Essay
Politics Essay Pack Paper 2
- Course
- Institution
All possible essay questions for your Politics Paper 2 Edexcel written in-full. Covers every part of the specification
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
nastiayevtushenko
Content preview
Constitution1. Evaluate the view that the need for further English devolution is now overdue.
Devolution is the process of delegating powers away from Westminster and to the regions and cities
of the UK. Since the devolution settlements enacted by the Blair government to Scotland, Wales and
Northern Ireland, many have questioned the unequal sharing of powers, particularly in England. In
recent years, a number of metro mayors have been introduced to resolve this issue. However, these
only cover a fraction of England, and they have considerably weaker powers than the regions. It will
be argued, after evaluating the power of the metro mayors, the West Lothian question and whether an
English Parliament needs to come about, that indeed there is a need for a radical further devolution to
England. This is by increasing the powers and scope of the metro mayors.
Metro mayors were introduced in England in some areas, and they have been successful in many
ways and it can be argued that it is now necessary for them to be extended across the whole of
England and for their powers to be extended to the same extent as the London Mayor. This would
allow local areas to have a representative to deal with problems their area is facing. This is of high
significance as Westminster can be seen as a 'bubble' where nothing is done for local areas. We can
also see the successes of metro mayors through Andy Burnham who is the Mayor of Manchester and
recently introduced an integrated transport system and brought it under mayoral control, and the
benefits have been seen by the citizens of Manchester. Johnson was also effective as London Mayor
in introducing environmental measures. This highlights how local areas are benefitting from the
introduction of metro mayors so further devolution is becoming necessary.
However, turnout remains low in devolved assemblies which suggests they are not seen as important
to the rest of the public, for example in the London Mayoral election turnout was only 42%. By
introducing more devolved assemblies it has created voter fatigue and the public are becoming
confused. There is already a lack of political awareness and understanding of our current system, by
intensifying the system it is going to confuse the public and be a futile process. However, the fact that
only some areas have Mayors is increasingly unfair and needs to be solved so further English
devolution is overdue in the form of Mayors.
English devolution is needed due to the problem of the West Lothian Question. Westminster
parliament fosters asymmetrical devolution as it allows Scottish MPs to vote on laws which do not
concern them. This has proved very problematic in the past, for example when Blair used Scottish
MPs to push through the law that introduced tuition fees in England whilst Scottish university would
remain free. There is currently a lot of resentment regarding this and by devolving powers this unfair
system would be prevented.
However, attempts to deal with the West Lothian question through English Votes for English Laws
(EVEL) have been abandoned as they seemed unfair and unnecessary. There is also the argument
that there is not a large demand for this issue to be solved and arguably mayors have already
satisfied this demand which would make the process of increased devolution futile. Thus it could be
argued that further devolution is not necessary, however, whilst it may not be a prominent issue to the
public it continues to take place and is unfair for Scottish MPs to vote on issues that don't concern
them and is affecting the unknowing population. Therefore it would be fair to argue that further
devolution is overdue.
A fully fledged English parliament would prevent the asymmetrical devolution which has taken place in
Scotland and Ireland. This could consist of mayors from across the country and focus on British
issues which would be beneficial to the public as it would allow more of a focused response to local
,issues. Moreover it could help to resolve the Barnett formula, currently just under £2,000 more per
head is spent on the Scots which is completely unfair and something needs to be done to combat this.
An English parliament would be the ultimate solution in preventing the continuation of asymmetrical
devolution and public spending.
However, English MPs already dominate Westminster and it can be argued that there really isn't a
need for another parliament. English MPs would become redundant and it would be a costly, time
consuming process, this time and money could be better invested elsewhere. However, it can be
argued that English devolution is overdue, as it would combat asymmetrical devolution which is
currently a large issue in the UK and help to resolve the spending differences.
On balance, devolution for England has been less successful than it has been for other devolved
regions. Therefore, while there might not be high demand for increased devolution within society, it is
much needed to combat the asymmetry that has taken place between the devolved bodies.
, 2. Evaluate the view that the UK constitution is in urgent need of further reform.
The UK constitution has undergone a number of substantial reforms in the past few decades, starting
with Labour but continuing with the reforming conservative governments. However, this reform has
been piecemeal and has often created more problems. A bi-partisan constitutional consensus needs
to be achieved to reform the constitution in three key areas: parliamentary reform, possibly
codification and finally, greater and symmetrical devolution. This cannot wait, and thus, it is clear that
further reform is urgent and necessary.
By parliamentary reform, we mean reform to the Commons and the Lords. A fully or partly elected
House of Lords would have greater legitimacy to challenge the House of Commons. It would
democratise the UK as the Lords would be accountable to the public. Furthermore, cronyism must be
removed - the appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority. For example, Johnson
appointed Lebedev - son of a KGB agent, to the Lords, even after MI6 sent their reservations. The
lack of reform means the UK parliament remains out of sync with other liberal democracies, leading to
democratic deficit. However, another elected chamber could possibly create gridlock in government: a
situation where two or more branches of government have the power to stop each other from acting
and therefore no governance takes place. This would be highly ineffective. Furthermore, a
non-elected house allows for specialist knowledge, its members can be chosen on the basis of
experience and expertise, careerist politicians would be of no benefit to the political system. For
example the current House of Lords contains experts such as Lord Sainsbury and Lord Sugar.
