Preview

The Critics of the Government’s Proposals to Abolish the Post of Lord Chancellor and Create a Supreme Court Are Motivated by Blind Adherence to Tradition Rather Than a Rational Analysis of the Issues

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1204 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Critics of the Government’s Proposals to Abolish the Post of Lord Chancellor and Create a Supreme Court Are Motivated by Blind Adherence to Tradition Rather Than a Rational Analysis of the Issues
Diploma in Law
Topic: “The critics of the Government’s proposals to abolish the post of Lord Chancellor and create a Supreme Court are motivated by blind adherence to tradition rather than a rational analysis of the issues”
The United Kingdom is a Constitutional Monarchy and is based on Parliamentary Democracy, with a Queen and a Parliament that has two houses: the House of Lords, and the House of Commons. Supreme legislative power is vested in Parliament, which sits for five years unless dissolved sooner. The executive power of the Crown is exercised by the Cabinet, headed by the Prime Minister.
Since the advent of the 10th century, England has existed as a unified entity and along with that has brought about many changes into the way England was governed which constantly reflected the changes in the times as the years passed by. In the year 1997 the electoral victory of the Labour Party after eighteen years of a Conservative rule is promising to bring about a Constitutional reform that will not only serve to decentralize the United Kingdom but also contribute to the effectiveness of the Separation of Powers which has long been an issue of contention, along with the introduction of separate Parliaments in Wales and Scotland. Among some of the other elements of the Constitutional Reform as proposed by this government is the decentralization of powers from Westminster and Whitehall.
The role of the Lord Chancellor is rather controversial in the sense that his responsibilities are in conflict with the doctrine of the Separation of Powers. This doctrine states that the power of the state has to be divided between the three organs, namely the judiciary, legislature and executive. Each of the organs should operate independently and none will become all powerful. The Lord Chancellor, who is the member of the cabinet, is the head of the judiciary and is entitled to sit in the House of Lords to hear the appeal cases. Besides that, he is the speaker of the House of

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    How Democratic Is the Uk?

    • 752 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Firstly, Britain, amongst many other countries, claims to be a democracy. This would suggest that UK citizens, have effective influence over government, and over decisions that affect them. However, there has been much controversy over this claim, some arguing that power lies in the hands of just a few, and others standing by the allegation that power in the UK is widely distributed.…

    • 752 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    -In 1997, the newly elected Labor party in London gave the Scots (and the Welsh) the opportunity to vote- not for independence, but for devolution. They both voted in favor, taking a major devolutionary step in one of Europe’s oldest and most stable unitary states.…

    • 1548 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The political system is based on the Westminster system ,which is a parliamentary form of government based on the Politics of the United Kingdom. The Westminister system involves a set procedures for the organization of the Legislature assembly. The government emanates from the lower house of parliament or “House of Representatives”, but with a overhus in the form of a Senate with representatives of states. The exercise of authority occurs in the monarch , the queen's name .The contemporary political relationship between London and Canberra is underpinned by a robust bilateral dialogue at head-of-government, ministerial and senior officials level.…

    • 1401 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    UK devolution created a national Parliament in Scotland, a national assembly in Wales and a national assembly in Northern Ireland. This process transferred various levels of power from the…

    • 729 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    United Kingdom changing radically with Labour’s landslide victory , the greatest since 1945. Led by Tony Blair, the party promised an ambitious programme of constitutional reforms which they themselves claimed would lead to “the most ambitious and far reaching changes to the constitution undertaken by any government in this century” (Hazell, Sinclair, 1999, p42)These reforms were also pioneered by Gordon Brown when he became Blair’s successor in 2007. While some of these amendments were successfully implemented others were abandoned or were watered down greatly. Also, the planned reversal of many of these reforms and other amendments made by the recent coalition Government must also be deliberated , however, as the coalition Government has only been in in power two years it is harder to see if they have had any real effect yet . Therefore this essay will focus on the constitutional reforms made by New Labour and will discuss that while they have made a difference, the impact has been limited and far less radical than they first proposed.…

    • 1694 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    First of all, the role of the Lord Chancellor was altered as he was previously the head of the judiciary, was a member…

    • 2833 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    During 1997, the Labour party developed a series of manifesto’s stating constitutional reforms which later on came into effect in 2005. They believed the British politics needed to be modernised and brought up to date. Labour also believed that the citizens lacked protections towards their human rights due to the unentrenched uncodified constitution. Lastly, Labour argued the executive to have too much power, with a weak legislature to restrain this power. In 1997, Labour was successful as they won a landslide victory and created a majority government. Many may argue they were successful through the modernisation process, this is shown through the separation of…

