How effective is Parliament at holding Government to account

Effective / Not effective
Backbenchers
Difference in the support of backbenchers depending on where Government is in their term-start, middle, end. Usually the start is a Honeymoon period of wanting to agree with their party and leadership. Middle they may become more disheartened and end back to being loyal as they want re-elected.
Linked with Prime Ministers power of Patronage-want to be promoted and so pressure to stay in line.
Depends on type of Government-Majority-big or small.
Big-Backbenchers may not always vote with their government if there is a big majority as they may feel that they are not as essential to their party and can go with their own feelings.
Small-Backbenchers will often vote with their party when they aware that they are essential to policy and actual feel more loyalty during small majorities-Working tax credit vote in the H of C. Many do not agree but will vote with their government. Start of a new term, small majority.
Coalition- Backbenchers often do not vote with their party in a coalition as it may not be part of their own party agenda. Lib dems tuition fees.
Votes in Commons: e.g. in 2013 MPs voted against a government motion urging British military involvement in Syria, defeating the PM.
PMQs - In his 2010 autobiography, former PM Tony Blair called PMQs ‘the most nerve-wracking experience in his Prime Ministerial life’, showing its ability to unnerve and control the PM to some extent. E.g. in 2015 Opposition leader Jeremy Corbynasked PM Cameron 6 times to explain the policy of working tax. Cameron deflected on the issue stating that he would publicise changes in the next statement. This showed him to be weak and indecisive. It alerted the public to the fact that this cut was not directly mentioned in his manifesto.
Effect-people/press/backbenchers can loose confidence in him as a leader and party as a strong Govt. Backbenchers feel demoralised if the prime minister is not performing well. He needs them on side.
Not significant actual impact, other than affecting public perception. Remember, the prime minister is not directly elected like the President so does not have as firm a position. If becomes disliked then party can have a vote of no confidence in him.
Events in the Commons generate publicity in the media, so it is perhaps the best place to hold the Government to account. Migrant crisis example Harriet Harman after election asked about Britain’s response to the Migrant Crisis July 2015. This along with public and press pressure pushed the Prime Minister into his promise to allow 20,000 Syrian migrants into UK in the next 5 years.
Events- Migrant crisis 2015. Failing generally on migrant policy –tough to control migration and with migrant crisis, Govt is under control to take more immigrants for humanitarian reasons.
Europe-EU referendum coming up. PM wants to stay in the EU but needs to renegotiate terms to ensure that the vote goes with him. Needs to keep friends in Europe so need to look like he is doing as much as other countries but need to appease those against immigration too. A very tricky position for Conservatives. / 3 line whip usually works –e.g. despite large Conservative backbench rebellion voting in favour of referendum on whether Britain should remain in the EU in 2011, PM Cameron imposed whip as he did not want referendum and rebellion failed to defeat PM.
Also, the Fawcett Society have claimed there is ‘something unhealthy about the UK’s political culture’ which they identify as ‘aggressive, knock-about and sexist’. Sarah Champion, the MP for Rotherham, described the levels of sexist abuse she encountered in the Chamber as ‘utterly appalling’. Speaker of the Commons John Bercow has said that some women MPs have told him that the atmosphere at PMQs is so bad that they no longer attend. Clearly therefore, many feel the Commons is an arena for cheap political point scoring and therefore limited in its effectiveness in holding the Executive branch to account.
House of Lords – The unelected second chamber of the UK Parliament. Its members have experience and expertise in fields such as politics, law, business, education, health and science, which scrutinise and review legislation passed from the Commons. They can delay and amend bills.First time since 1990s that it has less than a majority in the H of L. E.g. in 2012 they made changes to proposed government cuts to Legal Aid, voting to exempt victims of domestic abuse from the cuts. The PM and Government then agreed to these changes, and then Justice Secretary Ken Clarke called this a ’major concession’, showing the power of the Lords to limit the PM and the Govt.
Key example 2015 Working Tax Credit reforms-House of Lords voted to delay this proposal demanding that the Government reveal the impact of the cuts.
Cameron wants to get more involved in Syria but after the failure in the H of C in 2013, he is uncertain of H of C support and now cannot be certain of support from H of L. This has a serious impact on the Govt approach to Syria. Example of weakness of PM and executive by parliament. / Supremacy of Commons and govt over Lords, Lords can only delay bills for a maximum of year, not indefinitely. E.g. Lords recommended changes to the 2012 Welfare Reform Bill but the Commons overturned all these changes using ‘financial privilege’.
Also, PM appoints many of the members of the House of Lords, so it is limited.
Select Committees scrutinise govt bills and hold govt and PM to account by calling witnesses, hearing evidence, and writing reports to recommend policy to the Government. E.g. In 2014 Liaison Committee called PM David Cameron before them and questioned him for an hour and a half on gender equality, Female Genital Mutilation, and his response to the floods in England.
Backbench committee:
Established by Gordon Brown 2010 after expenses scandal 2007-2008. More accountability and role of backbenchers. Stop the disengagement of backbenchers. Now they set the business agenda of the H of C and decide who chairs committees. An important power which was previously under the PM patronage power so reduces that. Backbenchers can now hold their own debates which the frontbenchers may have disregarded. Empowered backbenchers and gave them a valid chance to scrutinise the executive.
John Bercow speaker in H of C has instigated 24hour emergency debates and so empowering backbenchers. Theresa May brought in to explain border agency powers. Previous she could have delayed an announcement but now they have to come in and explain at 24 hour notice.
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, if govt has large majority (e.g Blair’s Labour won landslide in 1997) then Select Committes will mostly be made up of Govt MPs, who may not ask awkward questions like the Opposition would.
The Govt is under 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.