How Westminster Works . . . and Why It Doesn't

Product Information

As Dunt describes, with a strong majority government it is hard to amend legislation at any stage of its passage through the House of Commons. Dunt is a political journalist with a reputation for independent thinking, and he conducted more than 100 interviews for his book. As with Grayling, a feckless minister was ultimately responsible (the then foreign secretary Dominic Raab), but the civil service – the supposed Rolls-Royce of British government – failed spectacularly to prepare for or carry out the evacuation, unlike the French, who withdrew their people months in advance.

Dunt describes how exhausting ministerial work can be, intensified by the controls and by hard parliamentary work.Below are some example insights that will help you decide if the book is for you (or for your apprentice activist if you are in a gifting mood). g., the decision to send asylum seekers to Rwanda—government measures can be blocked or delayed by the courts on appeals by protesters outside politics, and “lefty lawyers” as politicians disparage them. Boris Johnson, with Dominic Cummings, his Chief Advisor, a former spad, controlled them as never before, making or vetoing their appointments. Central Bylines is a trading brand of Bylines Network Limited, which is a partner organisation to Byline Times. Dunt believes that its chief weaknesses are failure to recognize the need for investment outside London, which could address regional inequalities, or to authorize large investments in the present which would yield savings in future.

Scotland, by contrast, since devolution has developed effective scrutiny at the committee stage by a committee of expert MSPs.Dunt finds that only lobbying from MPs brought about a belated, incomplete, plan to evacuate Afghans who had worked for the British and consequently were in danger of death; many were killed. Turnover has increased, faster than in the many countries where reshuffles require coalition agreement. The House of Lords can oppose them, sometimes successfully; the House of Commons can rarely succeed against a majority government.

It also created the House of Lords Appointments Committee which could vet nominations by political parties “to ensure the highest standards of propriety” and put forward non-party-political crossbench peers, at least two per year, to contribute expertise and experience. This provides a relatable real-world context for what follows, one example of the harm caused when Westminster doesn’t work. Dunt describes how selection is made “behind closed doors” by party members, who have become steadily less representative of the wider population as party membership has shrunk from a peak in the 1950s, especially since the 1990s. Most of the time, the formidable reporters of Westminster are only focused on stories that fall into one of three boxes: Tory-Labour fights, intra-Tory fights and intra-Labour fights.Unlike many other legislative chambers, it does not even control its own timetable – the government does. A centrally controlled parliament has become less attractive to people able to earn a better living in other ways. Visit our privacy Policy for more information about our services, how New Statesman Media Group may use, process and share your personal data, including information on your rights in respect of your personal data and how you can unsubscribe from future marketing communications.

They are not magical solutions dreamt up by an idealist, but practical steps that could be adopted by any party, should they wish to.That, at least, is what struck me when I worked in the lobby, or parliamentary press gallery, in 2022. Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. Electronic voting should be introduced to allow the report stage more time for debate, reducing the power of the whips and increasing the potential for rebellion against government edicts. He did so for 14 days in September 2019 until it was ruled unconstitutional by the UK Supreme Court. Dunt then proposes that the performance of MPs should be improved by reducing their workloads, including by providing more support for their constituency work, and more support and advice on parliamentary business including for understanding and scrutinizing proposed legislation.