than others (initiating legislation). Financial control is real in form but weak in practice — the Budget is almost never amended, so the Commons' 'power of the purse' is largely retrospective scrutiny through the PAC.
The legislative process and parliamentary influence (AQA 3.1.2.3; Edexcel P2 2.3)
A government bill passes through: first reading (formal introduction), second reading (debate and vote on principles), committee stage (a public bill committee examines it line by line), report stage (further amendments), third reading (final approval), then the same stages in the Lords, ping-pong (exchanging amendments between the chambers) and royal assent.
In practice the executive usually controls the process. Whips enforce discipline; programme motions (timetabling, used since 1998) can limit debate; public bill committees reflect the government's majority; and the Salisbury Convention stops the Lords vetoing manifesto bills. Yet Parliament does influence legislation:
- Amendments: governments concede changes to avoid defeat; the Lords routinely amends bills — the Brexit bills (2017–19) suffered 14+ Lords defeats on Article 50 and withdrawal terms, most later accepted or reversed.
- Government defeats: May's government suffered record Commons defeats in 2019 (her withdrawal deal was rejected three times), forcing delay and reshaping Brexit — the strongest modern evidence of Commons power. Johnson's large 2019 majority made defeats rare again — showing arithmetic determines parliamentary influence. Historic defeats — the Maastricht rebellions under Major (1992–93), which forced a confidence vote — show the same pattern: small majorities empower Parliament.
- Private Members' Bills: backbenchers in the ballot occasionally pass landmark laws — the Abortion Act 1967 and the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 — though most fail without government time. Since 2010 the Backbench Business Committee (the Wright Committee reforms) gives backbenchers control of some debating time.
- Urgent questions and emergency debates: the Speaker's discretion forces ministerial statements (used aggressively by Bercow, 2009–19).
Evaluation: parliamentary influence is real but conditional — greatest when the government's majority is small, the governing party is divided, or the Lords is united. Government dominance of the timetable is the structural limit; the 2019 Brexit session, when the Commons seized control of the order paper, is the exception that proves the rule.
Scrutiny of the executive: questions, committees and votes (AQA 3.1.2.2; Edexcel P2 2.4)
- PMQs (Wednesdays): the flagship scrutiny event — adversarial and theatrical, rewarding soundbites; critics doubt its substance, but it forces the PM to answer weekly and sets the political agenda.
- Ministerial and urgent questions: written and oral questions to departments; the Speaker can grant urgent questions for immediate answers — an effective modern innovation.
- Departmental select committees (since 1979; reformed by the Wright Committee, 2010, which introduced elections for chairs and members): around 11–15 cross-party MPs inquire into spending, policy and administration; they publish reports, summon witnesses and can embarrass government — e.g. the Treasury Committee's scrutiny of the 2022 mini-budget. The Liaison Committee questions the PM several times a year. Their power is influence, not compulsion: government may ignore recommendations but rarely escapes the publicity.
- Legislative vs select committees: public bill committees examine bills; select committees examine the government — keep this distinction crisp in exams.
- Votes: the ultimate check — opposition days, motions, and the confidence mechanism. Callaghan lost confidence by one vote in 1979; the FTPA's two-thirds rule (2011) was repealed in 2022, restoring simple-majority confidence votes.
Overall assessment: scrutiny is stronger at the margins (committees, urgent questions) and weaker at the centre (PMQs, whipped votes). The strongest answers balance this and reach a supported judgement — Parliament holds ministers to account effectively when publicity and expertise combine, less effectively when party loyalty dominates.
How effective is Parliament? The Lords reform debate (AQA 3.1.2.3; Edexcel P2 2.4)
Strengths: committees influence policy and administration; amendments are frequently passed; the Lords' expertise produces detailed revision; Parliament asserted itself over Brexit (the 2019 defeats; the Benn Act 2019, which forced an extension request); e-petitions and backbench time broaden engagement.
