The current system has no fixed terms outlining an executive regime. It has the flexibility of calling call for an election as long as it is 5 years within the previous election. This power acts as an advantage as they may call for an election when the time is most suited to their needs. The current system is scrutinised to be a Prime ministerial system or governance as the executive dictates the calling for election according to his/her ‘whims’.
The proposal of a 5 year fixed term raised many concerns amongst the public. The haunting fear of having a “lame duck” government, running for 5 years created much debate. However, effective measures have been taken to avoid such a catastrophe. In order to call for an early election, a vote of no confidence will be held, after which a government must be formed within 14 days. If this fails, Parliament shall be dissolved and a general election will be held. There will be an additional power for Parliament to vote for an early and immediate dissolution. A majority of two thirds (2/3) will be needed to carry vote. According to the Liberal Democrats, these changes will make it impossible for any government to dissolve Parliament for its own purpose. From the proposed reforms, it may be assumed that these measures are indeed effective.
From the above quote, an anchor of accountability can easily be placed on the government of the day. However, this proposal was described as “gerrymandering” by the Labour party. The fixed 5 year parliamentary terms, if approved, would mean that the present coalition government will be in power until 2015. The question is whether this proposal was introduced on the interest of the public or the interest of the party? The interest and welfare of the state lies in the decision made by the executive. This proposal in particular may be in fact in the interest of the party as it will provide the current coalition government with the luxury of a 5 year fixed term of power. Is the current Prime minister “giving up that right”? From their notable motive, the answer would be no.
The proposed reforms bring many benefits to the current electoral system; however they also undermine the prerogative powers that lie in the hands of the Monarch. The power to dissolve parliament rests with the monarch, however, the proposed reforms override that power by leaving it in the hands of the members of the members of Parliament. On the other hand, it may be argued that the prerogative powers are simply theoretical as before deciding to dissolve Parliament, the Monarch must get the approval of the Prime Minister of the day. It must also be noted that although the prerogative powers are theoretical, if Her Majesty if stripped of another rightful power, then it will eventually leave her with none, thus completely losing the importance and significance of have a monarchy.
Every constitution has an ultimate authority of power, in the United Kingdom; it is Parliament that exercises this power. Albert Venn Dicey described this power as “the dominant characteristic of our political institutions”. Nick Clegg, was quoted to have said “let me be clear; these steps will strengthen Parliaments power over the executive”. By the Prime minister giving up his power to call for an election, he is giving that power to Parliament, thus strengthening its supremacy. These proposals uphold Parliaments supremacy thus proving effective in achieving legal reform in the constitution of the United Kingdom.
In may be concluded that although these proposals strengthen and structure the future of the UK constitution, they come with a number of side effects. The conventional power of the Monarch are overridden, as well as this, there is a danger of having a “zombie government” running for long years. However, the proposals do strengthen Parliament’s Sovereignty and provide a more stable government thus outlining the effectiveness of legal reform in the constitution of United Kingdom.
[ Word Count: 919 ]
Bibliography
Hilaire Barnett, (2011), Constitutional and Administrative Law, Eight Edition, Oxon, Routledge, page 7
Fixed Term Parliament, House of Commons Library, 6th July 2010 [online] Available:
Plans for electoral reform, BBC News, 5th July 2010 [Online] Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10516429
Hilaire Barnett, (2011), Constitutional and Administrative Law, Eight Edition, Oxon, Routledge, page 146
Fixed Term Parliament, House of Commons Library, 6th July 2010 [online] Available:
Hilaire Barnett, (2011), Constitutional and Administrative Law, page 7
Fixed Term Parliament, House of Commons Library, 6th July 2010 [online] Available:
Plans for electoral reform, BBC News, 5th July 2010 [Online] Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10516429
Hilaire Barnett, (2011), Constitutional and Administrative Law, page 146
Fixed Term Parliament, House of Commons Library, 6th July 2010 [online] Available: