Legislation and Scrutiny GapFill

There are five primary ways in which Parliament can scrutinise the activity of the executive. Firstly, backbenchers play a significant role, with the ability to probe during   ministers' questionsfactionslegislationprime minister's questions to cabinet members in the chamber and to take part in  factionslegislationprime minister's questionsdebates that have been arranged by the Backbench Business Committee, and also by becoming a member of a specific  prime minister's questionsfactionselect committeelegislation. In practice, backbench scrutiny can often be ineffective as  government whipstellersthe shadow cabinetOpposition whips aim to prevent the extent to which backbenchers in the ruling party question the executive, while Opposition backbenchers can be ignored by a government with a majority. Backbenchers can also introduce   themselvesexternal influencelegislationstatutory instruments through private members’ bills and ten-minute rule bills, though these are very rarely passed into law.

Secondly, select committees provide an opportunity for individual ministers and departments to face extended questioning on certain issues. While each committee will usually have a majority of MPs from the party of government, select committee members are still selected by Parliament as a whole, increasing their independence from the   electoratelegislatureexecutivemanifesto.

Thirdly,  the cabinetthe Oppositioncross-bencherspeers, provided by the largest party in the Commons that is not in government, has a formal role of scrutiny in Parliament. It provides the primary means of opposition to government bills and decisions, while   the shadow cabinetgovernment whipsOpposition whipstellers ensures that each cabinet member has an opposing member on the Opposition front bench. In addition, the leader of the Opposition has special powers of scrutiny, such as the ability to ask the prime minister extra questions, and to call a formal vote of no confidence in the government. However, the Opposition cannot introduce legislation, has far fewer resources than the government, and often lacks credibility as it will have most recently lost an election.

In addition,   legislationfactionsprime minister's questionsministers' questions provide all MPs with an opportunity to question cabinet members on specific issues or bills. This role of scrutiny has increased importance as it is often more public-facing and designed to attract media attention and improve the transparency of the legislation process. The best-known of these sessions is   ministers' questionsfactionslegislationprime minister's questions, though it is often criticised for being theatrical and rhetorical, rather than providing detailed scrutiny.

Finally, another means of parliamentary scrutiny is the House of Lords. Because it is unelected, the Lords cannot veto legislation, but rather can suggest amendments, though the Commons is not obliged to accept them. Occasionally, when Commons rejects these amendments the Lords will in turn insist on their adoption. This can lead to parliamentary ping-pong, which can sometimes lead to delays of up to a year, though the Lords cannot delay legislation indefinitely.   Royal assentThe royal prerogativeThe Salisbury ConventionThe West Lothian Question states that the Lords should not try to delay legislation that was included in an election-winning party’s manifesto.