UNIT GUIDE 2016/17
POLI31336 The Contemporary British Parliament
Teaching Block: 1
Unit Owner:
Phone:
Email:
Office:
Unit owner
office hours:
Weeks: 1-12
Level:
Professor Sarah Childs
H/6
Credit points:
0117 921 7587
20
Prerequisites:
[email protected]
None
10 Priory Road ground floor
Comparative and National
Curriculum area:
room TBC
Politics
9-10 am Thursdays
10-11 am Fridays
There will be a sign up sheet on my office door please sign up for a slot
Scheduled office hours do not run during reading weeks, though you can still contact tutors
for advice by email and to arrange individual appointments
Timetabled classes:
You are expected to attend ONE seminar each week. Your online personal timetable will inform you to which
group you have been allocated. Seminar groups are fixed: you are not allowed to change seminar groups
without permission from the office.
Weeks 6 and 12 are Reading Weeks; there is NO regular teaching in these weeks.
NB for this unit, because of a postponement of classes in week 5 there will be teaching in week 12 –
this is when you will present your presentation based on your research paper.
Learning outcomes:
On successful completion of the unit, students will be able to:
• Advanced knowledge and understanding of the key practices, roles, and functions of, and behaviours
within the UK Parliament.
• Advanced knowledge and understanding of, and ability to apply to a personal area of study, the key
academic and practitioner debates associated with the UK Parliament, not least debates about
parliamentary reform.
• Facility in handling key concepts crucial to understanding parliaments, including, representation,
accountability, scrutiny and power, and being able to demonstrate their applicability to the students’
own area of study.
• Awareness of, and ability to engage with and situate their own work within, the conceptual frameworks
associated with analysis of the UK Parliament and legislatures
Requirements for passing the unit:
• Satisfactory attendance at seminars
• Completion of all formative work to an acceptable standard
• Attainment of a composite mark of all summative work to a passing standard (40 or above)
Details of coursework and deadlines
Assessment:
Word count:
Weighting: Deadline:
Day:
Week:
Formative assessment:
n/a
n/a
n/a
In class
12
In class presentation
9.30am
January
Summative assessment:
3,000
100%
11th January Wednesday assessment
Essay
period
• Students will confirm a research question with the tutor during the semester; there are no set
questions as this unit encourages students to undertake study in an area of interest to them albeit
within the remit of the unit.
• Instructions for the submission of coursework can be found in Appendix A
• Assessment in the school is subject to strict penalties regarding late submission, plagiarism and
maximum word count. A summary of key regulations is in Appendix B.
• Marking criteria can be found in Appendix C.
Make sure you check your Bristol email account regularly throughout the course as important information
will be communicated to you. Any emails sent to your Bristol address are assumed to have been read. If
you wish for emails to be forwarded to an alternative address then please go to
https://wwws.cse.bris.ac.uk/cgi-bin/redirect-mailname-external
Unit description
This unit critically examines the role and functions of Parliament within the contemporary British political
system. Both the Commons and the Lords are addressed. Parliament’s formal rules, traditions,
conventions and norms of behaviour are considered within a context of wider analysis of political
institutions, and institutional change. More specifically, it examines parliamentary representation;
parliamentary scrutiny, influence and accountability; Executive-Legislative relations; and questions of
parliamentary reform. This Unit is one of a handful of a UK Parliament accredited Units being taught in
leading Politics Departments and Universities across the UK from 2013. It accordingly benefits from a
specialized visit to the UK Parliament and from talks given by Parliamentary Clerks at the University of
Bristol as part of its teaching provision.
Teaching arrangements
• 1x 3 hour weekly seminar for 10 teaching weeks
• Parliamentary Speaker seminars in 4 of the10 teaching weeks
• Additional office hours devoted to 31336 students in the remaining Friday slots of the semester
• One day ‘bespoke’ research visit to Parliament in reading week
Requirements for credit points
• Attendance at seminars, the Parliamentary Speaker seminars, and the Parliament visit
• Formative ‘in class’ presentation
• One Essay
Summative assessment
There will be one summative assessment:
• 1x 3000 word essay.
This is worth 100% of the overall Unit mark.
These essays are ‘research papers’ and students will agree with the Tutor their area of study and a
specific essay question. They should do this in the Friday ‘extra’ office hour slots.
For many seminars students will be expected to read academic work and parliamentary
publications, including, legislation, select committee reports, and library papers. New sources will
be added throughout the unit.