    • 861 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One reform that can be seen to have reduced the power of government in the UK is the act of devolution or decentralisation. An example of this is the establishment of a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Assembly in 1999. The creation of these bodies meant that regions in the UK that are not very close to London, and in turn Parliament, could have easier access to politics as the people in that area could have their opinions heard better. Many would say that as a result of Devolution the UK was becoming more democratic and so this change to the constitution was a good thing. However, this reform may look positive on the surface but if it as looked at in more detail it is clear that this may not be the case. Even though there are now democratic bodies in places that are some distance away from London, parliament and government still hold sovereignty and so can dictate what changes these devolved bodies can or cannot make. On the other hand, if devolution becomes more prominent in the UK, the general public may begin to lose respect for government and instead listen to more local political bodies when looking for direction on current issues. As a result of this government power may be reduced by reforming the constitution in this manner since 1997.…

    • 885 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Throughout its vast history, Great Britain remained constant in many ways, even when there were major incidents. Continuities from the 1600’s still exist today. For example, a monarch still sits on the royal throne. In the 16th century, although there were many monarchies in Europe, the British monarchs did not have absolute power due to England’s system of government. The government system was Parliament. Founded by Edward I in 1295, Parliament has stood in place for an extended period of time. Edward’s Model Parliament grew into the House of Commons and House of Lords. In addition to limiting monarchs, the Magna Carta kept a major check. In 1215, King John signed the Magna Carta. This historic document contained certain principles that limited the power of the English monarch and gave more to the people and nobles. Thus, monarchs could not ordain absolute rule. Furthermore, the Magna Carta gave law and basic rights such as jury trials and habeas corpus. Parliament and the Magna Carta remain consistencies of English history and kept checks on the monarchs of England. Likewise, the Church of England remained a constant for a long time. In addition, the monarch is instantly named the head of the Anglican Church of England. Monarchs, Parliament, the Magna Carta, and the…

    • 1077 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The word parliament derives from a word loosely translated as ‘to talk’ or ‘to deliberate’. The UK Parliament consists officially of the two Houses of Parliament: the Lords and the Commons and the monarch, which by convention, delegates his or her authority to a group of ministers known as the executive. The role of parliament is mainly to legislate and to govern the United Kingdom through elected representatives. However the executive has a special role over the legislatures and it has been argued that the UK Parliament has become increasingly dominated by the executive.…

    • 1543 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    How democratic is the UK

    • 932 Words
    • 4 Pages

    It can be argued that Britain is both democratic and undemocratic; this can be shown via a range of issues relating to British politics and the society in which we live. The generally accepted definition of a democracy is a form of government in which the major decisions of government and the direction of policy behind these decisions - rests directly or indirectly on the freely given consent of the freely given consent of the freely majority of the adults government. There are two forms of democracy but the UK is run through an indirect or representative democracy as opposed to a direct democracy, which relies on referendums and would be difficult in a large, modern society. Furthermore, the UK is a parliamentary democracy, the government and representatives are intermingled meaning that the UK does not have separation of powers, meaning that the executive, legislative and judicial courts all work together unlike the American Presidential system which could create a lack in communication. In this essay, I propose to argue both for and against and eventually come to a conclusion whether the UK is democratic or not and give a comparison between the UK and the US in terms of democracy.…

    • 932 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Elenas Diary

    • 1037 Words
    • 5 Pages

    1. The Constitution – Position of Chancellor independent to Reichstag. Power structure unclear and confused.…

    • 1037 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Another one of Labour’s reforms to the UK was the devolution act. In Labour’s manifesto they said that they would address the issues of devolution and making the country more democratic. When Labour got into office they did…

    • 626 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Specifically, the Government of the United Kingdom there is a place for the Lord Chancellor, who is the oldest political body in the country which was established within 1066th year, and probably earlier. The problem is that he is the head of the judiciary that has the right to appoint and dismiss all judges in the state, seated in the House of Lords - the upper house of parliament (legislature) and has a place in the government (the executive). Theoretically, he has more political power than the Prime Minister and of course has a higher salary. The British political problem troubling the public for some time. United Kingdom, as one of the first liberal democracy itself should not be allowed to mix. However, since the British traditionalists this problem is easily solved by the same problem existed with the adoption of euro. In June 2003. The Tony Blair, then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, has announced it will abolish the office of Lord Chancellor and his place will set the British Supreme Court. Were counter-tradition, high costs for the construction of the Supreme Court and so…

    • 1292 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the House of Commons there are many parties all fighting individually for control of the house, and to be in power and govern the land of the UK. To win the election and do this a party or coalition of parties needs a 326 majority to be able to form a government. This system creates a dominance in the house of commons if that majority is achieved sufficiently, as with Tony Blair’s landslide in 1997 where he had over a 150 seat majority, it is this kind of one party dominance I am going to be discussing in this essay and whether or not it limits parliaments main function to represent constituents and pass laws which benefit them.…

    • 1009 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays