Transformative model of UK Parliament
In the UK, the system of government is often described as an 'elected dictatorship'. This is because for the majority of the time, the governing party holds the majority of MPs in the House of Commons, which gives them almost absolute control. Moreover, since the Royal Prerogative and many powers previously owned by the Crown have been passed over to the Prime Minister, the PM can be said to essentially be the elected dictator of our country. Also, in our country we have 3 models of Parliament: the Westminster model, the Whitehall model and the Transformative model. The Westminster model is the system in which Parliament is the highest body in the UK, and has key policy-making influence, however this system is now extremely outdated. The Westminster model makes Parliament essentially irrelevant, as it has no policy-making influence. This model was largely accepted until 1980. In recent years, many would say that Britain has moved to a more Transformative model, in which, while the executive is still powerful, Parliament still has some policy-making influence, but is far more reactionary to government initiatives rather than proactive in creating its own policies. This essay will argue that nowadays, our system of Parliament is very close to the Transformative model.
The UK has a system of Parliamentary government, in which the executive (government) is made from the legislative (Parliament). Because of this, the government usually holds the majority of the seats in the House of Commons, which makes the governing party extremely powerful because they will have the majority of MPs, and thus votes in Parliamentary votes. The power that the government holds is especially great when they are able to hold a large majority in the House of Commons, as it would then take an extremely large amount of opposition within their own party to defeat them. For example, in Blair's government he held huge majority of 178, wherein it would take a backbench revolt of 90 of his own MPs and every opposition MP to defeat them. This is also shown by the fact that throughout his government, he was only defeated on 4 occasions. Also, because of our FPTP system that we use for Westminster elections, the governing party almost always has a majority in the House of Commons. This is evidenced by the fact that since 1945, only on 2 occasions - 1974 and 2010 - has the UK general election resulted in minority governments, with the 2010 election resulting in a coalition government, whereas since 1945 there have been 6 occasions on which an election has resulted in the government with a majority of 100 or more MPs - 1945 (146), 1959 (100), 1983 (144), 1987 (102), 1997 (178) and 2001 (167). In this way, government is shown to be not that constrained by Parliament, as for most of the time they end with a large enough majority to support the theory of the UKs elected dictatorship. However, the very fact that elections do not always go so well for government shows that they can and often are restrained by Parliament. Since 2005 there have only been small majorities in the House of Commons, along with the 2010 coalition having to be formed. However, overall the government still usually remains powerful for these reasons. Government is usually only weak with a small majority, which is unlikely under the FPTP voting system used for Westminster elections. While popular sovereignty is on the rise, and has caused many MPs to become far more individualistic, as shown by the coalition's incessant backbench revolts, government still usually remains powerful. However, the opposition they face in Parliament must not be undermined, and therefore, Parliament restrains government, but only to a small degree.
Another way in which government can be said to be restrained by Parliament is through the decline of party unity, and rise of popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty, unlike Parliamentary sovereignty, is when the will of the people is placed above all else. When referendums occur, it is an example of popular sovereignty taking place. Moreover, great emphasis is placed on respecting and accepting popular sovereignty. The executive and legislative are made from the general election in which the British electorate votes, and thus the electorate holds true power. For example, while most MPs are pro-remain for the EU, the British electorate voted leave with a 51% majority, and thus popular sovereignty is now being respected by Theresa May in regard to the referendum. However, while popular sovereignty is not a factor that causes government to be restrained by Parliament, it has caused a decline in party unity as MPs have become more individualistic, resulting in government being more restrained by Parliament. For example, in recent years party unity has noticeably declined. The coalition faced the most backbench results of any government since 1945, as between 2010 and 2015, coalition MPs revolted in 35% of divisions, beating the previously most rebellious government of Blair's 2005-2010 government of 28%. This shows how in recent years, party unity has noticeably declined, with the number of backbench revolts increasing as MPs become far more concerned about their constituents than their parties. However, in a way this can also said to be not so restraining on government. While the unity of the governing party has declined, so has that of many opposition parties. For instance, our current governing party are the Conservatives, who, while they are deeply divided, are still not as divided as the Labour or UKIP parties, as Labour is threatening to implode, while UKIP is becoming increasingly irrelevant due to its lack of direction. However, overall, this does show that government is somewhat restrained by Parliament. While party unity has decreased, there are some ways in which government still remains powerful, and government remains especially powerful so long as they hold a large majority. At the same time, however, party unity has resulted in more defeats for government in the commons, and it is largely as a result in growing popular sovereignty.
Other than popular sovereignty, Parliamentary sovereignty still remains intact. Because of the large numbers of bodies and chambers in the UKs quasi-federal system, there are many ways in which Parliament can restrain government, for example through the devolved bodies, and especially the House of Lords. While the Welsh and Northern Ireland Assemblies are relatively weak, the Scottish Parliament is quite powerful and can provide a huge power block to the governing party if they do not control Scottish Parliament. Because of the 2015 election however, the governing party (the Conservatives), do not hold Scottish Parliament, which is held by the SNP. Overall, Scotland makes up 56 seats, which is an extremely large amount for a smaller party to hold in opposition to the governing party in the Commons, with the SNP holding 54 of those seats. Moreover, while party unity has declined for most parties, the SNP has remained extremely united, voting as a block on most issues, which puts a great restrain on the current government that only has a majority of 12. Furthermore, in recent years the powers of the Lords has increased. While the Lords can still only use the power of delay to halt government legislation that has been passed in the commons, that power is still a great one. The government, while they can use the Parliament Act to overturn the Lords at any stage, prefer not to do so, as it takes a long time to enact. The Lords can delay any government legislation for a year, and then can delay it even further by passing it back and forth between the houses as well, and thus the Government usually comes to a compromise. This is shown by the fact that the Parliament Act used to overturn the Lords has only ever been used on 4 occasions. However, there are ways in which this does not limit government power so much. For example, the devolved bodies, including Scottish Parliament, are still too small and weak to have much effect on the governing party, and so they need support from other parties to overturn legislation. Furthermore, the Lords still can't stop government legislation from being passed, only delay it, which shows how weak they still are. Overall, this shows how government once again is somewhat restrained by Parliament. Only in special circumstances, such as now with a government with a small majority and a united Scotland can the devolved bodies have much effect in Parliament. However, the Lords are still valuable in restraining government, as the Lords usually take it upon themselves to oppose and unwanted moves made by governments with large majorities. Therefore, this shows how Parliament somewhat restrains government.
In conclusion, government is somewhat restrained by Parliament. The model of Parliament used in the UK is the Transformative model, as shown by the evidence given of declining party unity, increasing Lords powers and the recently increased power of the devolved bodies through the SNP. However, the Transformative model is still closer to the Whitehall model than it is to the Westminster model, due to the fact that when a government has a large majority, the only sector of Parliament that can truly oppose it is the House of Lords, which is unable to overturn government legislation, and can only delay it. While popular sovereignty does not show how Parliamentary sovereignty can restrain government, it does increase Parliamentary power in terms of decreasing party unity, which also helps to restrain government power.