Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Please check the examination details below before entering your candidate information
Candidate surname Other names
Centre Number Candidate Number
Pearson Edexcel
Level 3 GCE
Time 2 hours
Paper
reference 9PL0/02
Politics
Advanced
PAPER 2: UK Government and Non-core Political Ideas
You do not need any other materials. Total Marks
Instructions
• Use black ink or ball-point pen.
• Fill in the boxes at the top of this page with your name,
centre number and candidate number.
• There are two sections and you must answer three questions:
– in Section A answer either 1(a) or 1(b) and then either 2(a) or 2(b)
– in Section B answer either 3(a) or 3(b), 4(a) or 4(b), 5(a) or 5(b), 6(a) or 6(b),
7(a) or 7(b).
• Answer the questions in the spaces provided
− there may be more space than you need.
• Calculators must not be used.
Information
• The total mark for this paper is 84.
• – usemarks
The for each question are shown in brackets
this as a guide as to how much time to spend on each question.
Advice
• Read each question carefully before you start to answer it.
• Good luck
Check your answers if you have time at the end.
• with your examination.
Turn over
*P66603A0124*
P66603A Downloaded by: TESTBANKNURSING | sheltonhiqta35@gmail.com
©2021 Pearson Education Ltd.
Distribution of this document is illegal
1/1/1/1/1
, Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
SECTION A: UK GOVERNMENT
Answer ONE question from either Question 1(a) or Question 1(b) and then
answer ONE question from either Question 2(a) or Question 2(b).
EITHER
1 (a) This source is adapted from an article in the Financial Times in November 2019.
Source 1
Nigel Farage claimed that Brexit party supporters were offered peerages in an
attempt to persuade the party not to field parliamentary candidates in the 2019
general election. After the general election, Farage vowed to campaign for a
new political system by reforming the Lords, which he states has no democratic
legitimacy. The average age of peers is 70 with too few women. The system of
appointment produces an unprofessional chamber with ‘working’ and ‘non-working’
peers. Lacking legitimacy, the chamber is too weak to do its job. In 2015, research
suggested a relationship between large political donors and nominations to the
Lords is statistically significant.
However, the Lords display ‘independence of thought’ with many crossbenchers not
being aligned to any political parties; many members see it as their duty to hold
governments to account. Governments are regularly defeated in the Lords, which
provides expert advice and informed scrutiny to the process of legislation. The
independent House of Lords Appointments Commission vets all nominations for life
peers, including those nominated by party leaders. This has increased the numbers of
experts selected, and the Lords is now more representative: over 25% are women and
around 6% come from ethnic minorities.
Source: adapted from https://www.ft.com/content/2c8bb0a8-06fc-11ea-a984-fbbacad9e7dd
Using the source, evaluate the view that the roles and membership of the House
of Lords require reform.
In your response you must:
• compare and contrast different opinions in the source
• examine and debate these views in a balanced way
• analyse and evaluate only the information presented in the source.
(30)
Downloaded by: TESTBANKNURSING | sheltonhiqta35@gmail.com
Distribution of this document is illegal
2
, Stuvia.com - The Marketplace to Buy and Sell your Study Material
Do not answer Question 1(b) if you have answered Question 1(a).
OR
1 (b) This source is adapted from a Guardian article in September 2019. It reports on the
unanimous judgement by the Supreme Court that the proroguing of Parliament
by Boris Johnson was unlawful. The Court ruled that the original decision by the
High Court was void, and the Speaker recalled Parliament.
Source 2
Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen called the Supreme Court’s judgement ‘…an
absolute disgrace. It’s the worst possible outcome for our democracy, with unelected
judges completely ignoring the referendum vote we had in 2016 to leave the
European Union.’
Critics argue that the Court has become too powerful, undermining parliamentary
sovereignty in areas like ‘Brexit’, where judges should not stray. The increased use
of judicial review means that in effect Parliament, as well as government, is often
challenged. Our system, having no separation of powers, lacks clarity, which has
enabled the Supreme Court to undermine Parliament.
However, Gina Miller said this is ‘a win for parliamentary sovereignty, against an over-
mighty executive’. It is right that the legality of the Prime Minister’s decision was
challenged as he was denying Parliament the right to scrutinise his ‘Brexit’ policy.
Judicial reviews are an essential component of the rule of law, often upholding the
will of Parliament against an executive that oversteps its powers under legislation.
With no separation of powers or a codified constitution, the Court has helped to
rebalance the relationship between Parliament and the executive. However, critics
argue declarations of incompatibility made by the Court challenge the sovereignty of
Parliament and can be controversial.
Source: adapted from a Guardian article in September 2019
Using the source, evaluate the view that the Supreme Court has strengthened
parliamentary sovereignty.
In your response you must:
• compare and contrast different opinions in the source
• examine and debate these views in a balanced way
• analyse and evaluate only the information presented in the source.
(30)
Downloaded by: TESTBANKNURSING | sheltonhiqta35@gmail.com
Distribution of this document is illegal
3
