Constitutional reforms since 1997 reduced
To what extent have constitutional reforms since 1997 reduced the power of the UK government? BY AbbteQ To what extent have constitutional reforms since 1997 reduced the power of the UK Constitutional reform is the process of changing the way in which a country may be governed. There are many reforms that have arguably changed the UK constitution in such an extent that the power of the elected government has been reduced or restricted. Changes such have these have occurred much more frequently in the years since 1997. One reform that can be seen to have reduced the power of overnment in the I-JK 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 I-JK was becoming more democratic and so this change to the constitution was a good thing. However, this reform may look positive on the surface ut if it as looked at in more detail it is clear that this may not be the case.
Constitutional reforms since 1997 reduced Essay Example
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 I-JK, 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 eforming the constitution in this manner since 1997.
Another way in which the government’s power could be seen to be reduced is the reform of the House of Lords. This is because there is speculation over whether after enforcing Stage 1 of the reform (the removal of hereditary peers from the House of Lords, other than 92) the process should continue and Stage 2 be enforced. Stage 2 of the reform would be the conversion of the House of Lords into a second elected chamber. Many would argue that this reform would cause government to lose power as with a larger number of lected MPs there may be more checks on government actions put in place.
Because of this those in power would have to be more careful regarding their actions and proposals. In contrast to this, others would argue that the government would not lose power as they would still be needed to be the body that runs the country. This is because it would be virtually impossible for such a large body to run the country on its own as the conflicting opinions would be too great and arguments would cause the decision process to be slowed dramatically. Consequently, it can be argued that his reform since 1997 would not reduce the power of the government in the I-JK.
Referendums are one way in which the power of the I-JK government can be reduced due to constitutional change. An example ot this is when reterendums were used to help the government decide whether devolution was a good idea or not. This meant that the voices and opinions of the people living in the I-JK were heard when an issue that would affect their lives was being decided upon. The rapidly increasing use of referendum in I-JK politics could be reducing the power of government by giving the ublic too much power of their own.
If the average person is allowed the opportunity to decide upon serious political issues to regularly then this could mean a loss of respect and faith in the government in the collective public. This would be caused by the idea that if the people of the country could make decisions perfectly well on their own then that said country would theoretically not be in need of a government. However, referendums are not yet legally binding and so the result can only be used to guide political decisions and not make them.
Because of this the government can completely ignore the opinion of the public even after a referendum has been held if they choose to do so. Also, it is the government who has to hold the referendums to start with but if they do not feel they need the help of the public or want to know the people’s view they are under no obligation to hold a referendum. For example there was a failure to hold a promised referendum on an alternative voting system. As a result of this it can be argued that government is not losing power because of constitutional reform.
To a certain extent, constitutional reforms since 1997 have reduced the power of the government in the I-JK. This is because the country can be seen to be becoming more democratic in that it is creating a situation of ‘demos cratos’ (power to the people). However, the winning argument seems to be that government power has not been reduced. This is because no matter what reform has been made, the London government has overall rule on issues (combined with the influence of parliament) and there is still a need for the political body.