1. Structure of parliament

2. Origins of parliament
Kings always had to consult with leading, powerful nobles
During the reign of William I this meeting was known as the Great Council – the king would consult on important issues with his nobles and bishops
The word parliament comes from ‘parler’, to talk, i.e. a talking shop.
The role of parliament at this time was mainly to supply money to the king

4. Growth of parliament’s power
In the seventeenth century parliament established its supremacy over the king as a result of the English civil war and the Glorious Revolution
In the eighteenth century the kings became even less powerful as the power of the Prime Minister e.g. Walpole increased. (The P.M. and other ministers were part of parliament).
In the nineteenth century democracy (the vote being exercised by large numbers) and the resulting development of mass political parties took the away the residual power of the king and created the modern parliamentary democracy.

5. House of Commons All MPs win their seat in the same way
The HOC consists of 646 MPs (not fixed and varies depending on the constituency)
Each MP is elected by a single-member parliamentary constituency using the FPTP voting
MPs are almost always representatives of a party and are subject to a system of party discipline (only 2 independents in 2005)
Most MPs are categorised as backbenchers while a minority are categorised as frontbenchers

6. Powers
The HOC is politically and legally the dominant chamber of Parliament
There is a difference with formal powers of the HOC enshrined in law and the constitutional theory:
HOC has supreme legislative power: in theory the Commons can make, unmake and amend any law it wishes with the House of Lords only able to delay. The legal sovereignty exercised in practice by the Commons (subject to higher authority of EU Laws and treaties)
The HOC alone can remove the government of the day: Convention of collective responsibility. A government defeated in the Commons on a major issue or a matter of confidence is obliged to resign or to call a general election

7. Reforming the Legislature: The Commons and the Lords

8. Bicameralism vs Unicameralism
Unicameralism – single legislative chamber
Strength of legislature vis-à-vis executive depends on nature of party system
Bicameralism – two legislative chambers
Weak vs strong bicameralism
Strong: 2 chambers have equal power (symmetrical)
Weak: lower chamber dominant (asymmetrical)
2 chambers can be (s)elected on different basis
Strong bicameralism in federal states
Weak bicameralism or unicameralism in unitary states
The stronger the bicameralism, the stronger the legislature vis-à-vis executive in parliamentary systems

9. House of Lords & Executive (1)
Lords once more powerful than Commons
Representation of different social classes
Composition: mainly hereditary peers (& Law Lords, bishops)
Once had unlimited power to veto legislation
Parliament Act 1911 – weakened Lords
Bill could become law without Lords’ consent after 2 years, money bills after 1 month; aspired to remove hereditaries
Parliament Act 1949 – 2 yrs delay cut to 1 year
Attlee Govt worried Lords would block radical policies
Salisbury Convention emerged
UK: weak bicameralism

10. Uses of the Parliament Acts
Welsh Church Act 1914
Disestablished Welsh part of Church of England
Home Rule Act 1914
Home Rule for Ireland (never implemented)
Parliament Act 1949
Amended Parliament Act 1911
War Crimes Act 1991
Enabled UK to prosecute Nazi war criminals for activities outside UK
Only time Parliament Acts used by a Conservative Govt
European Parliamentary Elections Act 1999
Changed voting system for Euro elections
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000
Lowered age of consent for homosexuals from 18 to 16
Hunting Act 2004
Banned fox-hunting and hare coursing

11. House of Lords & Executive (2)
1958 – Life Peerages Act
Enable prominent experts/public figures to enter Lords
Appointed by PM
Title dies with holder
1968 – Wilson: stop hereditary voting: defeated
Powers and functions
Legislation
Deliberation
Scrutiny – important committees
Previously Supreme Court of Appeal (Law Lords)
Constitutional Reform Act 2005 created new Supreme Court –opened in October 2009

12. New Labour – Reforming the Lords
Hereditary peers – conservative block on New Labour’s aspirations
Two-stage reforms – (1) remove hereditary Lords; (2) construct newly-composed chamber
Tories opposed removing hereditary Lords
‘Cranbourne compromise’ – keep 92 hereditary Lords
Interim House – politically rebalanced: no party had majority
Govt established Royal Commission to look into Stage 2 – composition, functions, powers

13. Composition of House of Lords 2009
Life Peers
Hereditaries
Lords Spiritual
TOTAL
Labour
210 4 -
214
Conservative
148 48
196
Liberal Dems 66 5 71
Crossbenchers
169 32
201
Bishops 26
Others 15 2 17
608 91
725

14. Stage 2 – Still Incomplete
Royal Commission (Wakeham) 2000
550 members: 67, 87 or 195 elected
White Paper, consultation, joint-committee
2003: Lords voted for 100% appointment; Commons rejected all proposals!
Dept of Const Affairs Sept 2003 – all-appointed
White Paper 2007
Remove hereditaries
Part-appointed, part-elected: 15-year terms, 1/3 elected every five years by regional list PR
March 2007: Commons voted for 100% elected; Lords voted for 100% appointed!

15. Future of the Lords (1) Debate: composition > powers
Power underlies debate: election  greater legitimacy
Interim Lords flexing muscles
Salisbury Convention obsolete?
PM – too much patronage power?
Is an elected chamber a good thing?
Replicate party system in Lords
Unsuitable for scrutiny role?

16. Future of the Lords (2)
What is the purpose of a second chamber in a non-federal state?
Function > election?
Democracy less important because Lords doesn’t choose, maintain or remove Govt & not involved in finance?
Dual democratic legitimacies?
Deadlock vs rubberstamp?
Does present Lords show election unnecessary for upper chamber to check Govt and have legitimacy?

17. The Lords What are the main arguments for and against Lords Reform?
What are the Pro’s and Con’s of an unelected second chamber?

18. Parliamentary Scrutiny
Broader question: how effective are parliamentary checks on the executive?
Debates on Lords reform: praise for Lords’ scrutinising role
Strengthen Commons select committees?
But major barrier to parliamentary scrutiny = whipping system and party loyalty
Some evidence of greater willingness of backbench MPs to rebel against Govt

19. Electoral Reform for Commons
Parliament weak because 2-party system
… which derives from FPTP electoral system
PR  Coalition Govts
Scotland/Wales
Executive more answerable to legislature
Problem for reformers: Labour & Tories not (usually) interested in PR – prefer single-party majority Govts

20. Seat-Vote Differentials in UK General Elections, 1964-2005
Note: Vertical axis measures (% seats won) minus (% votes won). Figures above zero indicate ‘unearned’ seats in parliament; figures below zero indicate ‘deprivation’ of seats; zero indicates perfect proportionality.

21. Jenkins Report 1998 Labour manifesto 1997 – electoral reform
Terms of Reference of Jenkins Committee
Keep constituency link
Strong Govt
Broad proportionality
Extend voter choice
Recommended AV+
Voters have 2 votes
AV in constituencies – MPs win 50% + 1 votes
Top-up MPs elected on regional lists (list PR element)
Top-up MPs = 15-20% (bit more proportional than FPTP)
Illegitimate? – Lab-Lib Dem stitch-up?
Never implemented

22. Conclusion
Major check on executive would be electoral reform – referendum promised in Labour’s next manifesto
Lords reform is secondary by comparison…
… but still important
UK’s bicameralism strong in 1900, weak in 1980s, but somewhat stronger in 2009 – Lords enjoys greater legitimacy today