To what extent does executive dominance over parliament prevent M.P.'s from carrying out their roles effectively?

Authors Avatar

Orlá Vallely 13H

POLITIC’S ESSAY

        To what extent does executive dominance over parliament prevent M.P.‘s from carrying out their roles effectively?

To a certain extent executive dominance over parliament does prevent M.P.‘s from carrying out their roles effectively.  This is largely due to the fact that the majority of M.P.‘s belong to the governing party, thus these M.P.‘s are supposed to remain loyal to their party and still carry out other roles such as scrutiny, representation, legislation and legitimizing.  Therefore there are often conflicts of interests for M.P.‘s.  However, some critics would argue that M.P.‘s perform their roles very well and that government domination does not effect how they perform their jobs.

        One job that M.P.‘s have to carry out is a representation role.  M.P.‘s are supposed to represent all of their constituents, even the ones that didn’t vote for them. Yet it could be argued that many British M.P.‘s follow the ‘mandate model’, a theory on the way in which M.P.‘s behave.  The mandate model means that the M.P. seems to have a strong party focus by which they represent their constituency.  These M.P.‘s feel that they have been elected because of their party name, thus they ensure that the policies outlined in the party’s manifesto are put into effect.   Also as the governing party has the majority of M.P.‘s in parliament this will allow them to dominate, as these M.P.‘s will all bend backwards in order to please their government, due to prospects of climbing the career ladder.  The party has been described as an M.P.‘s “life support system” as it’s their ticket into government, and a career in politics.  These M.P.‘s loyally support their party, even if it means suppressing their own personal views or ignoring the views of their constituents.  In this way the executive dominate parliament so that they don’t carry out their role of representing their constituency properly.  

        On the other hand some critics would contend that M.P.‘s to an extend can represent their constituency fairly in parliament in a number of ways.  These include through debates, asking questions on behalf of their constituency during Question Time, and through the use of Private Members Bills.  However these Private Members Bills are profusely unsuccessful because of hostile tactics such as filibustering, lack of government support, and lack of time.

Join now!

        Another extremely important part of the role of an M.P. is to redress grievances of the M.P.‘s constituency.  They are expected to meet with local pressure groups and businesses, visit local schools and hospitals etc. Therefore they should know the problems within their constituency for real.  These M.P.‘s also hold surgeries where their constituents can air their problems. In addition M.P.‘s have to answer mail from their constituents, this mail load is much more than in previous years, thus adding more work onto their already bulging schedule.  As well as this M.P.‘s can answer a constituent’s grievance by speaking to, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay