How successful was Peel's government of 1841 to 1846?
How successful was Peel's government of 1841 to 1846? Peel entered government for the second time in his career in August 1841 with a strong Tory majority in Parliament gained in part by Peel's skill as leader of the Opposition and by the failings of Lord Melbourne's former Whig government. He would lead his new "Conservative" party through many difficulties and end his career with the repeal of the notorious Corn Laws in June 1846. His party was split between the loyal Peelite Conservatives and the older, more reactionary Tories, who still for the most part believed in agricultural protectionism once ensured by the scrapped Corn Laws. But, as in accordance with Peel's ideology, failure in the party was not necessarily a failure for the nation. Peel entered government on the back of traditional Tory votes. These came from the agricultural sectors of southern England, especially the landed gentry, tenant farmers and the aristocracy. Any considerable amounts of votes had not, as Peel had hoped for, come from the middle classes and industrialists based in the large northern working towns who Peel had so sought to win over with his Tamworth Manifesto. This put Peel in a compromising situation over his allegiance. The majority of his more practical policies followed the line of stimulating trade to create prosperity across Britain's social spectrum. This meant reducing or
Referendums. Since the electorate is asked to vote directly on an issue, holding a referendum is a way of performing direct democracy within a system of representative democracy.
One way of finding out whether voters support a particular policy being thought about by the government is to vote 'yes' or 'no' to a single question on that policy. A vote on a single issue like this is known as a referendum. Since the electorate is asked to vote directly on an issue, holding a referendum is a way of performing direct democracy within a system of representative democracy. Britain's first national referendum was over British membership of the European Common Market (Europe). Referendums for Ireland Since the very first referendum, they have been used twice in Ireland to try and solve different problems: The Northern Ireland electorate voted to remain in the UK when the Storment Parliament (Northern Ireland Parliament). There was a majority vote of 98.9%. A referendum was also used to see the Irish peoples view on the 1998 Good Friday Agreement (Where the Catholics and the Protestants agree to stop their fighting). Referendums for Europe As stated above Britain's first and only ever national referendum was around the issue of Europe. The referendum came in 1975. Britain were already a member of the 'Common Market' (or in other words was a part of Europe), and the question that was asked was simply: "Do you think the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (Common Market)?" This issue brought together different parties, campaigning
Compare and Contrast how the Conservative and Labour 1997 manifestos use rhetorical language to appeal to their audiences
Compare and Contrast how the Conservative and Labour 1997 manifestos use rhetorical language to appeal to their audiences In 1997, the Labour Party had been in opposition for eighteen years. Such a long period of time to be out of power made them look unreliable and inexperienced. Many voters would be fearful of a repeat Labour Party pandemonium. When The Labour Party was previously in power it was accused of being "too socialist" and gave too much power to the unions. While taxes continued to ascend, the countries economy collapsed and a three-day working week was introduced. Should Labour wish to re-establish power, it had to distance itself from the previous Labour Party, and introduce new schemes to create an enhanced Britain. It is an immediate disadvantage for The Conservatives that Labour had been out of power for so long, as it wouldn't enable them to blame the problems in the country on the Labour Party. It was all very well that the Conservatives had been successful for the past four elections, but it resulted in the country's difficulties being mainly their fault. The Conservatives had many difficult problems to overcome, if they wished to continue in power. In order to maintain the possession of the voters' trust, The
"Aboriginals are interested not only in boomerangs, gum leaves and corrobores! The overwhelming majority of us are able and willing to earn our living by honest toil and to take our place in the community, side by side with yourselves"
"Aboriginals are interested not only in boomerangs, gum leaves and corrobores! The overwhelming majority of us are able and willing to earn our living by honest toil and to take our place in the community, side by side with yourselves" Unknown, Magazine Unknown, edition no 3, June 1978 page 1. The idea of Aboriginal reconciliation was brought about by a Royal Commission Inquest into the high death rate of Aboriginal Australians being held in custody, however the official reconciliation campaign began in 1991 with a ten year time frame to advance reconciliation to make the Australians Government address cultural, social and economic needs of Aboriginal Australians. With over 50,000 years of settlement before the "white invasion" it was time to fix the issue of discrimination and hardships that Non-Aboriginal Australia had caused towards the Aboriginal Australians. When Australia was first federated in 1901 Aboriginal Australians were the last thing on every Australians mind. This was reflective of the attitudes that Australian society held at the time. The majority of early settling Australians held the attitude of Aboriginal Australians being seen as inferior beings, savage, primitive and uncivilised. This is because the Aboriginal culture is very different to the European way of life in that Aboriginals are influenced by the physical and spiritual world and their
"An Institution in decline." Discuss this view of the contemporary House of Commons.
"An Institution in decline." Discuss this view of the contemporary House of Commons. The House of Commons has seven main functions; legitimating, Scrutinising, Accountability, Legislating, Law-making, Redressing of grievances and deliberating. If the contemporary House of Commons were in decline, we would see this by a decline in the effectiveness of the House of Commons when carrying out these functions. Looking at the functions of the House of Commons will help to assess whether or not the House of Commons is "an institution in decline." Legislation has to be approved by the House of Commons in order to give the consent of the people for the laws that they will be expected to follow. This is achieved in the function of legitimating in the House of Commons. No decline in effectiveness seems to be shown in this function. MPs are becoming more representative of the population as the House of Commons is slowly changing from being predominantly white, middle aged and middle class men to more representative of females and ethnic minorities; there are now 118 female MPs and the number of ethnic minority MPs has risen for the fourth time since 1945. More fair representation leads to more effective legitimating in the House of Commons so this shows an improvement rather than a decline. To give consent on behalf of the people, MPs are referred to as "honourable member" in order
"Assess the impact of the German army on the political process in Germany between 1918-1933".
