Parliamentary Affairs - Advance Access

Some Intellectual Origins of Charter 88

Howe, S. — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:08:52 PST

English Identities and Interests and the Governance of Britain

Bryant, C. G.A. — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:56:16 PDT

Are the identity and interests of the English nation still sufficiently protected by the British state? (the English question). And can the British state still secure sufficient loyalty from all its citizens? (the Britishness question). The omission of England from the programme of devolution implemented by Labour governments since 1999 has not led to a strong demand in England for its inclusion. One reason for this is that most English identities do not need an English parliament for their further articulation. There is an ease of fit between English identity and Britishness as recently reformulated by Gordon Brown and his colleagues. This does not, however, dispose of the English question. England still needs a stronger political voice to protect its interests. The Barnett formula divides annual increases in public spending for a wide range of services between the four parts of the United Kingdom in a way that is unfavourable to England. The British government is unwilling to reform or replace it and, polls suggest, this is widely resented in England. The West Lothian question refers to the anomaly whereby Scottish MPs continue to vote at Westminster on matters pertaining only to England when English MPs cannot vote on equivalent matters pertaining only to Scotland because responsibility for them has been devolved to the Scottish parliament. This, polls suggest, is also widely resented in England, but the British government is disinclined to do anything about it. The only work in hand addressing the Barnett formula and backed by the major British parties (but not the Scottish National Party) is that of the (Calman) Commission on Scottish Devolution set up by the Scottish parliament. Its first report does not anticipate radical change. The only proposal by one of the major parties to answer the West Lothian question is that of the Conservatives’ Democracy Task Force for a version of English Votes on English Laws (EVoEL) that meets many of the objections to earlier versions of EVoEL.

Who Doesn't Feel British? Divisions over Muslims

Uberoi, V., Modood, T. — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:51:41 PDT

Politicians increasingly promote Britishness. We thus ask who do they think has difficulty feeling British and why do they think this? Scholars have not yet tried to address these questions and in this article we attempt to do so. Using interviews with former home secretaries, junior ministers and their shadow cabinet counterparts, we examine whether leading politicians think that Muslims have difficulty feeling British. We show that senior members of the main political parties are not only internally divided on this issue, but that a cross-party divide exists and that many of the members of these divisions are unaware of the relevant sociological data.

Britishness (and Irishness) in Northern Ireland since the Good Friday Agreement

McAuley, J. W., Tonge, J. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:34:51 PDT

This article examines whether the promotion of British values is desirable, feasible or even permissible within Northern Ireland. Here, the advocacy of Britishness may be seen as threatening or offensive to a minority community whose political representatives desire the diminution of symbols of Britishness in order to encourage Irish nationalists to participate in political institutions. The promotion of British history, culture and belief systems may carry little remit among a nationalist community which more readily identifies with Irish versions of each of these features and may see the Irish, not British, government as the custodian of its interests. Moreover, the promotion of Britishness within Northern Ireland has historically been distinct from that found elsewhere in the UK. First, it has often been ‘bottom-up’, marked by ostentatious symbolism in response to the constitutional uncertainty which has beset the region. Secondly, Britishness has often taken on particular characteristics, such as Protestantism and Orangeism. In examining how the Westminster government and Northern Ireland executive have responded to these challenges, the article explores the constraints upon the promotion of Britishness in Northern Ireland. Any such project is necessarily confined to one side of the binary divide, a unionist community hardly in need of the assertion of its British identity, while it risks antagonising those holding an Irish identity. Given this, it is unclear how, if at all, the assertion of British values can be formulated on a UK-wide basis, when Northern Ireland remains an area of exceptionalism.

Party Rules, OK: Voting in the House of Commons on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill

Cowley, P., Stuart, M. — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:57:00 PDT

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, which passed through the Westminster Parliament in 2007–08, demonstrated the dominance of party, even when the whips are removed and MPs are given a free vote. The party composition of the Commons determined the passage of the Bill and there is evidence that on abortion the dominance of party is becoming stronger still. There was also a gendered dimension to the voting, but even on abortion—the archetypical women's issue—the gender dimension came a poor second to the strength of party in determining the outcome of the vote.

Governance and Identity in a Devolved Scotland

Leith, M. S. — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:57:00 PDT

This article focuses on the products of governance in Scotland and the UK, considering policy documents, public announcements and press releases and examines these outputs to consider the presence of Britishness within the institutions, agencies and other groups that govern in Scotland. It is our contention that Britishness, and the idea of Britain, is increasingly absent within the discussion, operation and outputs of governance in Scotland, despite the best efforts of the current British Government to entrench a sense of Britishness within the socio-political realm. By focusing on aspects of specific policy areas, such as citizenship in education and the railways within transport, this article will illustrate that the banal emphasis of governance within Scotland is not on Britishness but on Scotland and Scottishness. The end-result of such a focus, whether it be intentional or not, is the increasing differentiation of Scottishness from other British identities. Such findings pose serious questions for the political organisation and operation of the UK.

