Recall of MPs in the UK: 'if I were you I wouldn't start from here'

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The publication of a White Paper, Recall of MPs, and a draft Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny, by the UK Government in December 2011 was greeted with almost universal antipathy. In bringing forward the draft Bill Cabinet Office ministers declared their intention to ‘trigger a debate on what would be the best model for a recall mechanism’ and they expressed a willingness ‘to consider alternative models’ or even to contemplate ‘adopting a completely different approach’. Yet, they made it clear any such proposals ‘must work within our unique constitutional framework’ and be ‘suitable for our system of representative democracy’. The objective of this article, therefore, is to do precisely what Cabinet Office ministers asked: to examine comparative experience and to apply lessons from that experience to the UK's ‘unique constitutional framework’. Three questions guide the analysis: first, what is the problem to be addressed in introducing recall?; secondly, what does comparative experience reveal about the operation of recall? and thirdly how unique is the UK's constitutional framework?
LanguageEnglish
Pages732-751
Number of pages20
JournalParliamentary Affairs
Volume66
Issue number4
Early online date7 May 2012
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2013

Fingerprint

minister
representative democracy
experience
bill

Keywords

  • UK's constitutional framework
  • representative democracy

Cite this

@article{dee1f1c55e3e44bba13e27e753560ab2,
title = "Recall of MPs in the UK: 'if I were you I wouldn't start from here'",
abstract = "The publication of a White Paper, Recall of MPs, and a draft Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny, by the UK Government in December 2011 was greeted with almost universal antipathy. In bringing forward the draft Bill Cabinet Office ministers declared their intention to ‘trigger a debate on what would be the best model for a recall mechanism’ and they expressed a willingness ‘to consider alternative models’ or even to contemplate ‘adopting a completely different approach’. Yet, they made it clear any such proposals ‘must work within our unique constitutional framework’ and be ‘suitable for our system of representative democracy’. The objective of this article, therefore, is to do precisely what Cabinet Office ministers asked: to examine comparative experience and to apply lessons from that experience to the UK's ‘unique constitutional framework’. Three questions guide the analysis: first, what is the problem to be addressed in introducing recall?; secondly, what does comparative experience reveal about the operation of recall? and thirdly how unique is the UK's constitutional framework?",
keywords = "UK's constitutional framework, representative democracy",
author = "David Judge",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1093/pa/gss013",
language = "English",
volume = "66",
pages = "732--751",
journal = "Parliamentary Affairs",
issn = "0031-2290",
number = "4",

}

Recall of MPs in the UK : 'if I were you I wouldn't start from here'. / Judge, David.

In: Parliamentary Affairs, Vol. 66, No. 4, 10.2013, p. 732-751.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Recall of MPs in the UK

T2 - Parliamentary Affairs

AU - Judge, David

PY - 2013/10

Y1 - 2013/10

N2 - The publication of a White Paper, Recall of MPs, and a draft Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny, by the UK Government in December 2011 was greeted with almost universal antipathy. In bringing forward the draft Bill Cabinet Office ministers declared their intention to ‘trigger a debate on what would be the best model for a recall mechanism’ and they expressed a willingness ‘to consider alternative models’ or even to contemplate ‘adopting a completely different approach’. Yet, they made it clear any such proposals ‘must work within our unique constitutional framework’ and be ‘suitable for our system of representative democracy’. The objective of this article, therefore, is to do precisely what Cabinet Office ministers asked: to examine comparative experience and to apply lessons from that experience to the UK's ‘unique constitutional framework’. Three questions guide the analysis: first, what is the problem to be addressed in introducing recall?; secondly, what does comparative experience reveal about the operation of recall? and thirdly how unique is the UK's constitutional framework?

AB - The publication of a White Paper, Recall of MPs, and a draft Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny, by the UK Government in December 2011 was greeted with almost universal antipathy. In bringing forward the draft Bill Cabinet Office ministers declared their intention to ‘trigger a debate on what would be the best model for a recall mechanism’ and they expressed a willingness ‘to consider alternative models’ or even to contemplate ‘adopting a completely different approach’. Yet, they made it clear any such proposals ‘must work within our unique constitutional framework’ and be ‘suitable for our system of representative democracy’. The objective of this article, therefore, is to do precisely what Cabinet Office ministers asked: to examine comparative experience and to apply lessons from that experience to the UK's ‘unique constitutional framework’. Three questions guide the analysis: first, what is the problem to be addressed in introducing recall?; secondly, what does comparative experience reveal about the operation of recall? and thirdly how unique is the UK's constitutional framework?

KW - UK's constitutional framework

KW - representative democracy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885115839&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/pa/gss013

DO - 10.1093/pa/gss013

M3 - Article

VL - 66

SP - 732

EP - 751

JO - Parliamentary Affairs

JF - Parliamentary Affairs

SN - 0031-2290

IS - 4

ER -