Photo AI
'Arguments in favour of further constitutional reform are more convincing than those against.' Discuss. - 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.' Discuss. - 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 composition of the House of Lords remains unelected and arguably undemocratic. Advocates suggest that continued reform is necessary to create a chamber that better reflects the democratic will of the people.
- Electoral System Reform: The first-past-the-post system often results in disproportionate representation, where a party can obtain more than 50% of power with significantly less than that percentage of votes. Reform proponents argue for an electoral system that ensures fair representation.
- Devolution: There is a call for further devolution to ensure that different regions receive representation suitable to their needs. The perception is that devolution has not yet reached its full potential and current arrangements are not equitable across the UK.
- West Lothian Question and EVEL: Calls exist to address the West Lothian Question, enhancing the role of Scottish MPs while creating a framework for English MPs to deliberate on legislation pertinent to England only. This aspect signals a need for constitutional clarity.
- Human Rights Legislation Reform: Some argue that the Human Rights Act, guided by the ECHR, should be replaced with a UK-specific Bill of Rights, allowing for a legislative framework that aligns more closely with British historical context and values.
Step 2
Arguments against further constitutional reform
Answer
- Sufficiency of Current Reforms: Previous reforms to the House of Lords are said to have created a more vibrant and constructive second chamber. Critics argue that any further changes might undermine this new structure.
- Electoral Stability: The current electoral system has delivered strong and stable governments. Proponents of the status quo argue that changing it could lead to fragmented and unstable coalitions, reminiscent of political difficulties faced in the past.
- Devolution Endpoint: Opponents of further devolution suggest that current arrangements already risk the breakup of the UK, and additional division could be catastrophic. They argue the current system offers sufficient representation.
- Parliament's Legislative Powers: Parliament possesses mechanisms to adapt without constitutional reform. Critics highlight that Parliament can self-regulate voting rights and roles effectively and that further constitutional debates could introduce uncertainty.
- Human Rights Acts Functionality: The existing Human Rights Act has been effective as an international guardian of rights. Arguments for further reform in this area point to potential isolation and diminished protections for individual rights.
Step 3
Conclusion
Answer
In conclusion, while there are compelling arguments on both sides of the debate, the assertion that arguments for further constitutional reform are more convincing may hinge on broader perspectives of representation, equity, and stability. A balanced view indicates that the existing system has both strengths and weaknesses, and thus, a more nuanced approach may be required to assess the future of constitutional reform in the UK.