a level politics backbenchers essay

Backbenchers

Backbenchers are MPs in the House of Commons and members of the House of Lords that are not part of the government or the opposition party’s leadership team.

Backbenchers as Representatives

• Backbenchers represent UK citizens through impacting on laws and scrutinising the government.
• Backbenchers in the House of Commons represent the interests of the citizens in their constituency.

Government policy and legislation

• Backbenchers in the House of Commons represent their constituents' interests and should vote on legislation in a way which meets their constituents’ interests.
• House of Lords' backbenchers look to improve legislation.
• All backbenchers can speak in Parliamentary debates over legislation.
• Backbenchers can participate in voting in favour of or against legislation.
• Backbenchers are members of standing committees which review bills in detail.
• Backbenchers can put forward Private Members’ bills.

Government scrutiny

• Backbenchers scrutinise the government and hold it accountable for its actions.
• Backbenchers can question government ministers during Question time and the Prime Minister in Prime Minister’s Questions on their policies and actions to ensure they are held to account.
• Backbenchers make up and chair select committees which scrutinise government departments.
• Backbench MPs can write questions to ministers about issues which impact their constituents which ministers must reply to.

Party delegates

• Backbenchers are expected to support their party in Parliament.
• Backbenchers of the party in government are expected to not overly criticise the government and to follow the party line when voting.
• Backbenchers of the opposition parties have a role to oppose the government through criticism in ministers questions and voting against government policies.

Parliamentary privilege

• Parliamentary privilege enables backbenchers to carry out their roles, particularly representing the electorate’s interests through having free speech.
• Parliamentary privilege ensures that MPs and members of the House of Lords can freely debate on any issue without interference.
• MPs used their parliamentary privilege during the Ryan Giggs affair to name the footballer who had taken out an injunction over an affair.

Significance of Backbenchers

Backbenchers can have a significant role, but party whips can reduce this, as well as how willing the government is to support private members' bills and select committees

Significant role: rebellions

• Backbenchers often make up the majority of a party in Parliament. The government’s backbenchers are important to pass legislation.
• Backbench rebellions can change the direction of government policy.
• In 2012, 91 Conservative backbenchers voted against coalition government plans for House of Lords reform.

Significant role: constituency

• Backbenchers are important for the voices of their constituencies to be heard - and can spend more time in their constituencies because they are not ministers. -Rebelling backbenchers often prioritise their constituency.

Significant role: other

• Backbenchers can change public policy by introducing Private Members’ Bills.
• Backbenchers in committees can hold government ministers to account and research policies.

Not significant role

• If a ‘three-line whip’ is enacted, backbenchers risk being removed from their party and having to sit as an independent in parliament if they vote against the party’s position.
• Private members’ bills are rarely successful, especially if the government doesn’t back them.
• Select committees are often ignored by the Government.

