|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
138268
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Amid the fallout from the Scottish independence referendum, a UK constitutional convention has been proposed as a mechanism to take stock not only of the referendum, but also of the past fifteen years of devolution. However, despite longstanding conceptions of British constitutional development, a constitutional convention would not herald a brave new world for the UK's constitution. As the article highlights, in the past hundred years there have been two attempts to treat the territorial constitution in the round: the Speaker's Conference on Devolution, 1919–1920 and the Royal Commission on the Constitution, 1969–1973. This article examines both of these forums, arguing that they provide clear warnings for a future UK constitutional convention, in particular the threat of internal division that any such forum risks facing. A danger that this article highlights is heightened by the associated difficulty of reaching agreement across the UK's ‘state of unions’.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
138282
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The three televised leaders’ debates dominated the 2010 general election campaign. The House of Lords Communications Committee report on Broadcast General Election Debates is the product of a welcome but belated public inquiry into their organisation and conduct. The report is supportive of the view that ‘broadcast general election debates should take place during future campaigns’ and makes a number of cautious recommendations to the broadcasters. At the time of writing it was unclear whether the format proposed by the broadcasters for 2015 would be an improvement on that for 2010—or even if there would be any debates at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
138279
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The United Kingdom has traditionally featured many aspects of the majoritarian model of democracy: its first-past-the-post electoral system tends towards producing single-party majorities, while its legislative decision rules concentrate policy-making power in the hands of the resulting single-party governments. However, in an unprecedented break with the UK's postwar conventions, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats formed a coalition following the general election of 2010. In this article, we examine some of the Coalition's impacts on governing and constitutional conventions, placing them in a comparative European context. We conclude that the Coalition reflects a shift towards the less majoritarian forms of politics prevalent in continental Europe, and that some of these changes are likely to persist even after the end of the current government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
138280
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
For much of the 2010–15 Parliament the English Question was not a conspicuous feature of political debate in the UK. However, the issue of English votes for English laws (EvfEl) was thrust to centre stage by Prime Minister David Cameron in the aftermath of the Scottish independence referendum, when he announced that fulfilment of the promise of further devolution to Scotland must be accompanied by an answer to the West Lothian Question at Westminster. This article analyses these events and explores their possible consequences. It argues that a reform of parliamentary procedures along the lines outlined in the report of the McKay Commission looks increasingly likely, but that this will not mark a resolution of the broader English Question, and the future of the Union remains in doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
138267
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While devolution has provided a stronger political voice for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland since the late 1990s, it is only in the past few years that English public opinion appears to have become exercised by the lack of similar arrangements for England. The renewed debates over the character of the Union after the Scottish independence referendum reveal a desire for ‘fair treatment’ of England within a Union conceived as a partnership of equals. At the same time, numerous proposals have been made for devolution of power within England, reflecting long-held concerns about the territorial hegemony of London. Solutions to the former issue include English votes for English laws and an English Parliament. Solutions to the latter include city-regions, strengthened local government, the first of these appears to be the government's preferred route, in the light of the recent ‘Greater Manchester Agreement’. However, none of these ‘solutions’ can count on being implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
138270
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article explores some of the current themes round the perceived crisis in British politics in supposed an age of ‘anti-politics’. Drawing on Bernard Crick's In Defence of Politics, it offers a critique of what is referred to as a dominant British political tradition and in so doing seeks to challenge ‘demand-side’ accounts that ostensibly defend the traditional arena politics of the Westminster system. Instead, it argues that developments around issues such as big data, social media and freedom of information have led to a more open society in recent years. It concludes by suggesting that if traditional political institutions wish to restore a greater degree of legitimacy, they need to ‘do’ or, more particularly, ‘supply’ politics differently, adapting to these changes by seeking out new modes of openness, engagement and accountability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
138278
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The Coalition took office in 2010 in what seemed to be a relatively benign foreign policy environment. Since then, the international environment has become far more treacherous and the government has considered war on humanitarian grounds on three occasions. In light of the silence of early Coalition documents on humanitarian intervention, together with the two parties’ different positions on the issue, this article assesses the extent to which the Coalition has adopted a distinctive approach to humanitarian intervention. In so doing, it evaluates the relative importance of Conservative and Liberal Democrat traditions in determining the direction of Coalition foreign policy. The article also considers whether there are other, more pertinent factors driving foreign policy, and offers an explanation for its relative isolation from coalition tensions. It concludes by reflecting on the likely future of humanitarian intervention after the May 2015 general election.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
138274
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Following the inconclusive result of the last general election, David Cameron made a ‘big, open and comprehensive offer’ to Nick Clegg to form a partnership government. Four days later, on 11 May 2010, Britain had its first peacetime coalition since the 1930s. Despite widespread predictions to the contrary, the Conservative–Liberal Democrat government has survived for a full parliamentary term. While its period in office was marked by bitter disagreements over issues such as constitutional reform and Europe, it is equally clear that the two parties were able to work well together in other areas, notable among which are education and foreign policy. This raises a number of questions. Why did certain initiatives prove to be particularly contentious? Conversely, why was cooperation on other policies relatively straightforward? How did the two leaders seek to manage conflict within and between their respective parliamentary parties? What was the longer-term impact of the Coalition on Britain's constitutional arrangements?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
138271
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The British state is in flux and the Labour party is struggling to shape an effective response to the politics of disunification. This article reflects on the nature of Labour's governing project and its conception of modern statecraft which has evolved since the party became a serious contender for power in the aftermath of the First World War. We argue that Labour's initially pluralising instincts cultivated in opposition have been checked by the ongoing reality of a state-centric mode of governing, in which the party continued to robustly defend the Westminster model operating within the parameters established by the British Political Tradition (BPT). Ed Miliband's conception of ‘One Nation’ Labour threatens to reinforce this historical pattern of reversion to the Westminster model, at precisely the moment when devolutionary forces are destabilising the existing political settlement. To break out of this impasse, Labour must look elsewhere in its ideological lexicon for inspiration, chiefly to the tradition of socialist pluralism and associationalism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
138276
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
When the Liberal Democrats joined the Coalition government in May 2010, there was an expectation that they would have a restraining effect on the Conservatives, particularly in the area of European politics. But after almost five years as the junior party in the Coalition, the Liberal Democrats struggle to demonstrate their influence over the government's approach to Europe. Not only did they let the Conservatives lead the Coalition's European agenda, but they will be forever associated with the government that brought the UK closer to the exit door of the European Union. The article argues that this outcome is the result of a series of avoidable if surprising mistakes, such as the choice of ministerial portfolios and the party's attitude to the Coalition's monitoring mechanisms, as well as some unavoidable mistakes that could have not been foreseen when the Coalition was formed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
138266
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
GOVERNMENTS across the developed world still face acute fiscal difficulties. Even where, as in Britain, there has been a return to sustained moderate economic growth, the recovery has not produced a comparable rise in tax revenue. Despite the rise in employment in the British economy since 2011, tax receipts from income tax have fallen substantially. A recovery in significant part based on part-time jobs and self-employment has not, and cannot, repair Britain's fiscal hole, particularly since the Coalition government has raised the tax-free allowance on income. Internationally governments have made little progress on cooperative measures to address the revenue lost to tax havens and aggressive tax avoidance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
138283
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Eight years after the launch of the Stern Review of the economics of climate change, a new major report on economic growth and climate change (Better Growth, Better Climate) has been published by a Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, chaired by Nicholas Stern. While this comprehensive review of recent evidence has some overlap with the original Stern Review, it focuses more on the short-term costs and benefits of action needed to reduce carbon emissions in specific parts of the economy such as cities, energy and agriculture. Perhaps the most noted conclusion of the report is that policies which governments should be pursuing anyway, because they will reduce pollution, improve health, raise productivity and reduce congestion, will cut carbon emission by between 50 and 90 per cent of what is needed to get to a 2°C pathway. This is an important report that will have considerable influence, although it has had lower public visibility than the original Stern Review. However, it also points to the need for a better understanding of the politics of climate policy, and why the opportunities to adopt policies that have multiple long-term public benefits do not get taken. While Better Growth, Better Climatedoes have a chapter on the political economy of change, the analysis is limited, and could be deepened by bringing in the growing literature on the politics of climate policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
138275
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Following the formation of the Conservative–Liberal Democrat government in May 2010, David Cameron and Nick Clegg sought to persuade party members, the electorate and a sceptical media that their partnership would hold together for the duration of the parliament. Taking as its starting point Kenneth Burke's theory of rhetoric as identification, this article explores the strategies employed by senior Coalition figures to construct and present an image of unity to these different audiences. Of particular concern are appeals to the parties’ shared values and to the ‘national interest’, as well as the narrative of Britain's ‘debt crisis’. This narrative served to minimise inter-party divisions by inviting MPs and supporters to unite behind the cause of deficit reduction, in opposition to the ‘fiscally irresponsible’ Labour party that had allegedly wrecked the economy. The article concludes by reflecting on the lessons for the partners in a future UK coalition government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
138277
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Parties in coalition governments must address the ‘unity/distinctiveness’ dilemma: how to maintain governing cohesion, while sustaining individual identities. Within the Cameron–Clegg government this is a challenge for both parties, but it is more so for the Liberal Democrats as the junior partner. This paper considers how the Liberal Democrats negotiated this dilemma in relation to ministerial portfolio allocations. While the Liberal Democrat strategy of placing ministers in almost all departments has served the Coalition well in terms of governing unity, it has limited the extent to which they have been able to assert their distinctive contribution to Coalition policy-making. This is demonstrated through an examination of the Liberal Democrats' influence on Coalition welfare policy. A lack of clear policy contributions is potentially highly damaging to the Liberal Democrats electorally, as it suggests that they have made little substantive contribution to the Coalition beyond propping up their Conservative partners. Accordingly, the paper reflects on lessons for junior partners in future UK coalition governments, suggesting that concentrating ministers within one or two departments may provide a more viable means of carving out a distinctive governing legacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
138269
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article summarises the findings from a study of what constituents want from their local Member of Parliament.1 We make use of a survey technique known as conjoint analysis, wherein we present a national sample of British voters with profiles of hypothetical MPs who vary randomly in their characteristics, activities and behaviour. We find that voters like MPs who are independent from the party line and who do not focus exclusively on national policy work. MPs' gender and experience matter far less to constituents. Overall, voters want a Parliament made up of strong-minded MPs who see their role as that of a constituency representative. This has important implications for parliamentary democracy in Britain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
138273
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The ombudsman institution, in both the public and private sectors, is increasingly identified with the ethos of consumerism and the protection of consumer rights. The current trend is exemplified and reinforced by the EU ADR Directive and by the government response to a recent inquiry into complaints conducted by the Public Administration Select Committee. This article argues that the dominant consumerist ethos diminishes the ability of the ombudsman institution to fulfil its potential. If the ombudsman institution, in particular as manifest in the office of the UK Parliamentary Ombudsman, is to serve the public interest, it must instead promote human rights principles and constitutional morality, adopt a process that is marked by public reasoning and participation and seek by a whole-system approach to realise a vision that is integrated and truly democratic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
138281
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The chances of Labour winning the 2015 general election with a comfortable overall majority are vanishingly small. It could, however, emerge as the largest party or finish just a handful of seats behind the Conservatives. Either scenario would give it at least a chance—and a bigger chance than many realise, we argue—of forming a government. In that event, Labour may be faced with a choice between getting together with another party (or parties) to form a majority coalition or else forming a minority government (either on its own or with one or more partners), which could assemble different majorities for different pieces of legislation or try to negotiate a ‘confidence and supply’ agreement. Given the precedents from the UK and overseas, we argue that, faced with this dilemma, Labour should do all it can to form a majority coalition. We also argue that Labour can learn some useful lessons from the Cameron–Clegg coalition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
138272
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In a speech given to the University of London's Constitution Unit and Judicial Institute on 3 December 2014, the Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP challenged Conservatives to think carefully about the party's proposal to break the link between British courts and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Grieve recalled why the United Kingdom signed the Convention in the first place and, although recognising that the Court's approach has been on occasion properly criticised and may present difficulties, argued that the reforms embodied in the Brighton Declaration 2012 are bearing fruit. He provided a critical exposition of the Conservative paper ‘Protecting Human Rights in the UK: the Conservatives’ Proposals for changing Britain's Human Rights Laws’ (October 2014) and concluded that Conservatives should want to remain within the jurisdiction of the ECHR to maintain and ensure the Court's effectiveness and continued viability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|