To mark 20 years since the signing of the Belfast Agreement, this special issue of Parliamentary Affairs explores a range of critical topics surrounding the event, including the sustainability of peace, why politicians should question the utility of one-sided assetions of the past, and the impact of the Agreement on women’s rights.
- Are Discretionary Referendums on EU Integration Becoming ‘Politically Obligatory’? The Cases of France and the UK
Aude Bicquelet, Helen Addison
- Participation in Local Elections: ‘Why Don’t Immigrants Vote More?’
- The Conservative Party Leadership Election of 2016: An Analysis of the Voting Motivations of Conservative Parliamentarians (editors’ choice)
David Jeffery, Tim Heppell, Richard Hayton, Andrew Crines
- Committee Hearings of the UK Parliament: Who gives Evidence and does this Matter?
- The Politics of Welshness: A Response to Bradbury and Andrews
- The Development of the Treasury Select Committee 1995–2015
Saskia Maureen Rombach
- Advice Giving and Party Loyalty: an Informational Model for the Socialisation Process of New British MPs
- Votes At 16: New Insights from Scotland on Enfranchisement
Special collection: Twenty years after the Good Friday / Belfast Agreement
Guest editor: Peter Shirlow
- Twenty Years after the Belfast Agreement
- Between Conflict and Peace: An Analysis of the Complex Consequences of the Good Friday Agreement
- Truth Friction in Northern Ireland: Caught between Apologia and Humiliation
- Contested Space, Peacebuilding and the Post-conflict City
- One Step Forwards, Two Steps Back: Women’s Rights 20 Years after the Good Friday Agreement
Enjoy reading this? Please consider sharing it
The recent rearrangement of responsibilities for the government’s handling of EU-related affairs raises questions about future parliamentary scrutiny of these issues. In some respects pre-2016 institutional arrangements are restored, but the post-Brexit landscape presents new scrutiny challenges which thus far MPs have not confronted.
What information and evidence does Parliament need to enable it to oversee government law-making? Is Parliament currently provided with sufficient information and, if not, how can this be improved?
A recent House of Lords debate on a ‘made negative’ Statutory Instrument highlights Peers’ greater appetite and ability to secure such debates compared to MPs. Data on debate lengths suggests parliamentarians are more likely to give more meaningful scrutiny to SIs they wish to debate than those on which they are obliged to spend time by current procedures.
What Covid Regulations will the House of Commons debate on 14 December, and how? Amid backbench unrest, the occasion will be shaped by the interplay between delegated legislation scrutiny, parliamentary procedures, and raw politics. The outcome could have profound consequences for both public health policy and the Prime Minister’s position.
Statutory Instruments (SIs) have been a key tool in the government’s response to shortages of heavy goods vehicle (HGV) drivers. These SIs showcase the usefulness of this type of law-making but also highlight again some of the longstanding problems with its parliamentary scrutiny.
Delegated legislation may not be glamorous but it is essential to how our democracy works. Time to treat it accordingly.