1 Democracy & Participation

1.1 Representative & Direct Democracy

1.1.1 Direct Democracy

1.1.2 Pros & Cons of Direct Democracy

1.1.3 Representative Democracy

1.1.4 Pros & Cons of Representative Democracy

1.1.5 Comparing Types of Democracy

1.1.6 Case for Democratic Reform

1.1.7 End of Topic Test - Types of Democracy

1.1.8 Top Grade AO3/4 - Types of Democracy

1.2 Wider Franchise & Suffrage

1.2.1 History of the UK Franchise

1.2.2 Campaigns for Suffrage

1.2.3 End of Topic Test - Franchise & Suffrage

1.3 Pressure Groups & Other Influences

1.3.1 Types of Pressure Group

1.3.2 Functions of Pressure Groups

1.3.3 How Pressure Groups Influence

1.3.4 Case-Study Examples

1.3.5 Other Collective Orgs & Groups

1.3.6 End of Topic Test - Pressure Groups & Influences

1.3.7 Application Questions - Pressure Groups

1.4 Rights in Context

1.4.1 Development of Rights in the UK

1.4.2 The UK's Rights-Based Culture

1.4.3 End of Topic Test - Rights in Context

2 Political Parties

2.1 How Political Parties Work

2.1.1 Functions & Features of UK Political Parties

2.1.2 Funding of UK Political Parties

2.1.3 UK Funding Reform

2.1.4 End of Topic Test - Political Parties

2.1.5 Top Grade AO3/4 - Political Parties

2.2 Established Political Parties

2.2.1 The Conservative Party: History

2.2.2 The Conservative Party: Recent Leaders

2.2.3 The Labour Party

2.2.4 The Liberal Democrat Party

2.2.5 Ideas & Policies of UK Parties

2.2.6 End of Topic Test - Established Parties

2.2.7 Application Questions - Established Parties

2.3 Emerging & Minor Political Parties

2.3.1 Minority Parties

2.3.2 Minority Parties Case Studies

2.3.3 End of Topic Test - Minor Parties

2.4 UK Political Parties in Context

2.4.1 Different Party Systems

2.4.2 Political Spectrum

2.4.3 Factors Affecting Party Success

2.4.4 End of Topic Test - Parties in Context

2.4.5 Application Questions - Parties in Context

3 Electoral Systems

3.1 Different Electoral Systems

3.1.1 FPTP & STV

3.1.2 AMS & SV

3.1.3 End of Topic Test - Electoral Systems

3.1.4 Top Grade AO3/4 - Electoral Systems

3.2 Referendums & How They Are Used

3.2.1 Case For & Against Referendums

3.2.2 End of Topic Test - Referendums

3.2.3 A-A* (AO3/4) - Referendums

3.3 Electoral System Analysis

3.3.1 Electoral System Analysis

3.3.2 End of Topic Test - System Analysis

3.3.3 A-A* (AO3/4) - Electoral System Analysis

4 Voting Behaviour & the Media

4.1 General Election Case Studies

4.1.1 Case Studies of Elections

4.1.2 Factors Influencing Voting in Elections

4.1.3 End of Topic Test - Case Studies & Factors

4.1.4 A-A* (AO3/4) - Case Studies & Voting

4.2 Media Influence

4.2.1 Media Influence

4.2.2 End of Topic Test - Media Influence

5 Conservatism

5.1 Conservatism: Core Ideas & Principles

5.1.1 Pragmatism & Tradition

5.1.2 Human Imperfection & Organic Society/State

5.1.3 Authority & Hierarchy

5.1.4 Paternalism

5.1.5 Empiricism

5.1.6 Anti-Permissiveness

5.1.7 Radical Conservative Ideas

5.1.8 End of Topic Test - Core Conservatism

5.2 Conservatism: Differing Views & Tensions

5.2.1 Traditional Conservatism

5.2.2 One-Nation Conservatism

5.2.3 New Right Conservatism

5.2.4 End of Topic Test - Different Views

5.3 Conservative Thinkers & Ideas

5.3.1 Thomas Hobbes & Edmund Burke

5.3.2 Michael Oakeshott & Ayn Rand

5.3.3 Robert Nozick

5.3.4 End of Topic Test - Conservative Thinkers

5.3.5 A-A* (AO3/4) - Conservatism

6 Liberalism

6.1 Liberalism: Core Ideas & Principles

6.1.1 Individualism & Freedom/Liberty

6.1.2 The State & Rationalism

6.1.3 Equality & Social Justice

6.1.4 Liberal Democracy

6.1.5 Other Important Liberal Ideas

6.1.6 End of Topic Test - Liberalism

6.2 Differing Views And Tensions Within Liberalism

6.2.1 Classical Liberalism

6.2.2 Modern Liberalism

6.2.3 End of Topic Test - Tensions & Views

6.3 Liberal Thinkers & Ideas

6.3.1 John Locke & Mary Wollstonecraft

6.3.2 John Stuart Mill & John Rawls

6.3.3 Betty Friedan

6.3.4 End of Topic Test - Thinkers & Ideas

6.3.5 A-A* - Liberalism

7 Socialism

7.1 Socialism: Core Ideas & Principles

7.1.1 Fraternity & Co-operation

7.1.2 Capitalism & Common Ownership

7.1.3 Communism

7.1.4 Collectivism

7.1.5 Common Humanity

7.1.6 Equality

7.1.7 Social Class & Workers' Control

7.1.8 End of Topic Test - Socialism

7.2 Differing Views And Tensions Within Socialism

7.2.1 Differing Views And Tensions

7.2.2 End of Topic Test - Views & Tensions

7.3 Socialist Thinkers and Their Ideas

7.3.1 Socialist Thinkers: Marx & Engels

7.3.2 Socialist Thinkers: Webb & Luxemburg

7.3.3 Socialist Thinkers: Crosland and Giddens

7.3.4 End of Topic Test - Thinkers & Ideas

7.3.5 A-A* (AO3/4) - Socialism

8 The UK Constitution

8.1 Nature & Sources of UK Constitution

8.1.1 Development of the UK Constitution

8.1.2 Nature of the UK Constitution

8.1.3 Sources of the UK Constitution

8.1.4 End of Topic Test - Nature & Sources

8.2 Constitutional Change since 1997

8.2.1 Constitutional Reform 1997-2010 1

8.2.2 Constitutional Reform 1997-2010 2

8.2.3 Constitutional Reform 2010-15 & Reforms Since 2015

8.2.4 End of Topic Test - Reform

8.2.5 Application Questions - Reform

8.3 Role & Powers of Devolved UK Bodies

8.3.1 Devolution in England & Scotland

8.3.2 Devolution in Wales & Northern Ireland

8.3.3 End of Topic Test - Devolution

8.4 Debates on Constitutional Reform

8.4.1 Constitutional Reform & Devolution

8.4.2 Should the Constitution Be Codified?

8.4.3 End of Topic Test - Reform Debates

8.4.4 Application Questions - Codification & Devolution

9 The UK Parliament

9.1 Houses of Parliament

9.1.1 Houses of Parliament

9.1.2 Functions of the House of Commons

9.1.3 Functions of the House of Lords

9.1.4 End of Topic Test - Parliament

9.1.5 Top Grade AO3/4 - Parliament

9.2 Comparative Powers

9.2.1 Comparative Powers of the Houses

9.2.2 End of Topic Test - Comparative Powers

9.3 Legislative Process

9.3.1 Legislative Stages

9.3.2 Law-Making in the two Houses

9.3.3 End of Topic Test - Legislative Process

9.4 Parliament & Executive Interactions

9.4.1 Backbenchers

9.4.2 Select Committees

9.4.3 The Opposition

9.4.4 Ministerial Question Time

9.4.5 End of Topic Test - Parliament & Executive

9.4.6 Application Questions - Parliament & Executive

10 The Prime Minister & the Executive

10.1 The Executive

10.1.1 Structure of the Executive

10.1.2 Roles of the Executive

10.1.3 Powers of the Executive

10.1.4 End of Topic Test - PM & Executive

10.2 Ministerial Responsibility

10.2.1 Individual Ministerial Responsibility

10.2.2 Collective Ministerial Responsibility

10.2.3 End of Topic Test - Ministerial Responsibility

10.3 Prime Minister & the Cabinet

10.3.1 Role of the Prime Minister

10.3.2 Prime Minister's Powers

10.3.3 Limits on the Prime Minister's Powers

10.3.4 Role of the Cabinet

10.3.5 Prime Minister & Cabinet: Relations

10.3.6 Prime Minister & Cabinet: Balance of Power

10.3.7 Prime Minister & Cabinet: Case Studies

10.3.8 End of Topic Test - PM & Cabinet

10.3.9 Top Grade AO3/4 - PM & Cabinet

11 Relationships Between Government Branches

11.1 The Supreme Court

11.1.1 Role & Composition

11.1.2 Principles & Influence of the Supreme Court

11.1.3 End of Topic Test - Supreme Court

11.2 Parliament & Executive Relations

11.2.1 Parliament & Executive: Questions

11.2.2 Parliament & Executive: Committees

11.2.3 Parliament & Executive: Voting

11.2.4 Executive Dominance Over Parliament

11.2.5 Balance of Power

11.2.6 End of Topic Test - Parliament & Executive

11.2.7 A-A* (AO3/4) - Relationships Between Government

11.3 The European Union & the UK

11.3.1 Aims & Policy Making of the European Union

11.3.2 End of Topic Test - EU & UK

11.4 Sovereignty in the UK Political System

11.4.1 Sovereignty in the UK Political System

11.4.2 End of Topic Test - Sovereignty

12 US Constitution & Federalism

12.1 Nature of the US Constitution

12.1.1 Nature of the US Constitution

12.1.2 Nature: Positives & Negatives

12.1.3 Constitutional Framework

12.1.4 The Amendment Process

12.1.5 End of Topic Test - Nature US Constitution

12.2 Principles of the US Constitution

12.2.1 Federalism

12.2.2 Separation of Powers/Checks & Balances

12.2.3 Bipartisanship

12.2.4 Limited Government

12.2.5 End of Topic Test - Constitutional Principles

12.3 Federalism

12.3.1 Main Characteristics

12.3.2 Federal Government and the States

12.3.3 End of Topic Test - Federalism

12.4 Interpretations & Debates

12.4.1 Democracy in the Constitution

12.4.2 Federalism

12.4.3 End of Topic Test - Debates

12.4.4 A-A* (AO3/4) - US Constitution

13 US Congress

13.1 Structure of Congress

13.1.1 Structure of Congress

13.1.2 Distribution of Powers

13.1.3 End of Topic Test - Congress Structure

13.2 Functions of Congress

13.2.1 Representation

13.2.2 Legislative

13.2.3 Oversight

13.2.4 End of Topic Test - Functions of Congress

13.3 Interpretations & Debates

13.3.1 Changing Roles & Powers

13.3.2 Changing Significance of Parties & of Powers

13.3.3 End of Topic Test - Debates

13.3.4 Application Questions - US Congress

14 US Presidency

14.1 Presidential Power

14.1.1 Formal Sources of Presidential Power

14.1.2 Informal Sources of Presidential Power

14.1.3 Powers of Persuasion

14.1.4 End of Topic Test - Presidential Power

14.2 The Presidency

14.2.1 President Relationship with Other Institutions

14.2.2 Limitations on Presidential Power

14.2.3 US Presidents Achieving Their Aims

14.2.4 End of Topic Test - Presidency

14.3 Interpretations & Debates of the US Presidency

14.3.1 The Imperial Presidency

14.3.2 The President in Foreign Policy

14.3.3 End of Topic Test - Debates

14.3.4 A-A* (AO3/4) - US Presidency

15 US Supreme Court & Civil Rights

15.1 Nature & Role of Supreme Court

15.1.1 Nature & Role of the Supreme Court

15.1.2 End of Topic Test - Nature & Role

15.2 Supreme Court Appointment Process

15.2.1 Appointment Process

15.2.2 Supreme Court Membership

15.2.3 End of Topic Test - Appointments

15.3 The Supreme Court & Public Policy

15.3.1 Supreme Court & Public Policy

15.3.2 End of Topic Test - Public Policy

15.4 Protection of Civil Liberties & Rights

15.4.1 Protection of Civil Liberties & Rights

15.4.2 Race & Rights in Contemporary US Politics

15.4.3 End of Topic Test - Rights & Liberties

15.5 Debates & Interpretations of the Supreme Court

15.5.1 Political Nature of the Supreme Court

15.5.2 Judicial Interpretation

15.5.3 Supreme Court Checks & Balances

15.5.4 End of Topic Test - Debates

15.5.5 Application Questions - The Supreme Court

16 US Democracy & Participation

16.1 Presidential Elections

16.1.1 Presidential Elections

16.1.2 Primaries

16.1.3 National Party Conventions

16.1.4 End of Topic Test - Presidential Elections

16.2 Electoral College

16.2.1 Electoral College System

16.2.2 Reforms

16.2.3 End of Topic Test - Electoral College

16.3 Electoral Campaigns

16.3.1 Issues in Elections

16.3.2 End of Topic Test - Campaigns

16.4 Incumbency

16.4.1 Elections & Incumbency

16.4.2 End of Topic Test - Incumbency

16.4.3 A-A* (AO3/4) - Elections & Electoral College

