How are effective are Backbench MPs?
How effective are backbench MPs?
One of the main functions of backbench MPs is scrutinize the government and hold them to account via different ways, and it is this function which proves them to be highly effective. Their role in Parliament ensures and strengthens the democratic legitimacy of the executive, thus giving government the authority and right to exercise political power. Another key role of backbench MPs is to act as cross-section of the larger society and therefore represent their interests in Parliament. However, the increase of power held by the government further supports the Burkean view that an “elective dictatorship” has formed considerably in the UK political system. In addition to this, many people have argued that backbench MPs have limited power in actually calling the government to account due to the party system, which ensures that MPs are dictated by ministers and party whips – who use persuasive methods (the promise of promotions or the threat of expulsion/demotion) reduce the effectiveness within the political system. There are both arguments for and against the effectiveness of backbench MPs, however it is debatable as to which outweighs the other.
It can be argued that Backbench MPs are effective due to their role working on Select Committees. Whilst working on Select Committees, backbenchers check and report on areas ranging from the work of government departments to economic affairs. This over-seeing and examination of executive work provides effective and detailed scrutiny. The scrutinizing of the government ensures its democratic legitimacy and therefore gives it the authority and right to exercise political power . Through Select Committees, backbench MPs have proven to be effective because their close examination of the execute has led to action being taken. An example of this is George Osborne’s 2012 Budget which propose a “Pasty-Tax” on UK hot, baked goods. Following intense scrutiny from the Treasury Select Committee,
One of the main functions of backbench MPs is scrutinize the government and hold them to account via different ways, and it is this function which proves them to be highly effective. Their role in Parliament ensures and strengthens the democratic legitimacy of the executive, thus giving government the authority and right to exercise political power. Another key role of backbench MPs is to act as cross-section of the larger society and therefore represent their interests in Parliament. However, the increase of power held by the government further supports the Burkean view that an “elective dictatorship” has formed considerably in the UK political system. In addition to this, many people have argued that backbench MPs have limited power in actually calling the government to account due to the party system, which ensures that MPs are dictated by ministers and party whips – who use persuasive methods (the promise of promotions or the threat of expulsion/demotion) reduce the effectiveness within the political system. There are both arguments for and against the effectiveness of backbench MPs, however it is debatable as to which outweighs the other.
It can be argued that Backbench MPs are effective due to their role working on Select Committees. Whilst working on Select Committees, backbenchers check and report on areas ranging from the work of government departments to economic affairs. This over-seeing and examination of executive work provides effective and detailed scrutiny. The scrutinizing of the government ensures its democratic legitimacy and therefore gives it the authority and right to exercise political power . Through Select Committees, backbench MPs have proven to be effective because their close examination of the execute has led to action being taken. An example of this is George Osborne’s 2012 Budget which propose a “Pasty-Tax” on UK hot, baked goods. Following intense scrutiny from the Treasury Select Committee,