Democracy in the United Kingdom Speech

Out of Date Laws Are Undermining Democracy in England 

“The United Kingdom is a union, that... [has] a political system that has only one source of authority: Parliament.” (Almond 1996, p.161) Good afternoon Ms. Hotchins and fellow classmates. Great Britain has long been regarded as one of the most free and democrat countries in the world, bestowing its model of government upon such nations as Australia and Canada. However, as former Conservative Party Finance Minister Kenneth Clarke stated: “If a man landed from Mars and saw the current system, he would not say that democracy was working properly.” (Osborne, J. 2006) This statement highlights the current condition of democracy in the United Kingdom, and while it was stated by a man who is in opposition to the current government, it is nevertheless a valid point. For, while the UK is by all means still considered a thriving democracy, the “fact that the British system was not built to specifications, but simply evolved over time, has left it with certain features which appear... undemocratic.” (Downing 2008, p.18) It is therefore possible to hypothesise that democracy in the United Kingdom is undermined by outdated legislation and in need of reform. This point may be argued on the grounds of devolution, the bicameral system of government and finally the current voting system in the United Kingdom.

The outdated legislature of devolution is undermining democracy in the United Kingdom and in need of reform. Since devolution began, the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish have been granted the right of self-government on domestic affairs. However, England was not granted this privilege, and now Members representing Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish seats “may vote on legislation which extends to England, but neither they nor Members representing English seats can vote on subjects which have been devolved to the Scottish Parliament.” (Holden, H. 2008) According to a study commissioned by the Library of the House of Commons into the effect of devolution. This outdated legislation is undermining democracy in the United Kingdom as it allows MPs all over the United Kingdom to vote on English matters, while politicians with constituencies in England may not vote on issues concerning Scotland. This legislation is in need of reform if the people of England are to be allowed to exercise their democratic right of electing representatives who will be the ones voting on their laws, particularly since 85% of the population of the United Kingdom reside in England. William Hague, the leader of the Conservatives mounted a call for “English votes on English laws.” (Holden, H. 2008) Despite the obvious conflict of interest of being the Leader of the Opposition, this statement points out the undemocratic nature of the current system. The need for reform increased after the 2005 elections, where Labour only held onto power because of its Scottish MPs, which Tony Blair used to push through “English legislation on university tuition fees and health service reforms.” (Archant. 2006) This legislation had no effect on Scotland and would have been defeated had the Scottish MPs refrained from voting. This outdated legislation is undermining democracy as politicians from across the United Kingdom may vote on issues solely concerning Britain. The Liberal Democrats Chairman Rob Tilbrook described his desire to implement a federal system in England, where the “House of Commons would be responsible for UK-wide policies such as defence and foreign affairs, with England having its own elected parliament with a first minister just as the Scots have.” (Archant. 2006) Although this statement is made by a man whose political party would profit from an English-only parliament, his desire for reform to make the UK Parliament more democratic is understandable. It has been argued that reforming the devolution legislation in the United Kingdom would create two classes of Members of Parliament and, according to Prime Minister Gordon Brown: “Risk the Union.” (Holden, H. 2008) However, this is not the case, although Mr. Brown is understandably reluctant to reform the current system, since Labour would lose is majority if this ever happened. For as the leader of the Opposition, David Cameron stated, “We already have two classes of MP,” (Holden, H. 2008) because of the Scottish MPs who can vote on English Legislature. The devolution legislation in the United Kingdom is undermining democracy and requires political reform if it is to remove outdated legislation and introduce fairer and more balanced laws.

