Parliament: Commons, Lords & Legislative Process

A-Level Politics · UK Politics

Parliament: The House of Commons, House of Lords & Legislative Process

The Structure of Parliament

The UK Parliament is bicameral, consisting of:

The House of Commons (650 elected MPs)
The House of Lords (approximately 800 unelected peers)
The Monarch (formal role: Royal Assent)

Parliament's key functions are legislation, scrutiny of the executive, representation, and legitimacy.

The House of Commons

Composition: 650 MPs elected by FPTP in single-member constituencies.

Key roles:

Legislation: initiates and passes most bills (financial bills must originate in the Commons)
Scrutiny: holds the government to account through questions, debates, and committees
Representation: MPs represent their constituents' interests
Recruitment: ministers are drawn from Parliament (mostly the Commons)
Legitimacy: government must command the confidence of the Commons

Powers of the Commons:

Can pass, amend, or reject legislation
Controls taxation and spending (financial privilege)
Can force a government to resign through a vote of no confidence (last successful: 1979, Callaghan)
The Parliament Acts (1911, 1949) allow the Commons to bypass the Lords after one year

The House of Lords

Composition (approximate, 2024):

Life peers (~680): appointed under the Life Peerages Act 1958, often former politicians, experts, and public figures
Hereditary peers (92): retained after the House of Lords Act 1999
Bishops (26): "Lords Spiritual" — senior Church of England bishops
No overall party majority; significant crossbench (independent) contingent

Key roles:

Revising chamber: scrutinises and amends legislation (often improves technical quality)
Delaying power: can delay non-financial bills by up to one year (Parliament Acts)
Expertise: contains specialists in law, science, medicine, business, and the arts
Salisbury Convention: does not block government manifesto commitments

Should the Lords be reformed?

For an elected Lords	Against
Democratic legitimacy — unelected chamber is an anachronism	An elected Lords would rival the Commons, creating gridlock
Current system is patronage-based (PM appoints peers)	Expertise would be lost — appointed peers bring specialist knowledge
92 hereditary peers are indefensible in a democracy	Current system works well as a revising chamber
Size is bloated (one of the world's largest legislative chambers)	If both chambers had a democratic mandate, which would prevail?

The Legislative Process

Public Bills (Government Bills)

1. First Reading — formal introduction, no debate

2. Second Reading — debate on the general principles; vote

3. Committee Stage — detailed line-by-line scrutiny by a Public Bill Committee

4. Report Stage — the whole House considers committee amendments

5. Third Reading — final debate and vote

6. Repeat in the other House — the bill goes through the same stages

7. Ping-pong — if the second House amends the bill, it returns to the originating House until both agree

8. Royal Assent — the monarch's formal approval (last refused: 1708, Queen Anne)

Private Members' Bills

Introduced by backbench MPs via the ballot (20 names drawn), Ten Minute Rule, or presentation
Rarely become law without government support, but can raise awareness
Successful examples: Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965, Abortion Act 1967

Scrutiny of the Executive

Select Committees:

Departmental select committees (e.g. Health, Education, Treasury) shadow each government department
Cross-party membership, elected by MPs since 2010 (Wright reforms)
Can summon ministers, civil servants, and external witnesses
Produce influential reports (e.g. the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee's inquiry into Cambridge Analytica)
Strengths: independent, expert, cross-party; produce evidence-based reports
Weaknesses: no power to compel government to act on recommendations; limited resources compared to the executive

Other scrutiny mechanisms:

Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs) — every Wednesday at noon; high-profile but often theatrical rather than forensic
Urgent Questions — MPs can request a minister make an immediate statement (Speaker's discretion)
Opposition Days — 20 days per session for opposition-chosen debates (non-binding)
Backbench Business Committee — allocates time for debates chosen by backbenchers (created 2010)
Liaison Committee — select committee chairs question the PM twice a year

The Effectiveness of Parliament

Arguments that Parliament is effective:

Select committees have been strengthened since the Wright reforms (2010)
The 2017-19 Parliament demonstrated that a minority government could be defeated repeatedly (e.g. blocking a no-deal Brexit)
The Speaker can facilitate backbench influence (e.g. John Bercow allowing amendments)
The Lords regularly amend and improve legislation

Arguments that Parliament is weak:

Executive dominance: a government with a large majority can push through legislation with minimal opposition (Labour 2024: 174-seat majority)
The whip system pressures MPs to vote with their party
Limited time for scrutiny of complex legislation
PMQs is partisan theatre, not genuine accountability
Government controls the timetable (guillotine/programme motions limit debate)

Key Thinker: Walter Bagehot (1826-1877)

In The English Constitution (1867), Bagehot argued that the Cabinet was the "efficient secret" of the constitution — the body that truly governed. Parliament's role was to choose and sustain a government, not to govern directly. He distinguished the "dignified" parts of the constitution (monarchy, ceremony) from the "efficient" parts (Cabinet, Commons).

Exam Tips

Know the difference between Commons and Lords in terms of powers, composition, and legitimacy
Be able to evaluate whether the Lords should be reformed or abolished
Use the Wright reforms and specific select committee examples when discussing scrutiny
Discuss the tension between party discipline (whips) and parliamentary independence
The 2017-19 Parliament is an excellent case study of parliamentary power vs executive power