Europe -- Politics and government; Political science
It is within the competence of any member to address a question to any
minister of the crown who is also a member, to obtain information.
Except in special cases, notice of questions must be given at least
one day in advance, and a period of approximately three-quarters of an
hour is set apart at four sittings every week for the asking and
answering of such questions. A minister may answer or decline to
answer, but unless a declination can be shown to arise from legitimate
considerations of public interest its effect politically may be
embarrassing. In any event, there is no debate, and in this respect
the English practice differs from the French "interpellation."[186]
The asking of questions is liable to abuse but, as is pointed out by
Ilbert, "there is no more valuable safeguard against maladministration,
no more effective method of bringing the searchlight of criticism to
bear on the action or inaction of the executive government and its
subordinates. A minister has to be constantly asking himself, not
merely whether his proceedings and the proceedings of those for whom
he is responsible are legally or technically defensible, but what kind
of answer he can give if questioned about them in the House, and how
that answer will be received."[187] Any member is privileged to bring
forward a motion censuring the Government or any member or department
thereof, and a motion of this sort, when emanating from the leader of
the Opposition, constitutes a vote of confidence upon whose result may
depend the continued tenure of the ministry. By a call upon the
Government or a given department for information, by the constitution
of parliamentary committees, departmental committees, or royal
commissions, and, in particular by taking advantage of the numberless
opportunities afforded by the enactment of appropriation bills, the
House of Commons may further impose upon the executive the most
thoroughgoing responsibility and control. "A strong executive (p. 130)
government, tempered and controlled by constant, vigilant, and
representative criticism," is the ideal at which the parliamentary
institutions of Great Britain are aimed.[188]
[Footnote 186: See p. 314.]
[Footnote 187: Parliament, 113-114.]
[Footnote 188: Ilbert, Parliament, 119. On the
Commons' control of the Government see Lowell,
Government of England, I., Chap. 17; Moran, English
Government, Chap. 8; Low, The Governance of
England, Chap. 5; Todd, Parliamentary Government,
II., 164-185.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account