"Assess the impact of the German army on the political process in Germany between 1918-1933" The political processes in the years 1918-1933 were shaped both internally and externally by the army. This was because in a time so focused on the military the governmental processes seemed to follow suit. And it has been argued that this aggressive military stance was one of the early precursors of the Second World War. Many figured held a large influence in there areas including Alolf Hitler, Joseph Goebbels and other soldier turn politicians. Externally the political processes of Germany were visibly shaped by the actions of the army. Yet, as the treaty of Versailles limited the army to 100,000 meant then there were many other militant groups affiliated with the army who took a leading role. Such groups included the Freikorps. The Spartacist Revolution which had aims similar to those of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917, these made a change to the political environment through the use of political groups such as the USPD who provided a financial base for their claims. The Kapp Putsch followed in the same vein as this by exerting a force that was running counter to the workings of the Weimar republic. These external occurrences showed an increasingly popular distrust in the republic which can be seen in the translation of many of these movements been translated into
"Conservative Dominance in British Politics Between 1885 and 1905 Was Due to Conservatives Strengths Rather Than Liberal Failures" Discuss
History "Conservative Dominance in British Politics Between 1885 and 1905 Was Due to Conservatives Strengths Rather Than Liberal Failures" Discuss There are many different factors which contributed to the Conservative dominance of the period between 1885 and 1905. For one, the electoral reform of Gladstone's second ministry had a large effect on the Conservatives period in office as did the skill of Salisbury as a leader. The role that the government took in terms of its policies and foreign policy, and the nature of support for the party also played important roles in the conservative dominance. This is because the Conservatives lost working class support during its ministry, yet still managed to dominate politics for nearly twenty years. However, it can be suggested that due to the split in the liberals and the weaknesses the party, that conservative dominance was more to do with Liberal weaknesses than conservative strengths. One of the key reasons the Conservatives were so successful was because of Salisbury's leadership skills. This was demonstrated when he managed to persuade Gladstone that he would (as head of house of Lords) pass the reform act in return for the Redistribution of Seats Act. Salisbury knew that the reform act was inevitable, so he used his political skills to negotiate the redistribution of seats act in return for the reform act. This ultimately
"Critically evaluate the relationship between Members of Parliament, political parties and pressure groups in the formation of legislation"
Q) "Critically evaluate the relationship between Members of Parliament, political parties and pressure groups in the formation of legislation" Introduction The definition of legislation is that it I the whole or any part of a countries written law. In the UK this term usually means Acts of parliament, but can also means law made under other powers decided by Acts of parliament (delegated legislation). In this essay I will discuss the relationship between the members of parliament, political parties and pressure groups in the formation of legislation. The Legislative Process Before an Act of Parliament is put into power, it has to pass through the legislative process. This means that the government has to check that the act is suitable and other such considerations. The First Stage (public bills) The first stage in the legislative process is that the bill has to drafted. Acts of parliament are to begin with drafted by lawyers that work for the government. They are known as Parliamentary Counsel to the Treasury. They are told by what they have to put in the bill, and what the law is trying to bring about to the department who is responsible for it. When the bill is drafted, it is then published. It must be made sure that the bill gives a clear picture of what the government wants and that the legal wording is such, that there can be no loopholes in the law. The select
"Debates, Question Time, and Select Committees all give Parliament Teeth." Do you agree?
"Debates, Question Time, and Select Committees all give Parliament Teeth." Do you agree? I don't agree with this statement because in general I don't think that Parliament is able to complete one of its main functions, to scrutinise the Government - or get its teeth into Government - very effectively. Parliament's other main function is to pass bills, yet I don't think that it can do this very well either. First of all, there are a number of reasons which prevent Parliament from being very effective and getting its teeth into Government during debates. For instances, questions are expected from MPs, so they already have answers prepared. Also, going into a debate an MP cant expect to change anyone's opinion, at best they can just hope to higher their profile and get noticed. What's more, backbench MPs, who will be aiming to raise awareness of a problem bought to their attention by constituents, hardly get the opportunity to speak, especially during great debates. Furthermore, the Whips tell MPs what to say and when to attend, so debates are very much under their control, yet sometimes debates can just turn into slanging matches between MPs. Finally, there is generally a poor attendance in debates, so often there are deals done in the corridors, as private conversations appear to be more effective. On the other hand though, debates do allow Parliament to recommend amendments
"Did the Liberal Government of 1906-14 create the early Welfare State?"
"Did the Liberal Government of 1906-14 create the early Welfare State?" The Liberal government returned to office on 4th of December 1905 after a ten-year absence. In January 1906 the Liberals won the general election by a massive majority of 400 seats to the Conservative Party's 157 seats. From 1906 to the start of the First World War the Liberal government embarked on a numbers of social reforms that were to lay the foundations of a system under which the state (rather than the individual) would take responsibility for the welfare of its citizens. These reforms aimed to ease the plight of the poor and improve their standard of life. Before the creation of the welfare state in the 20th Century the 'Poor Law' was the only form of aid that was offered to the poor. The 'Poor Law' consisted of a combination of out door relief and the workhouses. The living condition for those not in steady employment were harsh to say the least. The choices that many poor people were faced if they were unable to finds work was to, beg, steal, prostitution or starve to death. The latter may seem some-what extreme, but many people at this time would have rather starved themselves to death, rather that go into the workhouses. The workhouses were extremely harsh and deliberately striped away any dignity or self-respect of whose who were desperate enough to enter them. Those who did lost their right