16.5 Democrats & Republicans

16.5.1 National & State Level Organisation

16.5.2 Democratic & Republican Policies

16.5.3 Changing Party Significance

16.5.4 End of Topic Test - Democrats & Republicans

16.6 Internal Conflict & Ideology

16.6.1 Types of Democrats

16.6.2 Types of Republicans

16.6.3 End of Topic Test - Internal Conflict

16.7 Support & Demographics

16.7.1 Coalition of Supporters

16.7.2 End of Topic Test - Party Support

16.8 Interest Groups

16.8.1 Political Significance of Interest Groups

16.8.2 Interest Group Influence & Impact on Democracy

16.8.3 End of Topic Test - Interest Groups

16.8.4 Application Questions - Parties, Ideology & Groups

17 Comparing Democracies

17.1 Theoretical Approaches

17.1.1 Theoretical Approaches

17.1.2 End of Topic Test - Approaches

17.2 UK & USA Similarities & Differences

17.2.1 Constitution: Nature

17.2.2 Constitution: Provisions & Principles

17.2.3 Federal System & Devolution

17.2.4 Legislative: Lower Houses of Government

17.2.5 Legislative: Upper Houses of Government

17.2.6 Legislative: Powers & Functions

17.2.7 Executive

17.2.8 Supreme Court

17.2.9 Supreme Court: Judicial Independence

17.2.10 Civil Rights

17.2.11 Civil Rights: Interest Groups

17.2.12 Party Systems & Parties

17.2.13 Campaign Finance & Pressure Groups

17.2.14 End of Topic Test - Comparing UK & US

17.2.15 Application Questions - UK & USA

18 Feminism

18.1 Feminism: Core Ideas & Principles

18.1.1 Context of Feminism

18.1.2 Sex & Gender

18.1.3 Patriarchy & The Personal is the Political

18.1.4 Difference, Egalitarian & Intersectionality

18.1.5 Key Themes

18.1.6 End of Topic Test - Core Ideas & Principles

18.2 Different Types of Feminism

18.2.1 The Waves of Feminism

18.2.2 Socialist & Radical Feminism

18.2.3 Post-Modern Feminism

18.2.4 End of Topic Test - Different Types of Feminism

18.3 Feminist Thinkers & Their Ideas

18.3.1 Charlotte Gilman & Simone de Beauvoir

18.3.2 Kate Millett

18.3.3 Sheila Rowbotham & bell hooks

18.3.4 End of Topic Test - Feminist Thinkers & Ideas

18.3.5 A-A* (AO3/4) - Feminism

19 Nationalism

19.1 Nationalism: Core Ideas & Principles

19.1.1 Nations & Self-Determination

19.1.2 Nation-States & Culturalism

19.1.3 Racialism & Internationalism

19.1.4 Civic & Ethnic Nationalism

19.1.5 Liberal & Socialist Internationalism

19.1.6 Key Themes

19.1.7 End of Topic Test - Core Ideas & Principles

19.2 Different Types of Nationalism

19.2.1 Liberal & Conservative Nationalism

19.2.2 Post-Colonial & Expansionist Nationalism

19.2.3 Progressive & Regressive Nationalism

19.2.4 Inclusive & Exclusive Nationalism

19.2.5 End of Topic Test -Different Types of Nationalism

19.3 Nationalist Thinkers & Their Ideas

19.3.1 Jean-Jacques Rousseau & Gottfried von Herder

19.3.2 Giuseppe Mazzini & Charles Maurras

19.3.3 Marcus Garvey

19.3.4 End of Topic Test - Nationalist Thinkers & Ideas

19.3.5 A-A* (AO3/4) - Nationalism

Jump to other topics

Unlock your full potential with GoStudent tutoring

Affordable 1:1 tutoring from the comfort of your home

Tutors are matched to your specific learning needs

30+ school subjects covered

End of Topic Test - Legislative Process

Select Committees

The Politics Shed- A Free Text Book for all students of Politics.

The Role of Backbench MPs

How effective has parliamentary scrutiny been during the COVID-19 crisis?  

Parliament's effectiveness at Scrutiny  

Back Bench MPs play a central role in the carrying out the Functions of Parliament

Legislation How laws are made

  Representation  

  Scrutiny and Oversight  

  Recruitment and training of ministers  

Crucial to the ability of MPs and peers to carry out their functions is the concept of parliamentary privilege. This means that, within the confines of Parliament, they may say what they like, without being subject to outside influence. This includes immunity from being sued for libel. It does not mean that they cannot be prosecuted for criminal activity; several MPs and peers were jailed, for example, following revelations in 2009 that they had made false claims for parliamentary expenses. The role of parliamentary privilege is to ensure that MPs and peers enjoy their historic right to freedom of speech.

Some commentators have suggested that backbench MPs are playing an increasingly significant role within Parliament, especially in scrutinising government activity and holding the executive to account. There is some evidence in support of this claim:

The creation of the Backbench Business Committee in 2010 , which is allowed to choose the topic for debate on 35 days in each parliamentary session. Some of these subjects are chosen in response to e-petitions signed by members of the public; 100,000 signatures are required to qualify. This has led to the holding of debates on some subjects that might not otherwise have been chosen. Some of these take place in Westminster Hall, the oldest surviving part of the Houses of Parliament, in order to ease the burden on the Commons chamber. Examples of such debates include one in 2015 that led to the introduction of Harvey's law, which obliges the Highways Agency to notify the owners of pets who are killed on the roads. The Backbench Business Committee responds to proposals that command cross-party support, and so there is an incentive for MPs to work together in requesting a debate

·    A rise in the number of backbench rebellions against government measures, even if the average number of MPs involved in particular rebellions has declined. 

·    An increase in the use of 'urgent questions' — a device which, subject to the approval of the Speaker of the House, allows an MP to raise an important matter requiring an immediate answer from a government minister. A study conducted during the coalition government found that Speaker John Bercow allowed a total of 3547 urgent questions in 2009-13, while his predecessor, Michael Martin (2000-09) presided over only 1234 in a much longer period.

There are important limits on the influence of backbenchers:

·        MPs can use various methods to draw attention to issues in which they are interested, but this does not mean that they will succeed in getting any action taken. One example of this is an adjournment debate. After the official business of the House is over, there is an opportunity to raise an issue and a minister will reply. Another option for backbenchers is the 10-minute rule. This allows MPs to speak for 10 minutes on their chosen subject before the beginning of official business on certain days. However, in both cases, the only result is likely to be an airing of the MP's concern in debate.

·         Public bill committees give MPs an opportunity to propose amendments to legislation, and each clause of a bill is scrutinised. However, the government has a majority on these committees and often it will use its position of strength to introduce its own amendments, rather than listening to proposals from opposition MPs.

·     The power of patronage and ties of party loyalty, reinforced by the party whips, remain important factors in the Commons.

Backbench members of the House of Lords are usually established figures in their own fields, and many are retired politicians. The promise of a government post cannot therefore influence them as much as it might a backbench MP, and so they are likely to act independently. The growing prominence of cross-benchers who have no party affiliation has already been noted. For almost any conceivable area of public life or interest, there will be peers with experience and expertise who can contribute to debates in particular areas. Current examples include Professor Lord Hennessy, one of Britain's leading experts on constitutional matters, and Baroness Greenfield in the field of science and technology. A full list of cross-benchers can be found on the following website: www.crossbenchpeers.org.ukirole.html

   It is normal for the government to enjoy the support of a majority of MPs in the Commons. In the past, this has been because the governing party has won an overall majority of the available seats at a general election (for example, 326 seats in a House of 650 members). In 2010, no single party won such an overall majority and so the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats formed a coalition which could command such a majority jointly. In 2015 the Conservative won the election with a majority of 17.

·    Patronage is an important factor. Most MPs hope, one day, to be promoted to ministerial office. To achieve this they need to demonstrate to the prime minister (who appoints all ministers) that they are loyal party members.

·    The government whips have a number of methods by which they can persuade

their own party's MPs to support the government, even if they have reservations.

·    In the legislative committees (which review bills at the Committee Stage) that consider possible amendments to legislation, the government side is always granted a majority of its own MPs.

·    The government controls most of the timetable of the Commons. This makes it possible for it to cut short (even avoid) debates which might embarrass it. For example, the Government was criticised for giving too little time to debate the 'Brexit Bill 2017'

Factors which will determine their success at controlling the Commons will include the size of their majority and the unity of their party- e.g Tony Blair only lost one vote in the Commons in 10 years mainly because of the size of the majorities he had. Since 2015 two Chancellors of the Exchequer have backed down in the face of backbench pressure from their own side- George Osbourne over the pan to scrap Tax Credits which were first delayed in the Lords and Philip Hammond over the plan to increase National Insurance for the self employed  

Reference Library

Collections

• See what's new
• All Resources
• Student Resources
• Assessment Resources
• Teaching Resources
• CPD Courses
• Livestreams

Study notes, videos, interactive activities and more!

Politics news, insights and enrichment

Currated collections of free resources

Browse resources by topic

• All Politics Resources

Resource Selections

Currated lists of resources

Study Notes

Backbencher

Last updated 22 Mar 2021

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share by Email

A backbencher is a legislator who doesn’t hold a government office or is not a frontbench spokesman in the Opposition. They are simply members of the Parliamentary “rank and file”.

The term originated in 1855 in the UK, where it refers to Members of Parliament (MPs) with no ministerial, or shadow ministerial office.

Someone is a backbencher because they might be a new MP yet to be promoted to high office, or they might be a senior figure who has been dropped from government, or they could be someone who for a variety of reasons hasn’t been chosen to sit in a ministry or opposition shadow ministry. In some cases, the backbencher has chosen to be in that position as they prefer the role to what they might view as the ‘compromises’ of being a government minister.

Especially in the latter case, the backbencher may not be a reliable supporter of their party’s goals and policies (for instance, Jeremy Corbyn rebelled against the Labour party line over 500 times).

Backbenchers do not tend to have much ability to influence government policy. However, they still play a role in providing services to and relaying opinions from their constituents, sitting on parliamentary committees and also they may join together to combat unpopular government policies or to exploit internal splits in the governing party. So they do provide valuable input into the legislative process.

• Member of Parliament (MP)

You might also like

Teaching Resources from the Parliament Education Team

11th September 2015

First Past The Post (FPTP) - Introduction

Uk mps versus donald trump.

19th January 2016

Should the Commons be more family friendly?

11th February 2016

Select committees not always successful in scrutiny role

26th October 2021

Excellent resource, full of stats on Parliament

28th April 2022

Record rebellion under Starmer

23rd November 2023

The Tory "five families"

13th December 2023

Our subjects

• › Criminology
• › Economics
• › Geography
• › Health & Social Care
• › Psychology
• › Sociology
• › Teaching & learning resources
• › Student revision workshops
• › Online student courses
• › CPD for teachers
• › Livestreams
• › Teaching jobs

Boston House, 214 High Street, Boston Spa, West Yorkshire, LS23 6AD Tel: 01937 848885

• › Contact us
• › Terms of use
• › Privacy & cookies

© 2002-2024 Tutor2u Limited. Company Reg no: 04489574. VAT reg no 816865400.

• TOP CATEGORIES
• AS and A Level
• University Degree
• International Baccalaureate
• Uncategorised
• 5 Star Essays
• Study Tools
• Study Guides
• Meet the Team
• United Kingdom

How effective are backbencher MPs?

How effective are Backbench MPs?                                                   Úna Richards 25/03/2013

A backbencher is an MP who does not hold governmental office, and is not a frontbencher spokesperson in the opposition. There is no said test of backbench MP efficiency, however we can come up with a measure of their effectiveness by looking at how effective they are within their role. What are they expected to do? Do they fulfil their role? In recent years, a large number of backbencher MPs have become more effective despite their limited air time, nowadays the majority of backbench MPs are often more active and involved in debates and plenary discussions.

A key function of backbencher MPs is that they represent the people of their own constituency whenever they are involved in government policy. It is typical for local MPs to bring up issues relating to their constituency and become active in decisions that are likely to affect their particular constituents. For example, when there emerged a proposal to build a third runway at Heathrow airport in 2009-10, the relevant MPs from constituencies in the Thames Valley, such as John McDonnel MP, actively opposed the plans or sought to change the details of those plans. When in debates and discussions MPs often try to represent the interests of their constituents, also they often represent pressure groups, either because the pressure group has funded them or the MP supports the group’s interest. Although many MPs successfully represent their constituents’ interests , it is arguable whether they actually represent the constituents, themselves. Indeed, roughly, only a fifth of Parliament are women, and only 4% are from minority ethnic groups, due to Parliament’s lack of diversity, it is questionable whether MPs are actually able to represent the population. Additionally, most MPs come from similar backgrounds: white, upper middleclass and have gone to Russell group universities such as Oxford and Cambridge. In this sense, Backbench MPs are ineffective in that they are unable to fully represent the people they are supposed to be representing. However, it should be stressed that in the last decade more and more female MPs and MPs from minority ethnic groups have become backbencher MPs, growing as a representative body and therefore becoming more effective.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Some backbencher MPs are largely ineffective in that they are sometimes unwilling to contribute their ideas, plans for policies and bills due to fear of how they will be received by the higher status politicians in Parliament. There is a common view that going against the PM/head of opposition and select committee ministers may have a negative effect on a backbencher’s political career, as they are less likely to get promoted. Therefore, they often lack influence or say in the government’s planned policies or bills. Although, occasionally it’s the courage of a backbench MP to criticise the government that works in their career’s favour, as they are seen as passionate about political issues. For example, Margaret Thatcher, when she was a backbencher in the early 60s, openly disagreed with the majority of the Conservative party on the topic of birching but within 3 years she had moved to the front bench of the Conservative party. Indeed, it is important to highlight that not all backbenchers are afraid of putting out their ideas for new legislation. For backbenchers, proposing legislation is a difficult process; it has to be financed by a pressure group or has to be strongly supported by the government. Perhaps, it’s for this reason that Backbencher effectiveness has come into question, a lot of the time it’s simply too difficult to make any kind of substantial difference because of backbencher status within Parliament. On the other hand, some may argue that in recent years particularly, backbenchers have been a lot more active, as their role has evolved over time and has gained more credibility in the political world due to the recent backbencher achievements. For example, Tom Watson, in his first year of being an MP for Labour in 2001, launched a campaign to ban album sales of convicted sex offender Gary Glitter, proving that backbenchers are effective.

A key function of Backbencher MPs is that they scrutinise the proposed work of the PM, the ministers in charge of the departmental committees and fellow Backbenchers. They aim to scrutinise both proposed primary and secondary legislation. A process that involves close inspection of specific legislation and, where it is seen necessary, amendments may be proposed. As backbenchers in legislative committees are whipped, they rarely defy government or express their own national interest. If a backbencher is defiant, he/she is at risk of being de-selected by the select committee he/she is part of. Another factor that makes a lot of backbenchers ineffective in terms of scrutiny is that many avoid challenging the more high-status members of Parliament due to their fear that if they were to do so it may harm the growth of their political career, and chances of promotion. Although it is important to stress this is only the case with some backbenchers, many are quick to scrutinise the actions and proposed legislation of the leading politicians in Parliament. In the 30 minute sessions they have for scrutiny, backbenchers closely investigate whether funds are being used effectively, and whether the government are acting in public interest. Many backbenchers express criticism towards the work of those that they scrutinise and are quick to offer improvements. Evidently, there is a mixture in the extent of effectiveness among backbenchers, but the majority are largely effective when it comes to their expected function, scrutiny.

Overall, backbenchers are effective in that they are largely able to fulfil their roles and the functions that come with the role. There are various backbenchers that have less prominence than others in Parliament but that’s not to say they are unable to represent, scrutinise or propose new legislation. Indeed, on a general scale, the majority of backbenchers are effective.

Document Details

• Author Type Student
• Word Count 1025
• Page Count 2
• Level AS and A Level
• Subject Politics
• Type of work Exam preparation

Related Essays

To What Extent Are Backbench MPs Lobby Fodder?

How effectively do MPs perform their representative function?

Explain how MPs can carry out their representative role

How effective is Parliament in checking Executive Power?

A website to support students and teachers of A-Level Politics

Level 5 Response – Evaluate the view that Parliament is effective at scrutinising the Executive in the UK (30 Marks)

Britain is a parliamentary democracy which means there is a fusion of powers between the Executive and Legislature. The Executive, led by the Prime Minister, is formed from the House of Commons and yet one of the key roles of Parliament is to scrutinise the actions of the Government. To answer this question the following issues need to be considered: legislative scrutiny, the role of backbenchers and question time. Ultimately, it is clear that parliamentary scrutiny of the Executive is woefully ineffective because of the elective dictatorship that is usually formed after a Government has won a clear majority.

Legislating is one of the most important roles of Parliament and is therefore an important area of executive scrutiny. This is as under Standing Order 14 the legislative agenda is largely controlled by the Executive. Most bills are Government Bills, with 76.9% of bills from 2015-2021 being tabled by the Executive. This dominance over the Commons agenda is reinforced by the notion of the elective dictatorship – that because of the FPTP voting system most governments have a clear majority and can govern as they please without having to worry about undergoing effective scrutiny. For example, Tony Blair had a majority of 179 and did not lose a single Commons vote in his first 8 years as PM, whilst the average government majority since 1945 has been 57.4 seats. This means that the Executive is normally capable of pushing through its agenda because it consistently has the parliamentary arithmetic on its side. Further to this, MPs are very heavily whipped. Consequently, they rarely rebel against their party leaders. This is because MPs are beholden to their party for their seat and they rely on the patronage of party leaders for personal advancement. This might help explain why since the 2019 General Election there are 321 MPs who have never once voted against their own party.  The combination of large government majorities and heavy whipping of backbenchers means that often legislative scrutiny in the House of Commons is ineffective. However, there are times when the House of Commons can offer effective legislative scrutiny, usually when the issue is very controversial or is so important that MPs are prepared to defy the whip. For example, whilst in a confidence and supply agreement with the DUP in January 2019, Theresa May’s Brexit deal was defeated by a record 230 votes with 118 Conservative MPs rebelling. This shows that, depending on the issue and the size of the government majority, the power of the whips can weaken. In addition, the second chamber of the House of Lords can be said to offer more effective scrutiny because of the time, expertise and independence it puts towards legislation. Firstly, the House of Lords are said to go through a bill ‘line by line’ spending much more time scrutinising legislation, particularly by adding ‘reasoned amendments’. For example, the Agriculture Act (2020) was considered for 32 hours by the House of Commons but for 96 hours by the House of Lords. In addition, in the Lords this scrutiny is carried by people who have been appointed to the House precisely due to their expertise. For example, Lord West was a former First Sea Lord and Intelligence Minister who has voted 725 times in the House Lords to help improve bills relating to military and diplomatic matters. Finally, unlike the House of Commons, the Lords are not heavily whipped. There is more independence and a collegiate atmosphere in the House of Lords which is helped by the fact that there are 184 crossbench peers and 26 Bishops who do not belong to a political party. However, despite these positive factors, the House of Lords is structurally limited by both statute and convention. The Parliament Acts mean the House of Lords cannot block legislation for the Commons while conventions like the Salisbury Convention and Financial Privilege limit the power of the House of Lords to effectively scrutinise Government legislation. Overall, the scrutiny of Government legislation is ineffective. The House of Commons is normally unable to provide effective scrutiny due to government majorities, whilst the effectiveness of the House of Lords is undermined by the structural limits placed upon it.

There are a number of limits that backbenchers face in attempting to scrutinise the Government in the House of Commons. One is that, unlike most members of the House of Lords, they have to be generalists and not specialists. Backbenchers have to represent the diverse range of opinions and concerns across their constituency. For example, as of 18/02/22 Conservative Backbencher Huw Merriman’s last ten questions were all about different subjects ranging from tourism to knife crime. In addition, backbenchers have limited power to initiate change themselves and instead rely on working within a party to bring any change about. This can be seen in the very low number of Private Members Bills that become Acts of Parliament. For example, since 2015 only 16.2% of Acts started as Private Members Bills. This often means backbench MPs do not introduce bills because they will pass but instead because they might push forward the issue in the media. As evidence of this since 2015 Christopher Chope has introduced 119 PMBs of which none have become law. Conversely, despite these limits, it is clear that some backbenchers are influential and can influence policy. This is particularly the case when a backbencher is seen to be either particularly experienced or have particular expertise. For example, Theresa May (Backbencher of the Year 2021) was able to persuade the government to incorporate her Ten Minute Rule motion on dangerous driving sentences into the Police, Crime and Sentencing Bill. In addition, the Wright Reforms of 2009 have increased the influence of backbenchers. Firstly, the Backbench Business Committee provides them with an opportunity to put forward ideas for debate that might provide scrutiny of the government. For example, on the 21/04 a backbench debate was held on the two-child limit for universal credit – a key government policy. Secondly, backbenchers may serve on Select Committees which since the Wright Reforms have seen committee chairs elected by the whole house and select committee members elected by their own party. This has substantially loosened the grip of the whips over Select Committee and increased their independence. For example, the DCMS Select Committee were critical of the Government’s Online Safety Bill saying it did not go far enough to tackle harmful content online – despite a Conservative majority on the Committee. Therefore, whilst backbenchers are still limited in their ability to provide security of the executive overall this ability is growing, and in addition, there are certain MPs who are able to provide more effective scrutiny than others.

