The call for reforms in the House of Lords (the "Lords") has always provoked intense debate and policy initiatives that spans for over 100 years. The paper outlines some of the proposals with a set of principles underlying the process: the primacy of the House of Commons (the "Commons"), complementarity, legitimacy, no dominant party, a non party-political element, diverse representation, and continuity…
While the primacy of the Commons was originally derived from its electoral mandate, it continuing relevance is furthered by its functions and roles. The Government cannot govern without the support of the Commons because it has final say on legislation. As the Royal Commission chaired by Lord Wakeham emphasised, "The House of Commons, as the principal political forum, should have the final say in respect of all major public policy issues" and "it would be wrong to restore the fully bicameral nature of the pre-1911 Parliament."3 The primary role played by the Commons rests on several factors. First, its mandate as the direct representatives of the people means that it has greater democratic legitimacy than the Lords. The Commons' power to grant or withhold supply (public expenditure) is the source of its ability to uphold or dismiss the Government. Without the Commons' consent, the Government cannot function because the Commons approves expenditure. It is thus undesirable for the reformed Lords to undermine this primacy. Changes in the Lords composition might lead to this undesirable outcome.4 The Lords cannot have the same power of public expenditure because there must only be a single route through which the Government secures its authority to govern. The Lords should have less power over the Government although it can ask the Government to reconsider a proposal without questioning the Government's authority. The primacy of the Commons is enshrined in the Parliament Acts, which limit the power of the Lords to veto legislative proposals, contain specific provisions relating to Bills on national taxation, public money or loans or their management. In a dispute between the two chambers on primary legislation, the Commons is supreme.
The Lords should neither be a rival nor a mirror of the Commons. The Lords should not also be a rubber stamp of the Government's proposals. The primary function of a second chamber is the scrutiny of proposed legislation to provide a second opinion. In order to secure the highest possible quality of legislation, a government must provide this second opinion. A second chamber is the appropriate unit to provide such second opinion as it has additional advantages in terms of the other functions, such as, examining and checking the effectiveness of the executive through questions and committees, being a forum for debate, and a representative of different interests5. In addition, the Lords complements the Commons, having a different kind of membership and providing a distinct voice in scrutinising legislation. To ensure this complementary role, no party in the Lords should have a majority of either the party-political members of the House or the House as a whole. At least 20% of the Lords should be non party-political appointments with a diverse experience. The Lords has traditionally provided a complementary function to the Commons through its composition considering the large portion of non party-political members, and the fact that its members sit as individuals rather than representing a constituency. Our political system is built around the idea of a complementary second chamber.
If the Lords is to be partly or fully elected, it maybe possible that independent candidates would be elected increasing the ...
Cite this document
(“PUBLIC LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/307164-public-law-essay
(PUBLIC LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words)
“PUBLIC LAW Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/307164-public-law-essay.
Student Name: Instructor name: Unit Name Date Introduction The British case-law and wider international academic debate was the last measure that was enacted under the government of labour which lost office in May 2010, in U.K. It is also a result of 14 years campaign by human rights and equality specialists.
Lastly, the third pillar guarantees the citizens the right to access tribunals and courts of law to deal with violations of the environmental law as well as, a violation of rights under the first two pillars. Considering that the United Kingdom (UK) lacks legal infrastructure, it still borrows from the international conventions in a bid to protect its interests.
Today, the political policies and the business interests of nations are intricately intertwined with each other, for never before the individual nations were so interdependent and connected. Thus, interactions and collaborations of the specific nations in today's complex world need to be governed by some rules.
Just like a regular Court case, the decisions are legally binding. The Court may also award damages.
While in conventional international relations discourse, states are the only political bodies awarded with acting powers in international law, the European Convention on Human Rights was the first to give to the individual the privilege of participating in international relations.
Since the Vienna Convention cannot be invoked in this case, it may be necessary to seek the legal assistance of the International Court of Justice at the Hague (A specialised organ of the UNO to deal with disputes among countries) to work out a peaceful settlement that could be accepted by all the three parties in the dispute, Countries A,B and C.
principle of the absolute sovereignty of Parliament which Dicey derived from Coke and Blackstone is being qualified (Jackson and others v Attorney General  UKHL 56, per Lord Hope of Craighead.
The theoretical basis for justification for the separation of powers centres
The court ruled that there was a need for Cabinet to preserve secrecy in order to maintain confidence.
The Standards and Privileges Committee investigated claims that Peter Mandelson – the then Secretary of State for Trade and Industry – had
3 Pages(750 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic PUBLIC LAW Essay for FREE!