Tag Archives: parliament

Should we be worried about the decline of parliamentary scrutiny?

Posted on by

Complaints about declining standards of government scrutiny by parliament have been commonplace in recent times – particularly during the troubled years of Brexit and Covid. But how can such claims be objectively assessed, and crucially, have scrutiny standards since recovered? Constitution Unit Director Meg Russell addressed these questions in a recently published journal article, summarised here. She concludes that there is significant cause for concern, and that standards actually worsened under Rishi Sunak, once the Brexit and Covid crises were over. To reverse the decline, both government and parliament need to act.

Continue reading →

The Canadian Prime Minister’s request for prorogation was neither ‘illegal’ nor unconstitutional 

Posted on by

On 6 January, the Governor General of Canada granted a request for a two-month prorogation of parliament. A legal challenge was soon launched to have it declared unlawful. Steven Chaplin argues that the prorogation is perfectly proper, that it is highly unlikely that a Canadian court will rule it to be unlawful, and that comparisons with the Boris Johnson prorogation request in 2019 and the subsequent ‘Miller 2’ case do not hold up.  

Continue reading →

The controversial origins of centralised agenda control at Westminster 

Posted on by

The 1902 ‘Balfour reforms’ established a core feature of the UK House of Commons: ministers’ control of its agenda. In a new article, summarised in this blogpost, Tom Fleming, Simon Hix, and Radoslaw Zubek explore how this important change came about, and question the idea that it was adopted with cross-party consensus. 

Continue reading →

A new parliament in an old palace: where next for the Restoration and Renewal programme? 

Posted on by

Following the general election, an unusually large number of MPs entered parliament for the first time, but the building that they will be working in is in serious need of repair. Alex Meakin outlines how the previous parliament approached the problem of restoring and rebuilding a parliamentary estate that is in increasing need of serious work to make it a safe and effective venue for the UK’s legislators. She concludes that the sheer cost of the project will act as a deterrent to strong action, but that further delay will likely only increase that cost, and could result in the loss of the Palace of Westminster as a working building altogether.

Several months into the post-election parliament, the 335 MPs who were sworn in for the very first time are starting to find their way round their new workplace, navigating a building covering the same area as 16 football pitches, across 65 different levels. Along with their returning colleagues, the 2024 cohort will soon be asked to decide on the future of the Palace of Westminster: a decision which has the potential to shape the culture of the legislature for their successors. 

As the newly-elected MPs are discovering, behind the magnificent mock-Gothic exterior of the palace lies a building in disrepair. Windows that cannot be closed, mice running along the long corridors, and leaking pipes and toilets are all evidence of the major refurbishment the palace requires. Far greater evidence is hidden behind the walls and within the basement of the building, where the essential mechanical and electrical services — which provide the necessary power, ventilation, communications, and heating to the building — are now decades past their expected lifespan. Their condition leaves the building at risk of a catastrophic event, such as a fire or flood, which could risk lives as well as the future of the palace.  

Continue reading →

Labour’s removal of hereditary peers from the House of Lords: 10 key questions answered

Posted on by

Labour’s 2024 general election manifesto promised to remove the remaining hereditary peers from the House of Lords. Today, the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill has its second reading in the House of Commons. In this post, Constitution Unit Director and House of Lords expert Meg Russell explores 10 key questions about the bill and Labour’s policy. For example, who are the hereditary peers? How did they get into the House of Lords? How have they survived so long? And what effect will their departure have on the House of Lords? 

  1. How long have the hereditary peers been in the House of Lords? 

The history of the House of Lords is long and complex. It is an ancient institution, but has changed very substantially over the years. The roots of the chamber can be traced to bodies that were drawn together to advise the monarch as long ago as the medieval period. Individuals called to those early assemblies were powerful figures, including major landholders and representatives of the church. Around the 14th century they began meeting separately from others representing the people – so that parliament developed into two distinct chambers, which became the House of Lords and the House of Commons. Initially, there was no guarantee that an individual called to one meeting of the upper chamber would be called to the next. But membership gradually stabilised, and it became established that the members of the nobility who took seats would pass these down the family line along with their titles. By the 13th century the chamber included earls and barons, while the titles Duke and Marquess date to the 14th century 

Continue reading →