Articles in this latest edition cover topics as diverse as political finance regulation, devolution, young people and the EU referendum, candidate campaigning in general elections, the policisation of abortion and the electoral success of women candidates, as well as reflections on the Turkish, Australian, Irish and EU Parliaments.
Articles available to read for free are marked with a star (☆).
- EDITOR’S CHOICE: ☆ ‘Taking Back Control’, the UK’s Constitutional Narrative and Schrodinger’s Devolution ☆ – Mark Sandford and Cathy Gormley-Heenan
- The Impact of Political Finance Regulation on Party Organisation – Anika Gauja, Stephen Mills, Narelle Miragliotta, Joo-Cheong Tham, Zim Nwokora, Malcolm Anderson
- Electoral Accountability, Responsibility Attributions, and the Democratic Deficit in Devolved Wales – Einion Dafydd and Sanja Badanjak
- Resources, Values, Identity: Young Cosmopolitans and the Referendum on British Membership of the European Union – Rakib Ehsan and James Sloam
- Elite-Citizen Linkages and Issue Congruency under Competitive Authoritarianism – Marwa Shalaby and Abdullah Aydogan
- Minority Party Government and Independent MPs: A Comparative Analysis of Australia and Ireland – Glenn Kefford and Liam Weeks
- Conceived in Harlesden: Candidate-Centred Campaigning in British General Elections – Caitlin Milazzo and Joshua Townsley
- Understanding Legislative Speech in the Turkish Parliament: Reconsidering the Electoral Connection under Proportional Representation – Alper T Bulut and Emel İlter
- Competing Principals and Non-Vote Decisions in the European Parliament – Nuria Font
- Falling on Deaf Ears? Exploring the Effects of Newspaper Coverage of the European Parliament on Public Support for it – Olga Eisele
- The Politicisation of Abortion, Voters’ Stereotypes and the Electoral Success of Women Candidates – Agnes Blome, Anouk Lloren and Jan Rosset
Enjoy reading this? Please consider sharing it
Should the Liaison Committee have as its chair someone who is not simultaneously a select committee chair, and should the identity of that person be determined by the government? The answer to these questions will tell us much about how this cohort of MPs, particularly government backbenchers, view the relationship between Parliament and the executive.
The Coronavirus crisis is spotlighting the importance of the House of Commons Chamber in our democratic life. 7-8 May marks 80 years since the Norway Debate, the event which demonstrated this most famously. Over two days of debate, MPs’ performances in the Chamber and a decision to force a division had historic consequences.
The extensive take-up of remote evidence-taking by House of Commons select committees during the Easter recess is a significant Coronavirus-induced change of practice. It shows how procedural and technological change can help support scrutiny.
Several parliamentary committees scrutinise delegated powers and delegated legislation. But what is the aim of this scrutiny, what standards are applied, and what are the value and limits of Parliament’s role in this aspect of the legislative process?
There will be gaps in a new House of Commons’ scrutiny of the government and engagement with the public until the events required at the start of a Parliament have taken place and all the necessary institutions and processes have been re-established. The length of time taken over procedures at the start of a Parliament therefore matters.
There have been many calls for Parliament to become ‘virtual’ during the Coronavirus pandemic, using remote working to ensure proper scrutiny of government during the crisis. But how should a ‘virtual’ Parliament operate?