E.g. in 2016, the Lords amended an Immigration bill, forcing the Government to relocate child refugees in the UK who had made it to Europe from Syria, against the wishes of the Government. Since 2010, the Government has been defeated over 100 times by the Lords. The Lords can also initiate bills themselves. The Conservatives do not have a majority of Peers so can be outvoted in the Lords. technically did not even require the approval of the Commons, as it is an executive power of the PM. Also, PM appoints many of the members of the House of Lords, so it is limited. In 2015, for example, David Cameron appointed 26 new Conservative Lords, increasing the influence of the Conservatives in the House of Lords and arguably making future government defeats in the Lords less likely. It has also been accused of cronyism (being stuffed with government donors) and in need of reform. The SNP have called the Lords ‘a sorry list of rejected politicians, cronies and hangers on with big chequebooks’ and have called for the House of Lords to be abolished. Parliament can check the work of Government through Select Committees; cross party groups of around 11-15 MPs who meet weekly to monitor government departments by scrutinising government bills, gathering evidence from expert witnesses, and writing reports with recommendations to the relevant Cabinet Minister. E.g. In 2016 the Liaison Committee called PM Cameron before them and questioned him for an hour and a half on the EU referendum and the issue of child refugees coming to the UK from Syria. Committees are arguably more effective than the Commons at holding Government to account as they are cross-party and have more time to question, meaning Ministers may struggle to get away with the evasive sound bite which they may use in the Commons. However, the government is no obligation to act upon recommendations made by committees, so it could be argued that Committees are limited in their ability to hold the Executive to account, especially as committees do not generate significant media coverage. In saying that, the lack of media coverage allied with a civilised and calm atmosphere may make Ministers more relaxed and candid when giving evidence, meaning the Committees can be an effective way to expose truths. 4a) Evaluate / Analyse the effectiveness of an electoral system(s) in providing fair representation 4b) Analyse the strengths and weaknesses of different electoral systems 4c) ‘Electoral systems do not always provide for fair representation. ’Discuss.
Because educational inequality begins at a young age, early intervention is therefore required. This has prompted Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon to pledge that her government’s key priority will be closing the poverty-related attainment gap in Scotland. Overall, refer to isolated factor, but remind us there are other ways to tackle inequality Evaluate….. 7. Evaluate / Analyse the effectiveness of different ways to tackle inequality Effective ways Less effective ways Government – mention some of above govt policies in benefits, housing, health and education Government – mention some of govt policies in benefits, housing, health and education Also, the voluntary sector and charities can work to reduce inequality. Food banks are an example of charities working to reduce inequality by providing emergency food to people most in need. There are over 400 food banks across the UK, 50 in Scotland. Perhaps as a consequence of UK government cuts to benefits, there has been a massive rose in the number of food banks in the UK recently. A 2015 BBC documentary ‘The Food Bank: Scotland’s Hidden Hunger’ showed that the Trussell Trust charity which runs the food banks, says it has handed out over 1 million emergency food parcels in the UK in the last year, up from 347,000 the year before. This suggests that they are doing vital work as so many people are using them. It also suggests that the public are keen to support food banks, as they are entirely dependent on donations from the public. If they did not exist, perhaps many of these people would have nothing to However, as valuable as charities are, they do not set policy but rather simply respond to it, so they are often powerless to actually change the direction of the Government. Arguably, the growing dependency on food banks suggests the ineffectiveness of the Government in tackling inequalities. SNP MP Mhairi Black made this point in 2015, saying: “Food banks are not part of the Welfare State, they are a symbol that the Welfare State is failing.” Perhaps the rise of food banks is a sign that the Minimum Wage is too low. The Living Wage Commission recommend a higher ‘living wage’ instead but over 5 million people currently earn below the set Living Wage, and some of those using food banks are the working poor.