Volcanic politics
Executive–legislative relations in Britain, 1997–2005
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6234941 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Matthew Flinders (0000-0003-3585-9010, University of Sheffield, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2006 |
| Volume | 41 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 385-406 |
| Publication date | 2006-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Australian Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1036-1146 • E-ISSN: 1363-030X |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/10361140600848986 |
| OpenAlex | W2006321746 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 34 |
The parliamentary decline thesis overstates the dominance of the executive. The relationship between the executive and legislature is actually far more complex and balanced than is commonly recognised. After exploring recent developments in Australia and New Zealand, this article draws upon an audit of parliamentary modernisation in Britain since the election of New Labour in 1997 and suggests that a reforming parliament occurred during 2001–05 in which an executive with a majority of 166 was forced to acquiesce in the introduction of a raft of reform measures in the House of Commons that were designed to shift the balance of power. At the same time, the ‘transitional’ House of Lords displayed a new-found zeal and activism in a way that further frustrated the executive's control of parliament. This is not to overstate the degree of change: party loyalty remains the primary glue in the executive–legislative relationship and the executive remains dominant. However, it does suggest that in the British context the executive must still work within the limits and constraints of the parliamentary framework. The author would like to thank John Uhr, Jonathan Boston, Ryan Malone, William McDermott, Alex Brazier and Declan McHugh and two anonymous referees for their helpful comments and assistance in the preparation of this article. Additional informationNotes on contributorsMatthew Flinders Matthew Flinders is Reader in Parliamentary Government and Governance at the University of Sheffield. Since 2004 he has been Sub-Dean for Graduate Affairs for the Faculty of Social Sciences
House of Commons · Legislature · Parliament · Political science · Politics · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Political and Economic history of UK and US · Political Systems and Governance · Public Administration
Prime Minister, Cabinet and Core Executive
Presidential Attribution as an Agency of Prime Ministerial Critique in a Parliamentary Democracy
Prime Ministerial Predominance? Core Executive Politics in the UK
The Australian Senate as a 'House of Review
The Impact of Proportional Representation on Government Effectiveness
Is the House of Lords Already Reformed
Modernising the Commons
Reforming the Constitution
None of the Above
Australia's Commonwealth Parliament and the ‘Westminster model’
The Growth of Ministerial Control in the Nineteenth–Century House of Commons
The Royal Commission on Reform of the House of Lords
Guest Article
Reforming parliament in the United Kingdom
Majoritarian Democracy in Britain
Shifting the Balance? Parliament, the Executive and the British Constitution
How Much Change
Prospects for Parliamentary Reform
Parliament
Democratic Audit
The Commons
Modes of Executive-Legislative Relations
Explicating the Australian Senate
Why the case for parliamentary reform in Britain is so weak
Where were the massed ranks of parliamentary reformers?’ – ‘attitudinal’ and ‘contextual’ approaches to parliamentary reform
Australian Democracy
Bicameralism and Democracy
Does parliament matter
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,18 |
| Citation span | 2009 - 2015 (7) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |