Evaluate the effectiveness of backbench MPs (30 marks)
Backbench MPs are constituency representatives without ministerial positions in the
government or shadow cabinet, whose main job is to represent the interests of their
constituency as well as their party on issues within parliament. While they do not have as
much power in influencing policy as front bench MPs, they play a large role in not only
scrutinizing the opposition and policy in the second and third reading of bills, but also in the
scrutiny of their own party; after all, they make up the majority and a cabinet or shadow
cabinet’s failure to consider the opinion and advice of backbenchers can end up in situations
like backbench rebellions.
A less factious way in which backbenchers can make their voice heard effectively on matters
of legislation and policy is through participation in public bills or select committees to
suggest amendments to bills or criticise and bring attention to various government
departments. Backbench participation on Public bill Committees is particularly effective
since they have a direct say on changes in policy and since MPs are only part of the
committees until the bill has passed it gives backbenchers the scope to participate on a
variety of different committees dealing with different areas of policy. For example during
the stages of passages for the Immigration Bill of 2016, the public bill committee that
consisted of only twenty people gave members of the opposition such as Keir Starmer the
chance to influence some of the details of the bill, such as providing housing for refugee
family members, that would have otherwise been solely put forward by the conservative
cabinet. Membership of public bill committees is one of the most effective ways in which
backbench MPs can further their aims as the small number of people on these committees
gives MPs the chance to scrutinise details and voice their opinions in a way which wouldn’t
be possible in parliamentary debates on legislation.
The drawback with membership of parliamentary committees is that the government can
essentially choose to ignore changes put forward by select committees, and participation on
public bill committees will only get you so far in implementing changes to policy unless you
are part of the majority party that sits on the committee. Furthermore, it can be rejected by
popular vote in the commons or even changed by the House of Lords during the ping pong
stage of a bill’s passage. Select committees can be argued to be an especially ineffective way
for backbenchers to make valuable changes, since the main objective of these is to make
inquiries – for example the September 2020 Grenfell enquiry by the Public Accounts
Committee, which showed a massive failure in government to commit to its targets for
replacing cladding in high rise buildings. Although the inquiry certainly was picked up by the
media there was no change in policy or direction by the government; often these reports by
committees act as scrutiny with no obligation to actually implement changes, therefore
undermining the entire point of them as MPs are not able to effectively hold the
government to account.
Whilst the limitations of backbenchers' ability to directly change policy may be evident,
arguably the most effective way backbenchers can bring about change for the benefit of
their constituents or party is by trying to pass their own bill as a Private Members bill. The
three ways backbenchers can achieve this is by trying to pass a ballot, ten minute rule or
presentation bill, the most likely of which to actually be debated is Ballot Bill. Many
Backbench MPs are constituency representatives without ministerial positions in the
government or shadow cabinet, whose main job is to represent the interests of their
constituency as well as their party on issues within parliament. While they do not have as
much power in influencing policy as front bench MPs, they play a large role in not only
scrutinizing the opposition and policy in the second and third reading of bills, but also in the
scrutiny of their own party; after all, they make up the majority and a cabinet or shadow
cabinet’s failure to consider the opinion and advice of backbenchers can end up in situations
like backbench rebellions.
A less factious way in which backbenchers can make their voice heard effectively on matters
of legislation and policy is through participation in public bills or select committees to
suggest amendments to bills or criticise and bring attention to various government
departments. Backbench participation on Public bill Committees is particularly effective
since they have a direct say on changes in policy and since MPs are only part of the
committees until the bill has passed it gives backbenchers the scope to participate on a
variety of different committees dealing with different areas of policy. For example during
the stages of passages for the Immigration Bill of 2016, the public bill committee that
consisted of only twenty people gave members of the opposition such as Keir Starmer the
chance to influence some of the details of the bill, such as providing housing for refugee
family members, that would have otherwise been solely put forward by the conservative
cabinet. Membership of public bill committees is one of the most effective ways in which
backbench MPs can further their aims as the small number of people on these committees
gives MPs the chance to scrutinise details and voice their opinions in a way which wouldn’t
be possible in parliamentary debates on legislation.
The drawback with membership of parliamentary committees is that the government can
essentially choose to ignore changes put forward by select committees, and participation on
public bill committees will only get you so far in implementing changes to policy unless you
are part of the majority party that sits on the committee. Furthermore, it can be rejected by
popular vote in the commons or even changed by the House of Lords during the ping pong
stage of a bill’s passage. Select committees can be argued to be an especially ineffective way
for backbenchers to make valuable changes, since the main objective of these is to make
inquiries – for example the September 2020 Grenfell enquiry by the Public Accounts
Committee, which showed a massive failure in government to commit to its targets for
replacing cladding in high rise buildings. Although the inquiry certainly was picked up by the
media there was no change in policy or direction by the government; often these reports by
committees act as scrutiny with no obligation to actually implement changes, therefore
undermining the entire point of them as MPs are not able to effectively hold the
government to account.
Whilst the limitations of backbenchers' ability to directly change policy may be evident,
arguably the most effective way backbenchers can bring about change for the benefit of
their constituents or party is by trying to pass their own bill as a Private Members bill. The
three ways backbenchers can achieve this is by trying to pass a ballot, ten minute rule or
presentation bill, the most likely of which to actually be debated is Ballot Bill. Many