Weaknesses: executive dominance remains the structural problem — fusion of powers, whips, timetabling control and majorities usually deliver the government's programme; PMQs is theatre; Lords reform is incomplete (hereditary by-elections, crony peerage criticism, an ever-larger chamber); governments can ignore committee reports.
Reform debates:
- A fully elected Lords: for — democratic legitimacy and no patronage; against — risks rival legitimacy with the Commons (deadlock), loses crossbench expertise, and would fill the chamber with party loyalists. The 2012 House of Lords Reform Bill was abandoned amid coalition tensions — evidence of political difficulty.
- Removing the hereditaries: the 2024 Labour government introduced legislation (the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill) to abolish the by-elections and remove the remaining hereditaries — partial reform, not full election.
- Strengthening the Commons: committee elections, more backbench time, reforming the PMQs format.
Essay logic: weigh structural executive dominance against Parliament's expanded scrutiny toolbox; use the 2019 Brexit session, committee evidence and Lords amendments as proof points; finish with a judgement on whether reform has made Parliament more effective — and whether an elected Lords would strengthen or complicate scrutiny.
💡 Worked Example
Exam-style: AQA Paper 1: 'Analyse the ways in which Parliament can hold the executive to account.' [25 marks] Edexcel Paper 2: 'Evaluate the view that select committees are the most effective means of holding the executive to account.' (30 marks)
Mark-scheme logic: Mark-scheme logic (AQA 25 marks: AO1 12 / AO2 13): AO1 — accurate coverage of scrutiny mechanisms: PMQs; ministerial and urgent questions; departmental select committees and the Liaison Committee; opposition days; legislative committees; motions and confidence votes. AO2 — developed analysis: PMQs (public accountability and agenda-setting, but adversarial theatre); select committees (cross-party expertise, elected chairs since the 2010 Wright reforms, influential reports — e.g. the Treasury Committee and the 2022 mini-budget; but government may ignore findings); urgent questions (the Speaker's discretion forces immediate ministerial answers); votes (the ultimate sanction — Callaghan's 1979 confidence loss; May's record 2019 defeats). Synthesis: scrutiny is strongest where publicity and expertise combine (committees) and weakest at the centre (PMQs, whipped majorities). Conclusion: a supported judgement. Edexcel (30 marks) additionally requires: alternative viewpoints (committees vs questions vs votes vs the Lords), a range of contemporary examples, explicit evaluation of 'most effective', and a sustained final judgement that weights the evidence.
❓ Practice Questions & Mark Schemes
Explain the term 'Salisbury Convention'. [5 marks]
Answer: The convention that the House of Lords does not block at second reading, or wreck, government bills that implement commitments in the governing party's manifesto (2 marks for the definition). It developed after 1945, when the Labour government's nationalisation programme faced a hostile, Conservative-dominated Lords; unelected peers lacked the legitimacy to defeat an elected mandate (2 marks for developed description with context). It is not legally binding and has been tested — the Lords extensively amended the Brexit bills (2017–19), though it ultimately passed them (1 mark for accuracy and example).
Analyse the powers of the House of Lords and the factors that limit them. [25 marks]
Answer: AO1: the Lords can delay other bills for up to a year (Parliament Acts 1949 — the Commons can override), amend bills extensively, question ministers and conduct inquiries; it cannot delay money bills (Parliament Act 1911) and by convention does not block manifesto commitments (Salisbury Convention). AO2: (1) Revision power — peers' expertise and independence from re-election produce detailed amendment: the Brexit bills were amended dozens of times (2017–19) and governments often concede Lords changes. (2) Delay and leverage — the Lords can hold a bill between sessions, forcing negotiation; the Parliament Acts have been used rarely (e.g. War Crimes Act 1991, Hunting Act 2004, Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000), showing the Lords' power normally deters rather than is overridden. (3) Scrutiny — Lords committees such as the Constitution Committee give authoritative review of constitutional bills. Limits: the Salisbury Convention, the democratic legitimacy deficit, the Parliament Acts' ultimate override, the money-bill exclusion, and the chamber's size. Counter-analysis: when a government lacks a mandate or majority, the Lords' power expands — 2017–19 Brexit is the key example. Conclusion: the Lords' powers are real but ultimately subordinate to the elected chamber; its influence is greatest when the Commons' own legitimacy is contested.
Evaluate the view that Parliament is effective in holding the executive to account. (30 marks)
Answer: In support: departmental select committees (chairs elected since 2010) conduct rigorous inquiries — the Public Accounts Committee and the Treasury Committee forced transparency over the 2022 mini-budget; the Liaison Committee questions the PM several times a year; urgent questions compel immediate ministerial answers; and the Commons can defeat governments — May's record defeats (2019) forced Brexit delays and produced the Benn Act. The Lords' expertise adds scrutiny (e.g. the Constitution Committee's review of constitutional bills). Against: (1) PMQs rewards theatre — adversarial soundbites over substance. (2) Executive dominance: whips, programme motions and majorities usually pass the government's programme; committees' power is influence, not compulsion, and reports can be ignored. (3) Party loyalty limits independence — rebellions are rare, and constituents' interests can be overridden by discipline. Counter-evaluation: effectiveness is conditional — highest when governments are weak or divided (1979, 2017–19), lower under strong majorities (Johnson, 2019–20). The 2019 Brexit episode shows the Commons asserting itself where it matters most: control of the timetable and the government's survival. Judgement: Parliament is effective at the margins and at moments of crisis, but structurally the executive usually prevails — a balanced verdict with a supported conclusion is what earns the top levels.
Evaluate the view that the House of Lords should be fully elected. (30 marks)
Answer: In support: legitimacy — no other part of the legislature lacks a democratic mandate; election would remove patronage and cronyism (criticism of recent dissolution and resignation honours lists), the anachronistic hereditary by-elections and the bishops. An elected chamber could claim the moral authority to check the Commons more robustly. Against: (1) Rival legitimacy — two elected chambers could deadlock, as in the USA and Australia; the current asymmetry (Commons primacy under the Parliament Acts) ensures swift government formation and keeps one chamber free to scrutinise without re-election pressures. (2) Expertise — appointed peers (crossbenchers, former judges, scientists, medics) bring independent specialist knowledge that elected politicians seeking re-election may lack; the Lords' revising quality depends on independence. (3) Electoral dynamics — election would fill the Lords with party loyalists, defeating its purpose as a revising chamber. Counter-evaluation: partial reform is realistic — removing the hereditaries (the 2024 bill), limiting size, tightening appointments — while preserving appointment. The abandoned 2012 Reform Bill shows full election is politically difficult. Judgement: a fully elected Lords would solve the legitimacy problem but at the cost of expertise and legislative efficiency; the stronger position argues that legitimacy can be improved without election — and reaches a reasoned verdict on that basis.
Analyse the main functions of Parliament. [25 marks]
Answer: AO1: legislation (passing and amending bills); scrutiny and accountability (questions, committees, debates); representation (constituencies; trustee vs delegate); recruitment of ministers (government drawn from Parliament); deliberation (opposition days, emergency debates); legitimacy (consent to taxation and laws). AO2: (1) Legislation and legitimacy are linked — the elected Commons' consent is what makes law democratic; the Salisbury Convention protects this principle in the Lords. (2) Scrutiny constrains the executive: departmental committees since 1979 (the Wright reforms of 2010 added elected chairs) and weekly PMQs — though scrutiny can slow legislation and PMQs rewards theatre. (3) Representation can clash with party discipline: the whips versus constituents; Burke's trustee model gives MPs judgement, the delegate model demands mandate-following. (4) Recruitment fuses executive and legislature — a weak separation of powers, but it ensures ministers face Parliament. Counter-analysis: the functions vary in effectiveness — law-making is usually government-dominated (programme motions, whipped committees); scrutiny is strongest in committees; legitimacy is the Commons' unique asset. Conclusion: Parliament's functions interlock around one core — conferring democratic legitimacy — but their effectiveness differs by function and by the government's parliamentary strength.