One of the most important mechanisms of parliamentary scrutiny is Question Time. The most prominent example of question time is Prime Ministers Questions which takes place at 12.00 on Wednesdays. PMQs sees the PM questioned by Government and Opposition MPs with the Leader of the Opposition given six questions. PMQs is however both the most visible and the most theatrical form of Question Time. MPs spend significant time trying to score political points rather than scrutinise the Executive in detail – for example Diana Johnson’s question that over ‘partygate’ saying that the PM ‘was trying to convince people he was a stupid rather than dishonest’. Whilst the questions are often political, so are the answers, with the Prime Minister being able to avoid giving a detailed response. As such PMQs gives a bad indication of how effective Parliament is in its function of scrutiny. Importantly, however, it must be noted that PMQs is just one form of question time and the others that take place at the start of the parliamentary day from Monday to Thursday are far more productive. MPs can ask a department any question and can also table questions in advance or in writing, therefore encouraging a more detailed response. Further, since the speakership of John Bercow, the use of Urgent Questions and Emergency Debates has grown significantly. Under the previous speaker there were 0.02 UQs a day but under Bercow this rose to 0.88 per day with the Speaker ensuring the Government could be held to account immediately if required – a trend that has largely continued under Lindsay Hoyle. In addition, Emergency Debates have been increasingly granted, for example the Emergency Debate granted to discuss the crisis in Ukraine. During this debate the Government were asked detailed questions about what they were doing to support the Ukrainian Government. Overall, whilst the visible PMQs might make it appear that Question Time is an ineffectual method of scrutiny this is not a realistic depiction. PMQs is the theatre of Parliament whilst the Daily Questions allow MPs to force Ministers to account for their actions whilst the growth of Urgent Questions and Emergency Debates shows the Speaker is helping backbench MPs to do this.

In conclusion, it is the case that parliamentary scrutiny of the Executive is largely ineffectual. This is because of the predominant role of the House of Commons and the fact that due to the fusion of powers the Government normally dominates that chamber. Whilst there are exceptions to this rule, they only really occur in the rare occasions when a government does not have a clear majority. The House of Lords does offer detailed scrutiny, particularly of legislation, however it is limited by the structural power the House of Commons has over it. Whilst Select Committees and Question Time are examples of effective scrutiny they do not enable Parliament to enforce change, so are therefore still fundamentally limited. Therefore, it is clear that the dominance of the Executive over the House of Commons ensures that parliamentary scrutiny of the executive is largely cosmetic.

Why is this a Level 5 Response?

• The introduction immediately shows the examiner the candidate understands the topic. It also lays out the different themes that will be discussed and sets out a clear argument.
• Three body sections are completed each which put forward a clear point and corresponding counter point.
• Detailed knowledge is deployed throughout the piece, which is often very specific.
• Analysis is built upon this detailed knowledge, with a consistent focus on answering the question.
• Clear mini-conclusions are used at the end of the section which consider what the view on the question is as regards the issue that has been discussed.
• The conclusion is comparative in nature and synthesises the entirety of the arguments made before coming to a clear judgement.
• Political terminology is deployed throughout the essay.
• Synoptic links are made to Paper 1 through considering of FPTP. (This in only required in Paper 2).

Share this:

2 responses to “level 5 response – evaluate the view that parliament is effective at scrutinising the executive in the uk (30 marks)”.

Are we genuinely expect to write 1,618 words in 45 minutes and then immediately repeat this a second time before writing a 24 mark question on political ideologies? These questions are chosen randomly with so much nuance to consider and the student is expected to have this level of recollection on so many statistics and facts. There is enough evidence in this singular essay to fill around 10 pages of a textbook. Its nonsensical. I understand that an A* is not the norm or the expectation but it should at least be an achievable goal rather than an impossibility. This is closer to a well researched dissertation than something expected in the time it takes to walk your dog.

You don’t need to be anywhere near this quality to get an A*. These aren’t student exam responses. Level 5 also does not equal A* – if you consistently get Level 4 on the 30 Markers you will be in that territory. This link will take you to a number of A* scripts from last year’s exams. I can’t open them up until the exam board unlock last years paper in August: https://politicsteaching.com/student-work/external-work/2023-edexcel-exam-series/

However, the link does have some other moderated work of different levels too: https://politicsteaching.com/student-work/internal-work/

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

What is the office for budget responsibility and how do keir starmer’s government plan to reform it.

What is the history of the Liberal Democrats and where do they stand today?

How effectively are Human Rights and Civil Liberties protected in the UK?

Common Law – Why is it fundamental to the constitution?

Discover more from politics teaching.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

• International
• Education Jobs
• Schools directory
• Resources Education Jobs Schools directory News Search

A* A Level Politics Feminism Essay Plans

Subject: Government and politics

Age range: 16+

Resource type: Assessment and revision

Last updated

6 September 2024

• Share through email
• Share through twitter
• Share through linkedin
• Share through facebook
• Share through pinterest

Essay plans for four exam-style questions.

The questions are:

To what extent do feminists agree over the role of the state?

To what extent do feminists agree in their understandings of society?

To what extent do feminists agree on understandings around human nature?

To what extent do feminists agree over understandings around the economy?

The plans were graded at A*.

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource: