The UK Parliament: the composition and roles of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the legislative process, the functions of representation, legislation and scrutiny, the work of select committees, and the debate over Lords reform.

What this dot point is asking

You need to explain the composition and roles of the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the legislative process, Parliament's functions of representation, legislation and scrutiny, the work of select committees, and the debate over Lords reform. The CCEA AS 2 paper rewards precise knowledge of how Parliament works and a balanced judgement on how effectively it scrutinises the executive.

The House of Commons

The Commons is where governments are made and unmade: the party (or coalition) commanding a majority forms the government, and a successful vote of no confidence can force a government out or trigger an election. Its dominance over the Lords reflects its democratic legitimacy.

The House of Lords

The Lords' value lies in its expertise and independence: many peers are experienced specialists, and crossbench (non-party) peers and weaker party discipline let it scrutinise more freely than the Commons. By convention (the Salisbury Convention) it does not block manifesto commitments of the elected government, recognising its lesser legitimacy.

The legislative process

A government bill becomes law by passing through stages in both Houses:

• First reading (formal introduction), second reading (debate on principle), committee stage (detailed, clause-by-clause scrutiny), report stage (further amendments) and third reading (final approval) in the first House.
• The bill then repeats these stages in the second House, which may amend it; disagreements are resolved by exchange of amendments ("ping-pong").
• Finally the bill receives Royal Assent and becomes an Act.

Functions: representation, legislation, scrutiny

Parliament, like other legislatures, exists to represent, legislate and scrutinise.

• Representation. MPs represent constituents (raising grievances, holding surgeries) and the nation; the Commons reflects, however imperfectly, public opinion.
• Legislation. Parliament makes, amends and repeals primary law and grants the government its mandate.
• Scrutiny. Parliament holds the executive to account through Prime Minister's Questions, departmental question time, debates, votes of confidence, and especially select committees.

Select committees

Select committees are widely regarded as Parliament's most effective scrutiny tool, because they are cross-party, expert and largely free of the whips. Reforms since 2010 (elected chairs and members) strengthened their independence. The Public Accounts Committee, chaired by an opposition MP, scrutinises the value for money of public spending. Their power is influence rather than command: they cannot force the government to act, but their reports shape debate and can embarrass ministers into change.

The debate over Lords reform

The composition of the Lords is contested:

• The case for reform. An unelected chamber lacks democratic legitimacy; an elected second chamber would be more accountable, or a chamber wholly appointed on merit would remove the remaining hereditary peers and patronage.
• The case against radical reform. An appointed Lords brings independent expertise without challenging the elected Commons; an elected Lords might rival the Commons' authority and produce deadlock.

Reform has been incremental: the 1999 Act removed most hereditary peers, but proposals for a substantially elected chamber have repeatedly stalled, so the Lords remains a part-reformed, mainly appointed house.

Examples in context

A model AS paragraph on scrutiny might read: "The effectiveness of parliamentary scrutiny is shaped above all by the government's control of the Commons. A government with a working majority and disciplined whips can usually set the agenda, win its votes and pass its bills largely unaltered, which limits how far backbenchers can constrain it. Yet scrutiny is not toothless. Departmental select committees, cross-party and free of the whips, take evidence and publish reports that ministers must answer and that can force changes in policy, while the Lords' revising role secures amendments the Commons later accepts. The judgement, therefore, is that Parliament scrutinises the executive effectively at the margins, through committees, the Lords and occasional rebellions, but that executive dominance of the Commons sets real structural limits." This balances the two sides and reaches a verdict.

Try this

Q1. State two ways the House of Commons is more powerful than the House of Lords. [2 marks]

• Cue. It is elected and sustains the government, it controls money bills, and it can override the Lords under the Parliament Acts.

Q2. Explain why select committees are an effective form of scrutiny. [6 marks]

• Cue. They are cross-party, take evidence from ministers and experts, are largely free of the whips, and publish reports the government must answer.

Q3. To what extent should the House of Lords be reformed? [24 marks]

• Cue. Weigh the democratic case for an elected or merit-appointed chamber against the value of independent expertise and the risk of rivalling the Commons. Reach a substantiated judgement.