Obsolete legislature reducing the power of the United Kingdom’s bicameral system of government is undermining democracy and in need of reform. According to the United Nations, the purpose of a bicameral system of government is to hinder the “passage of flawed legislation... [since] with two legislative bodies, there is enhanced oversight of the executive branch.” (United Nations. 2008) This informative statement by a neutral international body sums up the advantage of this style of government. However, in the UK the Upper Chamber only has consultative powers, and as the United Nations article goes onto elaborate: “The popularly elected House of Commons, has evolved into the superior legislative power, and its decisions override those of the upper chamber – the House of Lords.” (United Nations. 2008) Yet how can the United Kingdom remain a flourishing democracy if its bicameral system of government is so weak? The current system does not provide the degree of protection that is found in other countries utilizing bicameralism, such as Australia. Out of date legislature is undermining democracy in the United Kingdom as the Upper House is stripped of almost all of its powers. It has been argued that the weak bicameralism in the United Kingdom is justified, since the Members of the Upper House have historically maintained their position through hereditary right and not by mandate of the people. Just like the monarch, who according to the English Bill of Rights has lost the power of “dispensing with and suspending laws, and the execution of laws, without consent of parliament,” (Constitution Society. 2008) the Lords too have lost a great degree of their power. However, this argument is no longer valid, since the government has “removed the automatic right of hereditary peers to hold seats in the House of Lords.” (U.S. Department of State. 2008) Despite opening up the Upper House for popularly elected members, The United Kingdom’s bicameral system of government remains weak and does not afford the democratic protection that having more and stronger representation should. The outdated legislation depriving the Upper House of the majority of its powers because its members in the past were not elected is in need of reform, since bicameralism cannot function in the United Kingdom as effectively and this is at a democratic cost.

The outdated voting system in the United Kingdom is undermining democracy and is in need of reform. As the Economist puts it, “In Britain low political participation (the lowest in the developed world) is a major problem.” (Kekic, L. 2007) This analysis by a neutral study into global democracy by this magazine underlines the problem with the current voting system. Disproportionate electorates and an inequitable voting system are eroding democracy in Great Britain and is in need of reform. For in the UK “the first-past-the-post electoral system is one of disproportionate representation, manufacturing a majority in the House of Commons from a minority of the popular vote.” (Almond 1996, p.192-3) This voting system is outdated and need of reform as it is undermining democracy as political parties gain power in the United Kingdom with a minority of the vote, as the vote is split by more than two candidates running in each electorate. Low voter turnout, perhaps signalling dissatisfaction with the current electoral system prompted an inquiry by the Ministry of Justice into whether proportional representation would improve voter participation. It found that “there is some evidence that proportional systems have a marginally higher turnout internationally.” (Ministry of Justice. 2008) Almost every country in continental Europe utilizes this electoral system, and this report by a neutral government body draws attention to the positive way people respond to this electoral system, which could improve voter turnout in the United Kingdom. Another issue of concern is the disproportionate size of the constituencies in the UK. (See Appendix A) The number of electors per constituency differs throughout the United Kingdom, and has the undemocratic effect of allowing the votes of people in some regions to count more than the votes of others. This information from the Office of National Statistics offers insight into the United Kingdom electoral system from a neutral government body. As you can see, in England each electorate comprises of 72,958 people, while in Wales it is a mere 56,840. This outdated legislation is in need of reform as it undermines democracy by allowing the votes of some to count more than others. Although it has been argued that smaller constituencies in some areas of the United Kingdom are necessary to protect the rights of the constituents, this is not the case. As the Conservative peer Lord Baker of Dorking stated: “Votes are worth the same wherever they are throughout the United Kingdom. It has always been said that we should overcompensate for Wales and Scotland. I do not think that that is fair.” (Holden, H. 2008) Although this statement was made by a member of the Opposition, it nevertheless raises the question of how democratic different constituency sizes truly are. Reform is required to remove this outdated legislation undermining the democratic elements of the voting system in the United Kingdom.

Democracy in the United Kingdom is undermined by outdated legislation and in need of reform. Devolution, the bicameral system and the electoral system in the United Kingdom exhibit undemocratic traits that are in need of reform if Britain is to remain a flourishing democracy. If the United Kingdom seeks to honour its claim as the architect of modern democracy, then it must do its own people the justice of introducing reform by removing outdated and undemocratic legislature.

Appendices

Appendix A:

(Holden, H. 2008)

Annotated Bibliography 

Almond, G. (1996). Comparative Politics Today. USA : Longman Publishers

The authors’ names were clearly visible on this book and both authors are professors and experts in this subject area. There was no evidence of bias in the information provided. It was written in a factual and neutral scholarly manner. The authors listed an extensive bibliography as well as a wide range of suggested readings. The purpose of this book was to provide an educational text on world politics comparing a wide variety of countries. Although the book was published in 1996 and is over 12 years old, the information was still useful and relevant. The author extensively covered this topic and I found it extremely useful.

