• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Assess the effectiveness of Parliaments Scrutiny of Government.

Extracts from this document...


Assess the effectiveness of Parliaments Scrutiny of Government Scrutiny of the work of the executive is possibly the most effective area of the House of Commons business, in the sense that it focuses on the politically sensitive aspect of policy implementation rather than policy initiation. The scrutiny of government takes two main forms. One is the spontaneous contemporary examination through questions to ministers, and the other is the procedural investigation of administrative activity through departmental select committees. Select committees are the more effective check on policy, or have most influence because they traditionally operate on a non-partisan ground from a parliamentary prospective. Scrutiny and control of the executive can also be carried out in other areas such as: > Her Majesty's opposition > Opposition Days > Backbenchers Rebellions > The Ombudsman (The Ombudsman or Parliamentary Commissioner for administration is appointed by the Prime minister. ...read more.


This gives the Prime Minister and Ministers time to prepare what they are going to say and it can allow them even to manipulate and predict the questions. The government can introduce certain difficult issues straight after one-weeks questioning and by next week there would be new and maybe easier topic for the PM to answer, it can basically help him get out of hard situations. There is also not adequate time for many questions and ministers can avoid straight questions by rambling and wasting time. All these points make parliament's scrutiny of government far less effective. There are so positive and effective parts of question time that scrutinise the government, such as direct confrontation between government and the opposition and it can reveal gaps in government knowledge. ...read more.


The difficulty is the fact that the government is not obliged to act on a committee's recommendations, although it does make a response. Such behaviour limits any policy influence committees may have over the executive. Select committees have improved the scrutiny function of the House of Commons over the executive. The results have been such things as now the house of commons is better informed about government work through MPs specialised critical activity in select committees. Also Committees have had a direct effect on the behaviour of government in the knowledge that their affairs are publicly scrutinised. Although difficult to count exactly, the government later adopts the reports of select committees and proposals may find their way into improvements in policy. But executives in parliamentary systems are generally reluctant to see increased powers given to scrutiny committees for fear of losing policy initiatives to what becomes government by committee. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays

  1. What means are available to parliament and how effective is its scrutiny of the ...

    Thus it would be fair to say that although standing committees do allow opposition MP's the chance to scrutinize the legislative functions of the government of the day, because of the fact that the government is likely to have an inbuilt majority's in each of the committees, the extent to which this is likely to be effective is compromised.

  2. Consider the contribution of select committees to the House of Commons' scrutiny of government ...

    The issue on the effectiveness of the select committee can be studied in "The Second Report from the Procedure Committee 1990", which simply assessed the first 10 years of the working of this system. It was submitted that the Select committee is a highly significant and not so much a total break with an evolutionary development albeit.

  1. Malta at the turn of the 19th Century.

    Some people couldn't careless about political freedoms, as they only wanted to get rich. However others were quite disappointed because they weren't getting rich and had no political power like the landlords and the nobles. In fact number of petitions were made during these years.

  2. Decentralization and development of modern local government systems in Eastern Europe

    However, most of the necessary elements of change have been realized since the late 1980s. A possible commonality concerning the above mentioned models and their different versions is that a "critical weight" of change is necessary before systemic transformation can be realized in the building of democratic state and local government.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work