Evaluate the view that the House of Commons is more effective than the House of Lords in holding
the executive to account
Introduction Define: p Argument:
Paragraph 1: Weak argument point 1: Weak argument point 2:
Mechanisms The prevalence of planted questions The Lords are more prepared to scrutinize
orchestrated by the govt has arguably the executive, tabling 8000 WQs in 2018-
rendered PMQs a largely ineffective 2019 – a flood of scrutiny that the
medium of scrutiny. Cameron’s government was not able to stem.
Parliamentary Private Sec, circulated a list Whilst PMQs is largely political theatre, the
of ‘free hits’ for backbenchers to ask the Lords arguably acts as a crucial source of
PM every Wednesday. Equally, in recent expertise – peers e.g. Baroness Chakrabati
months there have been frequent planted – Human Rights expert and previous Chair
questions addressing the poor of Liberty. Equally,
performance of the Welsh-run NHS, whilst
a planted question emerged on the
discovery of an ichthyosaur following the
release of the Sue Gray report. Synoptic
link to FPTP.
DSCs also ineffective – only 44% of
recommendations are followed.
Strong argument point 1: Strong argument point 2:
However, it would be wrong to dismiss Far less government ministers in the House
PMQs as entirely ineffective. PMQs often of Lords: in 2019, 24 out of the total 116
acts as a crucial source of scrutiny – link to ministers in government (21%) were in the
partygate and synoptic link to the media. House of Lords. This further limits scrutiny/
PMQs can result change in government ability of the House of Lords to hold the
policy: in May 2020, Starmer criticized executive to account.
PM’s proposal that foreign workers will
have to pay to use NHS services –
executive abandoned the policy.
Paragraph 2: Weak argument point 1: Weak argument point 2:
Debating + In the House of Commons, EU bill received Only the Commons can veto a bill outright
voting just 4 hours and 37 minutes debate. – Lords remains constitutionally limited.
Similarly, the Internal Markets Bill that set
out how trade would operate within the
UK after Brexit was debated for just 11
hours by the House of Commons.
Strong argument point 1: Strong argument point 2:
As a result of these factors, backbench
In the house of lords more time spent rebellions are rare and Governments can
scrutinizing legislation – backbenchers usually rely on the support of their own
often experts in their fields e.g. Lord MPs. Since the 2019 General Election, of
Adonis is an expert on education – 650 MPs there are 321 who have never
previous academic. Can devote more time: once voted against their own party.
whilst the Commons spent just 10 hours Between 1945 and 2019 there were 19,909
scrutinizing Agriculture Act (2020), Lords divisions in the House of Commons, of
the executive to account
Introduction Define: p Argument:
Paragraph 1: Weak argument point 1: Weak argument point 2:
Mechanisms The prevalence of planted questions The Lords are more prepared to scrutinize
orchestrated by the govt has arguably the executive, tabling 8000 WQs in 2018-
rendered PMQs a largely ineffective 2019 – a flood of scrutiny that the
medium of scrutiny. Cameron’s government was not able to stem.
Parliamentary Private Sec, circulated a list Whilst PMQs is largely political theatre, the
of ‘free hits’ for backbenchers to ask the Lords arguably acts as a crucial source of
PM every Wednesday. Equally, in recent expertise – peers e.g. Baroness Chakrabati
months there have been frequent planted – Human Rights expert and previous Chair
questions addressing the poor of Liberty. Equally,
performance of the Welsh-run NHS, whilst
a planted question emerged on the
discovery of an ichthyosaur following the
release of the Sue Gray report. Synoptic
link to FPTP.
DSCs also ineffective – only 44% of
recommendations are followed.
Strong argument point 1: Strong argument point 2:
However, it would be wrong to dismiss Far less government ministers in the House
PMQs as entirely ineffective. PMQs often of Lords: in 2019, 24 out of the total 116
acts as a crucial source of scrutiny – link to ministers in government (21%) were in the
partygate and synoptic link to the media. House of Lords. This further limits scrutiny/
PMQs can result change in government ability of the House of Lords to hold the
policy: in May 2020, Starmer criticized executive to account.
PM’s proposal that foreign workers will
have to pay to use NHS services –
executive abandoned the policy.
Paragraph 2: Weak argument point 1: Weak argument point 2:
Debating + In the House of Commons, EU bill received Only the Commons can veto a bill outright
voting just 4 hours and 37 minutes debate. – Lords remains constitutionally limited.
Similarly, the Internal Markets Bill that set
out how trade would operate within the
UK after Brexit was debated for just 11
hours by the House of Commons.
Strong argument point 1: Strong argument point 2:
As a result of these factors, backbench
In the house of lords more time spent rebellions are rare and Governments can
scrutinizing legislation – backbenchers usually rely on the support of their own
often experts in their fields e.g. Lord MPs. Since the 2019 General Election, of
Adonis is an expert on education – 650 MPs there are 321 who have never
previous academic. Can devote more time: once voted against their own party.
whilst the Commons spent just 10 hours Between 1945 and 2019 there were 19,909
scrutinizing Agriculture Act (2020), Lords divisions in the House of Commons, of