It can be argued that the UK must reform the UK constitution into a codified form. A codified
constitution would entrench civil rights and liberties preventing the government from infringing them.
The uncodified nature of the UK constitution led Dominic Raab to attempt to repeal the Human Rights
Act 98. It’s possible that new attempts will arise in the future. Furthermore, an uncodified constitution
allows the parliament to pass legislation which contradicts human rights. For example, recently the
right to protest near Parliament has been restricted by the Conservatives, undermining the right for
free transportation, for which the ruling party was heavily criticised by Labour. These examples show
that there is an urgent need for codification of the UK constitution. However, the UK's uncodified
constitution offers flexibility and the ability to respond quickly to changing social, economic and
political circumstances. For example, the outlawing of guns after the Dunblane Massacre, which killed
15 children and their teacher, and has prevented any future school shootings. In the USA, where they
have a codified constitution, the right to bear arms is entrenched in their constitution and cannot be
changed meaning school shootings continue. Codifying a constitution would also take away the
parliamentary sovereignty which is one of the twin pillars of the UK constitution. Therefore, we can
maintain the view that the UK constitution is not in urgent need of further reform in terms of
codification.
It can be argued that there needs to be further reform in the UK's constitution in regards to enforcing
enhanced and symmetrical devolution. English devolution is needed due to the problem of the West
Lothian Question. Westminster parliament fosters asymmetrical devolution as it allows Scottish MPs
to vote on laws which do not concern them. This has proved very problematic in the past, for example
when Blair used Scottish MPs to push through the law that introduced tuition fees in England whilst
Scottish university would remain free. There is currently a lot of resentment regarding this and by
devolving powers this unfair system would be prevented. However, attempts to deal with the West
Lothian question through English Votes for English Laws (EVEL) have been abandoned as they
seemed unfair and unnecessary. There is also the argument that there is not a large demand for this
issue to be solved and arguably mayors have already satisfied this demand which would make the
process of increased devolution futile. Thus it could be argued that further devolution is not necessary,
and therefore there is no need for the UK constitution to be reformed.
, 3. Evaluate the view that constitutional reforms since 2010 have not gone far enough.
Constitutional reform is the means by which changes are made to the way that the UK is governed. It
can include devolution, reform to the House of Lords and changes to the way rights are protected.
First of all, since 2010 there have been a number of parliamentary reforms which modernised the UK
constitution. For example, the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 made resignation from the House
possible, as well as removal for non-attendance, and automatic expulsion upon conviction for a
serious criminal offence (if resulting in a jail sentence of at least one year). For supporters, this gave
the House greater legitimacy even without the introduction of elections. However, a stronger
counter-argument of insufficient constitutional reform is the failed electoral system reform. Under the
coalition of Lib Dems and Conservatives, a referendum took place on the AV electoral system. Its
outcome turned out to be negative, therefore, the FPTP electoral system remains for UK general
elections and continues to produce unproportional outcomes. Furthermore, there remain 92 hereditary
peers in the House of Lords and it is fundamentally undemocratic to have unelected people
representing the wider public. Therefore, we can maintain the view that constitutional reforms in
parliament since 2010 have not gone far enough.
Second of all, since 2010 many devolved bodies have been given more powers. As of today, Scotland
has immense powers including those over income tax as dictated by the 2012 Scotland Act, and this
means that Scotland can operate almost entirely as its own country without needing to get anything
from Westminster. The power of the devolved nations was seen in 2020 with the devolved powers in
relation to the Covid lockdown, where the assemblies had powers over their own countries and
enforced their own laws, which demonstrates that they do have enough power to be successful.
Scotland had enough power that they would call and ask for a referendum on Scottish Independence;
whilst this did not go the way they had hoped for it highlights they had the power to be able to make
the Westminster government allow them to hold a referendum on such a big constitutional issue.
However, other than Scotland none of the devolved powers have complete control over their tax
powers, which means that tax, being a large issue to many voters, remains a key issue that the voters
cannot discuss with their own Parliament’s, creating conflict. The Northern Ireland government has
limited powers and the lack of success of this government can be seen through the regular
suspension of Stormont and introduction of Direct rule from Westminster, which highlights that
devolved nations do not have enough power to be successful. +(Rishi Sunak vetoed the Gender
Recognition bill)
There has been a number of legislation passed since 2010 which ensured greater protection of
human rights. Such as the Equalities Act 2010 which protected citizens from discrimination in nine key
areas such as gender, race, religion etc. Another act passed to advance human rights is the Marriage
Act 2014 passed under Cameron. It allowed for same sex marriage to take place in England and
Wales. However, it can be argued that there is still a need for a codified constitution. Due to the
uncodified nature of the UK constitution and parliamentary sovereignty, the government can
effectively pass any law it wants. For example, the Conservatives recently passed The Police, Crime,
Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 which placed restrictions on the right to protest. Another example is
Dominic Raab making plans to repeal the HRA, giving the government more power to choose when
rights should be upheld. Overall, the constitutional reforms focussed at strengthening human rights
have not gone enough, especially considering the risk that the HRA might get repealed.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller nastiayevtushenko. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $33.04. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
60281 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now