The UK and the European Union: Dimensions of Sovereignty and the Problem of Eurosceptic Britishness

Gifford, C. — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:56:59 PDT

Sovereignty is at the core of the UK's chronically contentious relationship with, and within, the European Union (EU). In order for EU membership to be an expression rather than an erosion of British sovereignty governments must influence the direction of European policy and the level of UK involvement. Labour has, it is argued, established an effective accommodation between continued membership of the European Union and British parliamentary sovereignty understood as the continued efficacy of executive power. Nevertheless, this policy has lacked a wider legitimacy and in key respects Euroscepticism has been reasserted by the Labour leadership. Consequently, when viewed from the perspective of popular sovereignty, the nation and the people, the UK's relationship to the European Union remains highly contested and unresolved. It is this aspect of sovereignty that is central to the Conservative Party's continued Euroscepticism. In the political mainstream, it is argued that Eurosceptic Britishness has become politically dominant however this is complicated by the UK's multi-nationalism and the rise of pro-Europeanism in separatist and regional politics. Alongside this it is proposed that British conceptions of economic sovereignty are in flux following economic crisis, contributing to an overall uncertainty in the UK's European trajectory.

State Devolution and National Identity: Continuity and Change in the Politics of Welshness and Britishness in Wales

Bradbury, J., Andrews, R. — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:24:10 PDT

Wales is one of the principal cases in Europe where the stateless nation enjoys relatively high levels of identification relative to the state, and is a key focus for addressing identity politics in the UK following devolution in 1997–1999. However, the development and political consequences of Welshness and Britishness are currently relatively neglected in the research literature. This article explores these issues in relation to post-devolution Wales. Part one examines survey evidence on national identities, governmental reference to identity in policy development, and public attitudes to constitutional reform. Part two examines the approaches of the political parties, as key agents of identity politics, to Welshness and Britishness in their political strategies. Overall, the paper argues that since 1999 civic Welshness has become predominant in public discourse and support for further devolution has grown. The political parties have all converged on the politics of a civic Welshness in their political strategies. At the same time the underlying extent of identification with Welshness and Britishness since devolution has in fact changed little and the increased assertion of Welshness has not led to a rise in support for independence. Devolution appears to have both enhanced Welsh identity loyalties as a framework for political life and sustained a stable basis for Wales within the UK.

British Citizenship and the Legacy of Empires

Mycock, A. — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 06:16:42 PDT

The Labour government has acknowledged the ‘enormous bonds of commonality’ (T. Blair, speech to Commonwealth Heads of Government, 24 October 1997. http://www.thecommonwealth.org), but the former empire or the modern Commonwealth has remained largely absent in the re-articulation of Britishness. Although there has been little attempt to reform the institutions and symbols of Empire, transnational ties with its former empire remain predominantly defined by ambiguity and selective myopia. This article will explore the relationship between former empire, British state and its composite nations by examining continued transnational constitutional and governmental ties and its implications on post-imperial frameworks of citizenship. The article will also consider the absence of empire or Commonwealth on the current debates concerning the ‘Politics of Britishness’ and how devolution has redefined post-imperialism across the UK. Finally, the article will assess in what ways the enduring legacy of empire may continue to influence the seemingly perpetual search for a homogenous sense of ‘Britishness’.

Parliamentary Affairs: A Special Edition on Britishness

McGlynn, C., Mycock, A. — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:17:19 PDT

The Impact of Semi-Presidentialism on Governance in the Palestinian Authority

Cavatorta, F., Elgie, R. — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:57:09 PDT

In 2003, the Basic Law of the Palestinian Authority (PA) was amended and a semi-presidential form of government was established. In January 2006, the legislative election resulted in a period of ‘cohabitation’ between the Hamas government and President Mahmoud Abbas from Fatah. In 2007, following the civil war between the two forces, governance structures in the PA all but collapsed. This article examines the extent to which cohabitation contributed to the problems of governance in the PA. We conclude that cohabitation did not determine the outbreak of conflict, but that it did contribute to the timing of the confrontation between the two actors.

A Question of Expertise: the House of Lords and Welfare Policy

Bochel, H., Defty, A. — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:15:22 PDT

The expertise of its members is often cited as one of the distinctive features of the House of Lords. It is frequently argued that, in particular, because of its composition, and in particular the existence of the Crossbench Peers, debates in the Lords are more informed than in the Commons. Peers, it has been claimed, bring professional experience and expertise to the scrutiny of legislation, and have the time to maintain their expertise, in contrast to the Commons, where MPs, because of the demands of re-election and constituency business, are sometimes seen as being required to know a little about a wide range of subjects. Moreover, the presumed expertise of the Upper House has also been central to debates about the reform of the House of Lords, with assertions that any further reform should retain the Lords' ability to provide distinctive and informed scrutiny. Drawing on a series of interviews with a large sample of MPs and Peers, this article seeks to examine what is meant by parliamentary expertise by focusing on one particular policy area—welfare. It seeks to explore the nature of parliamentary expertise on welfare in both Houses, and suggests that in the field of welfare the Upper House may, in fact, be less expert than the House of Commons.