In depth notes with academic commentary and debate, lecturer comments, textbook information and exam tips. Bright and colorful with pictures to illustrate, visually attractive. ...
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Public Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Central Government
|
|
---|---|
|
|
Institutions and Functions
The Monarch
Distinguish Monarch acting in her personal capacity versus her public capacity, i.e. performing acts of government
Functions: Head of State, Head of the Armed Forces, the Supreme Governor of the Church of England and the fount of honor (has the exclusive right of conferring legitimate titles of nobility and orders of chivalry); is also the reigning constitutional monarch in all 16 sovereign states members of the Commonwealth and has a role in relation to Crown Dependencies (Channel Islands and Isle of Man) and to Overseas Territories
The Royal prerogative power refers to the residual power inherent in the Sovereign. Its scope has changed over time and the bulk of prerogative powers are now exercised by ministers (see Cabinet Manual, 1.5).
Certain fundamental principles apply to the use of prerogative powers:
Where there is a conflict between the prerogative and statute, statute prevails. Statute law cannot be altered by use of the prerogative (Case of Proclamations).
The use of the prerogative is subject to judicial review in most cases (GCHQ; Miller v PM).
While the prerogative can be abolished or abrogated by statute, it can never be broadened. However, Parliament could create powers by statute that are similar to prerogative powers in their nature.
The nature and scope of prerogative powers were challenged in the R (on the application of Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union and Miller v Prime Minister cases.
In terms of the exercise of prerogative powers = two categories.
Prerogative powers exercised by her ministers | Prerogative powers exercised by the Monarch herself |
---|---|
. |
|
Appointing the Prime Minister
By convention, the person appointed as Prime Minister is the person best positioned to command an overall majority in the House of Commons. Typically, the leader of the party with such a majority, though not necessarily.
What happens when there is no clear leader of the majority party?
What happens when there is no clear majority in Parliament (a ‘hung Parliament’)?
The First-Past-the-Post electoral system is designed to make this outcome highly unlikely. The monarch could (1) send for the leader of the party with the most number of seats (even if not a majority), resulting in a minority government, or (2) initiate discussions to see whether another person exists who could command a majority or a coalition could be formed, resulting in a coalition government.
Advantages of First Past The Post
It is easy to understand
It can be quick to count the votes and declare a winner
Voters can express a clear view on which party they want in government
In a two-party system, it has normally produced a single-party government with a clear mandate to govern
Disadvantages of the system
MPs can be elected with relatively small percentage of the vote.
It encourages tactical voting where people vote against the candidate they most dislike.
Many votes are wasted: either those cast for a losing candidate or those for a winning candidate past the level needed to win the seat.
Penalises small parties whose votes are spread widely across the country, not concentrated in particular seats.
The Monarch also formally appoints the First Ministers of Scotland and Wales, but there has less leeway – she must appoint whoever the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament (Scotland Act s.46) or of the Welsh Assembly (Government of Wales Act 2006, s.47) nominates, whoever that may be.
Granting royal assent to legislation
Last used in 1708
Conventionally Queen always signs as would be a constitutional crisis for monarch to refuse to assent the decrees of an elected body.
A potential exception to the convention falling into disuse if the monarch were to act on the Prime Minister’s advice.
Is the fact that a convention has not been used in a long time a clear indication it no longer is valid?
Dismissal of the Government
Last used in the UK in 1834
Dissolution of Parliament (until 2011)
Before the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011, the timing of the dissolution of Parliament was for the Prime Minister to decide. Maximum term was 5 years, but the actual duration was not fixed.
After passing of Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011:
Next polling day: 7 May 2015; thereafter: first Thursday May in the 5th calendar year since last election – no later than 2 months after this (if approved by resolution in each House + a statement of PM’s reasons)
Parliament dissolves on the 25th working day prior to this day
Early elections:
If HC passes a motion, with 2/3 absolute majority: “That there shall be an early parliamentary general election.” OR
If there is a vote of no confidence:
(1) HC passes a motion: “That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.” AND
(2) Within 14 days, no motion of confidence has been passed to say: “That this House has confidence in Her Majesty’s Government.”
Elections for the devolved legislatures must not fall on the same date. As a result, the elections for devolved parliaments were held on 5...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Public Law Notes.
In depth notes with academic commentary and debate, lecturer comments, textbook information and exam tips. Bright and colorful with pictures to illustrate, visually attractive. ...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started