Photo AI
'Arguments in favour of further constitutional reform are more convincing than those against' - Edexcel - A-Level Politics - Question 3 - 2016 - Paper 2
Question 3
'Arguments in favour of further constitutional reform are more convincing than those against'. Discuss.
Worked Solution & Example Answer:'Arguments in favour of further constitutional reform are more convincing than those against' - Edexcel - A-Level Politics - Question 3 - 2016 - Paper 2
Step 1
Arguments in favour of further constitutional reform
Answer
-
House of Lords Reform: The current House of Lords remains unelected and is seen as undemocratic. Advocates argue that further reform is necessary to enhance its legitimacy and functionality.
-
Electoral System Reform: The existing electoral system can lead to a lack of representation, as demonstrated by the reality of MPs obtaining 100% of power with less than 50% of the vote. Calls for proportional representation highlight this contradiction.
-
Devolution Issues: While there has been progress in devolving powers, the uneven distribution across different UK regions suggests that further reform is needed to ensure political equity.
-
West Lothian Question: This problem illustrates the imbalance created when Scottish MPs can vote on English matters without English MPs having similar rights. Advocates argue for legislative reform to address these disparities.
-
Human Rights Bill Concerns: Some critics of the current system advocate for abolishing the Human Rights Act and creating a UK-specific Bill of Rights, arguing it would better reflect British values and judicial priorities.
Step 2
Arguments against further constitutional reform
Answer
-
Sufficiency of Existing Reforms: Many believe that the reforms to the House of Lords have already sufficiently improved its function, providing a more vibrant second chamber that adds value to the legislative process.
-
Stability of Electoral System: The electoral system is argued to be stable and effective, resulting in strong government representation. The rejection of further changes in the 2011 referendum supports this claim.
-
Devolution as Complete: Critics argue that devolution has reached its logical conclusion. Further changes might risk fragmenting the UK rather than uniting it.
-
Parliamentary Sovereignty: Opponents state that Parliament is equipped to handle issues without needing further constitutional changes; the existing mechanisms of governance are adequate.
-
Human Rights Act as Sufficient: The Human Rights Act is considered essential for protecting rights, and critics are wary of creating a new system that may weaken these protections.