Archant. (2006). Aim is to restore democracy to England. Retrieved 2008

from Source

Although the author of this newspaper article did not have his name clearly displayed, the name of the organization that ran the paper was clearly visible. No bias was evident in the text and the report was written in a neutral manner. The facts could be verified from other research I had conducted and the source quoted a range of officials on the topics, so it was not just the journalist giving his opinion. The purpose of this source was to examine the effect of devolution on England and since it was only published in 2006 it is a relatively recent article and still highly relevant. The source covers the topic in great detail and I found it extremely useful for my assignment.

Constitution Society. (2008). English Bill of Rights. Retrieved 2008

from Source

This website is run by a none-profit organisation that seeks to have the English Bill of Rights freely available for anyone to see. The website consisted of the original English Bill of rights as well as the translation into modern English. The website merely displayed this primary source and was intended for educational purposes. This website was updated this year so it is very current and up to date.

Downing, D. (2008) Democracy. Great Britain : Heinemann Library

The author of this book had his name clearly visible on the cover and he listed an extensive bibliography at the end of the book. There was no bias evident in the book which was written in a factual manner. The purpose of this book was to act as an educational resource and since it was only published this year it is very current. I found this source very useful as it provided me with a great deal of in-depth background information about factors of democracy in the world as well as in the United Kingdom.

Holden, H. (2008). The West Lothian Question. Retrieved 2008

from Source

The names’ of both the author’s of this document were clearly visible on this document, which was commissioned by the House of Commons Library. The purpose of this source was to examine the effect of devolution on Britain and was written in a neutral and unbiased manner. The authors list an extensive range of referenced sources, and since the report was updated this year it is very current and up to date. I found this source extremely useful for my assignment as it provided me with a lot of primary quotes.

Ministry of Justice. (2008). Governance of Britain. Retrieved 2008

from Source

The organisation that created this source was the United Kingdom Ministry of Justice, and it was clearly acknowledged. This was a media report on a study into voting systems and the purpose was to inform the public of the results. This source was written in a neutral and unbiased manner and since it was published this year it is very current. I found this source very useful as it adequately covered the topic.

Kekic, L. (2007).Index of democracy. Retrieved 2008

from Source

The author’s name was clearly displayed on this online document, as well as the organisation that commissioned it – the Economist. The information was presented in a neutral and unbiased manner and the methodology used by the investigators to attain their results were meticulously explained. The purpose of this report was to assess the democracy of countries throughout the world and since it was published last year it is very current and up to date. I found it useful as it provided me with some background information on democracy in the United Kingdom, as well as some elements of democracy to investigate further.

Osborne, J. (2006). Democracy for England! Retrieved 2008

from Source

The name of the author of this source was clearly visible. The information presented in this source was verified by my other research and no bias was evident in the text. The purpose of this website was to examine the effect of devolution on the United Kingdom and it covered this topic in great detail. This source was last updated in 2006 so it is still current and relevant to today. I found it extremely useful and it provided me with a great deal of background information that helped my assignment.

United Nations. (2008) Legislative Chambers: Unicameral or Bicameral? Retrieved 2008

from Source

The purpose of this resource was to act as an educational website on the two systems of unicameralism and bicameralism. The name of the organisation that commissioned this source was clearly visible and since it was updated this year the resource is very current and up to date. The resource covers the topic in great detail and no bias was evident in the text. I found it extremely useful for my assignment and I used it for gaining both background knowledge for my assignment and quotes.

U.S. Department of State. (2008). Background Note: United Kingdom. Retrieved 2008

from Source

This internet resource was commissioned by the United States Department of State and its purpose was to provide factual background information on the United Kingdom. The organisation that commissioned this source had its name clearly visible and since it was updated this year it is very current and up to date. There was no bias in this source and the information was presented in a factual manner. This source covered the topic in great detail and it was very useful for me since it provided me with great detail about the current political and government system in the United Kingdom today.