As a final year Unit, much of the reading will come from academic journals; many of which are available
as e-journals from the University Library. As British politics changes all the time, new articles will be
published throughout your studies. You should ensure that you keep up to date with new research by
looking at, inter alia, the following relevant journals: British Politics, Political Studies, Public Administration,
Governance, Public Administration Review, British Journal of Political Science, British Journal of Politics
and International Relations, Parliamentary Affairs, Political Quarterly, West European Politics,
Government and Opposition, Party Politics.
In addition to academic analysis it is important that you keep up to date with Westminster politics through
the media and the Parliament website and BBC Parliament TV, Democracy Live, and BBC Radio 4. In
order to develop your understanding of contemporary politics it is vital that you:
o Read a broadsheet newspaper, ideally daily, but at least the weekend versions;
o Watch quality television news and political programmes such as Channel 4 news; Newsnight; the
Andrew Marr and the new Peter Peston TVshows;
o Listen to Radio 4 politics programmes: eg, Today (Monday to Saturday 6-9pm), Yesterday in
Parliament (each evening), Westminster Hour (Sunday) and the Week in Westminster (Saturday)
(all can be accessed via BBC iplayer);
o Read weekly political magazines, ie The New Statesman, The Spectator
o You should follow political commentators on twitter, an journalists and politicians’ blogs
o And visit regularly the following websites:
 http://www.parliament.uk The official Parliament homepage: this contains information about
Parliament, text of Hansard, select committee reports and much else.





http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/procedurecommittee/publications/ for procedure committee publications which is a key source of
parliamentary reform consideration
http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/committees/recent-reports/ this link takes you to
the recent publications table, where you can identify relevant reports.
www.hansardsociety.org.uk/ provides extensive analysis of Parliament.
www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/publications/catalogue.htm a good source of academic analysis.
http://www.theyworkforyou.com documents MPs’ activities.
Unit aims
• To develop an advanced understanding of UK Parliamentary practice and behaviour; and of the
relationships between Parliament and other parts of the political system, not least the
Government.
• To be able to identify and critically examine the formal rules, traditions, conventions and norms of
the UK Parliament.
• To be able examine the role and functions of, and behaviour within, the Houses of Parliament and
appreciate the wider institutional setting within which they occur.
• To develop an understanding of the concepts of representation, accountability, scrutiny and power
within the context of the UK Parliament.
• To develop an understanding of institutional change; to be able to recognise the relationship
between structural and behavioural factors in considering institutional change.
• To gain awareness of major concepts and significant typologies developed in the comparative
study of legislatures.
• To develop skills in analysing primary source material, not least Parliamentary material.
• To develop skills in written and oral communication
In sum, this unit focuses in depth on key aspects of the British Parliament rather than constituting a broad
‘survey’ unit. Accordingly, it requires of students to gain a detailed, sophisticated and comprehensive
understanding of a particular aspect of the British Parliament (objectives 2-4). This involves, in turn,
extensive analysis of practices roles, and functions of, and behaviours in the contemporary Parliament
acquired through reading and observation of, for example, the passage of legislation, public bill committee
and select committee activity (objective 1) together with reports from parliamentary reform organizations
such as the Hansard Society (objective 2). This unit is, then, examined by an extended ‘research paper’
style essay, worth 100% of the overall unit. Students will be able to decide upon their own topic for the
essay – reflecting their own particular interests, albeit constrained by the coverage of the unit – and will be
guided to construct an appropriate essay question by the Unit Owner, who must approve all titles. The
essay will require the analysis of both secondary and primary literature (objectives 2 and 4). To provide
formative feedback the students will present a ten minute presentation in class – this will enable students
to set out and defend orally their research question, approach and analytic framework, and methods.
Students will be advised to talk through their presentation in advance with the Unit Owner in the additional
Unit specific Friday office hours.
Transferable skills
• Presentation skills; oral participation; small group work; in-depth (guided) independent study
Development and feedback
• Peers will provide student feedback in class; the Tutor will provide oral feedback on student
presentations in class and Office hours; written feedback will be available at the end of the unit;
students can and should make use of additional friday office hours to discuss in advance their
presentation and essay.
Details of coursework
One, 3000 word essay worth 100% submitted to Blackboard
One, 10 minute presentation to the class
Seminar Schedule
The teaching is based around seminars and external talks from parliamentary experts. In the seminars
different texts and empirical cases will be discussed and critically analysed. The seminars will include
group discussions and small group work based on empirical case study material. One full seminar (week
12) will be devoted to student presentations. Seminars will open with a collective discussion of the ‘week
in Parliament’, with students drawing on their wider reading/listening/watching of news about Westminster
in the preceding week. Seminars will often involve different tasks, for example, watching select committee
proceedings; the discussion of Hansard debates; analysis of Prime Minister’s Questions; and in-depth
analysis of individual academic works.
Weekly Topics:
1. Parliamentarians’ Roles and Functions
(w/b 26 Sept)
2. Representation and the UK Parliament
(w/b 3 Oct)
3. Influence, Scrutiny and Accountability I : questions, debates, and parties (w/b 10 oct)
4. Influence, Scrutiny and Accountability II: select committees and petitions (w/b17th)
5. Classes postponed
(w/b 24 Oct)
6. Reading week: Bespoke Research Trip to Westminster
(Tues 1st Nov)
7. The Backbencher: Private Members’ Bills; Early Day Motions; APPGs
(w/b 7 Nov)
8. Constituency Representation
+ Lecture with Mr Speaker, the Rt Hon John Bercow MP
(w/b 14 Nov)
9. Parliamentary Reform I: The Wright reforms and after
(w/b 21 Nov)
10. Parliamentary Reform II: The Good Parliament
(w/b 28 Nov)
11. Parliamentary Reform III: House of Lords
(w/b 5 Dec)
12. Seminar Presentations
(w/b 12 Dec)
In addition to Mr Speaker coming, we will also have Parliamentary Speakers presenting on 4
Fridays – dates to be confirmed; on other Fridays I will hold additional office hours
Pre-Unit preparation
Pre-Unit Reading Constitution and Parliament chapters (Commons and Lords) from one of the following
introductory UK Politics text books:
Plus
•
British Politics, 2nd edition, by Robert Leach, Bill Coxall and Lynton Robins; or Politics UK,
Kavanagh and Norton; or The New British Politics Budge et al
•
Kelso, Alexandra ‘Changing Parliamentary Landscapes’ in Heffernan et al, Developments in
British Politics 9.
You might also wish to read
•
Riddell, P. (2011) In Defence of Politicians (London: Biteback), available in the library.
Week 1 Parliamentarians’ Roles and Functions
This is a substantive seminar: you must come to class prepared
Seminar
•
•
•
•
Student introductions, class format and Tutor expectations of students;
The ‘Week in Parliament’
Individual student reflections on the autobiography of an MP;
Backbench and frontbench roles of MPs and Peers at Westminster.
Essential Seminar Reading
ALL students must read AT LEAST ONE MP’S ACCOUNT OF PARLIAMENTARY LIFE.
You can choose any contemporary account, the following are some suggestions (also check out
second hand bookshops for these titles):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Edwina Currie Diaries https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/edwina-currie-diaries-hardback
Paul Flynn, How to be an MP https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/how-to-be-an-mp-paperback
Helen Jones, How to be a Government Whip https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/how-to-bea-government-whip
Oona King Dairies http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Oona-King-Diaries-House/dp/0747590931
Chris Mullen, A walk on Part https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/a-walk-on-part-paperback’; Decline
and Fall https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/decline-fall-paperback; A View from the Foothills
https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/a-view-from-the-foothills-the-diaries-of-chris-mullin-paperback
Jack Straw, Last Man Standing https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/last-man-standing-hardback
Malcolm Rifkind Power and Pragmatism https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/power-and-pragmatism
Joan Ruddock Going Nowhere https://www.politicos.co.uk/books/going-nowhere
Ann Widdecombe, Strictly Ann http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0297866435
You could also check out others: https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/category/autobiography
You should also read:
• Norton, P. (2013) Parliament in British Politics, Chapters 1, 2 and 5.
• Campbell, R. and Lovenduski, J. (2015) ‘What Should MPs Do? Public and Parliamentarians'
Views Compared’, Parliamentary Affairs, 68 ,4
Further Reading
Brazier, A. et al, (2008) Law in the Making: Influence and Change in the Legislative Process (London:
Hansard Society.
The Commission to Strengthen Parliament, Strengthening Parliament (2000)
Cowley, P (2000) ‘Legislatures and Assemblies’, in Dunleavy, P. et al (eds), Developments in British
Politics 6 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
Cowley, P. (1996) ‘‘Crossing the Floor’: Representative Theory and Practice in Britain’, Public Law
Flinders, M. and Kelso, A. (2011) ‘Mind the Gap: Political Analysis, Public Expectations and the
Parliamentary Decline Thesis’, BJPIR 13, 2: 249-268
The Hansard Society Commission on Parliamentary Scrutiny, (2001) The Challenge for Parliament.
Healey, J., Gill,M. and McHugh, D. (2005) MPs and Politics in Our Time (London: Hansard Society)
Available online at http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/publications/archive/2007/10/02/MPs-andpolitics-in-our-time.aspx
Flinders, M. & Wood, M. (2015) When Politics Fails: Hyper-Democracy and Hyper-Depoliticization. New
Political Science, 37, 3.
Fox, R. And Korris, M. (2012) ‘A Fresh Start? The Orientation and Induction of New MPs at Westminster
Following the 2010 General Election’, Parliamentary Affairs 65, 3.
House of Commons facts sheet on legislation.
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/guides/factsheets/legislation/
Kalitowski, S. (2009) ‘Parliament for the People? Public Knowledge, Interest and Perceptions of the
Westminster Parliament’, in Parliamentary Affairs, 62, 2: 350-63
Leston-Bandeira, C. ‘Why Symbolic Representation Frames Parliamentary Public Engagement’, British
Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18.2 (2016), 498-516
Markham, S. (2012) ‘Strengthening Women's Roles in Parliaments’, Parliamentary Affairs 65, 3.
Norton, P. (2013) Parliament in British Politics, Chapter 8
Norton, P. (1998) ‘The Legislative Powers of Parliament’ in Flinterman, C. et al (eds), The Evolving Role of
Parliaments in Europe.
Norton, P. (1990) ‘Parliament in the United Kingdom’, West European Politics, 13.
‘Parliaments and Publics’, Special Issue of Parliamentary Affairs, 50 (1997).
Parliament First, Parliament’s Last Chance (2003).
Rosenblatt, G. (2006) A Year in the Life: From member of public to Member of Parliament, London:
Hansard Society. http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/publications/archive/2007/10/17/A-Year-in-theLife.aspx
Rush, M. (2001) The Role of the Member of Parliament Since 1868 (Oxford: OUP).
Rush, M and Giddings, P. (2011) Parliamentary Socialization (Basingstoke: Palgrave)
The Lords
Baldwin, N. (1985) ‘The House of Lords: Behavioural Changes’, in Norton, P. (ed) Parliament in the 1980s,
(Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Baldwin, N. (ed) (2005) Parliament in the 21st Century (London: Politico’s).
Dorey, P. (2008) ‘Stumbling Through 'Stage Two': New Labour and House of Lords Reform,’ British Politics,
3,1: 22-44.
HM Government (2007) White Paper, “The House of Lords: Reform” (Cm 7027) Available at:
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm70/7027/7027.asp
Kelso, A. (2006). ‘Reforming the House of Lords: Navigating Representation, Democracy and Legitimacy at
Westminster,’ Parliamentary Affairs, 59, 4:563-81.
Maclean, I., Spirling, A. and Russell, M. (2003) ‘None of the Above: The UK House of Commons Votes on
Reforming the House of Lords’, Political Quarterly, 74, 3, 298-310.
Parkinson, J. (2007) ‘The House of Lords: A Deliberative Democratic Defence’ The Political Quarterly, 78,
3: 374-81.
Richard, I, and Welfare, D. (1999) Unfinished Business: Reforming the House of Lords) (London: Vintage).
Reforming the House of Lords, Special Issue of Representation, 37 (2000).
Russell, M. (2013) The Contemporary House of Lords (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press).
Russell, M. (2009) ‘House of Lords reform: Are We Nearly There Yet?’, The Political Quarterly, 80, 1: 11925.
Russell, M. (2009) ‘Nature and Role of the “Crossbenchers” in the House of Lords’, Parliamentary Affairs,
62, 1: 32-52.
Russell, M. (2000) Reforming the House of Lords: Lessons From Overseas (Oxford: OUP).
Russell, M. (2001) ‘What are Second Chambers for?’, Parliamentary Affairs, 54, 3.
Russell, M. and Sciara, M. (2009) ‘Independent Parliamentarians En Masse: The Changing Nature and
Role of the ‘Crossbenchers’ in the House of Lords’, Parliamentary Affairs, 62, 1:32-52.
Russell, M. and Sciara, M. (2006) The House of Lords in 2005: A More Representative and Assertive
Chamber?, (London: Constitution Unit).
Russell, M. and Sciara, M. (2008) ‘The Policy Impact of Defeats in the House of Lords’, The British Journal
of Politics and International Relations, 10, 4: 571-89.
Shell, D. (2008) The House of Lords (Manchester: MUP).
Shell, D. (2000) ‘Labour and the House of Lords: A Case Study in Constitutional Reform’ Parliamentary
Affairs, 53, 2: 290-310.
Shell, D. (1992) The House of Lords (New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf).
Whittaker, R. (2006) ‘Ping Pong and Policy Influences: Relations between the Lords and Commons,20052006,’ Parliamentary Affairs, 59, 3: 536-45.
Some useful Parliament research papers:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmproced/684/684.pdf
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/procedure/Government-Response-toProcedure-Committee-PMBs.pdf
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04055/SN04055.pdf [results of ballot bills]
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN03236/SN03236.pdf [carry over of bills]
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06208/SN06208.pdf [select committees]
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04653/SN04653.pdf [sitting days since 1945]
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04568/SN04568.pdf [successful PMBs since...]
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04092/SN04092.pdf [addresses to both houses of
parliament]
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04809/SN04809.pdf [mps related to eaach other]
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN02430/SN02430.pdf [mps withdrawn from ]
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/procedure/Letter-to-the-Chair-from-Leader-ofthe-House-the-Govt%e2%80%99s-response-on-EVEL.pdf
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7339/CBP-7339.pdf [evel]
members interview report
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/admin-committee/Interview-study-Membersleaving-Parliament-report%20-%20April%202016.pdf
sitting hours
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06380/SN06380.pdf
pre-legislative scrutiny
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05859/SN05859.pdf
late sittings
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN02226/SN02226.pdf
Seminar learning outcomes
Be familiar with the different roles and functions undertaken by UK Parliamentarians, noting differences
between the two Houses; begin to be able to compare the two Houses in light of extant academic literature;
be familiar with at least one MP’s account of parliamentary life; be cognizant of the stages of legislative
passage at Westminster and be able to critically engage with associated debates.
Week 2 Representation and the UK Parliament
Seminar
• Who sits in the House of Commons and the House of Lords? party, sex, race, class and the rise of
the ‘professional’ politician
• Concepts of representation and the UK Parliament
• Reforming representation: legislative recruitment and supply and demand side explanations
Essential Seminar Reading
1. Campbell, R. And Cowley, P. (2014). Rich Man, Poor Man, Politician man: Wealth Effects in a
Candidate Biography Survey Experiment British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 16, 1
2. Campbell, R. And Childs, S. (2015) ‘All aboard the Pink Battle Bus’, in A. Geddes and J. Tonge
(2015) Britain Votes 2015, also available as special issue of Parliamentary Affairs, Sept 2015.
http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/content/68/suppl_1/206.extract
3. Cowley, P. (2013) Why not ask the audience? Understanding the public’s representational
priorities British Politics. 8, 2.
4. Criddle, B. (2015) ‘Variable Diversity: MPs and Candidates’ in P. Cowley and D. Kavanagh (ed) The
British General Election of 2015 (London: Palgrave).
Further Reading
Speaker’s Conference on Parliamentary Representation,
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/spconf/spconf.htm Executive Summary & Recommendations
‘The Women in Parliament APPG Inquiry’, www.policybristol.blogs.bris.ac.uk/2014/07/14/the-women-inparliament-all-party-parliament-group-appg-inquiry/
Parliament and Constitution Centre: Ethnic Minorities in Politics and Government, Published 05 January
2012| Standard notes SN01156
Parliament and Constitution Centre: Religious representation in the House of Lords Published 26 October
2009 | Standard notes SN05172
Allen, P. And Cairney, P. (forthcoming) http://www.peter-allen.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/AllenCairney-2015-Final-Accepted-Version.pdf
Bochel, H. and Defty. A. (2012) ‘A More Representative Chamber: Representation and the House of Lords’
Journal of Legislative Studies, 18, 1.
Bochel, H. And Defty, A. (2010) ‘A Question of Expertise: the House of Lords and Welfare Policy’,
Parliamentary Affairs 63, 1.
Cairney, P. (2007)‘The Professionalisation of MPs: Refining the ‘Politics-Facilitating Explanation’,
Parliamentary Affairs, 60, 2.
Casey, L. S. and Reynolds, A. (2015) ‘Standing Out: Transgender and Gender Variant Candidates and
Elected Officials Around the World’, access via
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/11/invisibility-transgender-people-electoral-politicsaround-world
Childs, S. (2008) Women and British Party Politics (London: Routledge) Chapter 3.
Cowley, P. (2012) ‘Arise Novice Leaders’, Politics, 32, 1.
Criddle, B. (2015) MPs and Candidates in P. Cowley and D. Kavanagh (ed) The British General Election of
2015 (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Criddle, B. (2010) ‘More Diverse yet more Uniform’, in Kavanagh, D. And Cowley, P. (ed) The British
General Election of 2010 (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Criddle, B. (2005) ‘MPs and Candidates’, in D Kavanagh and D Butler (eds), The British General Election of
2005 (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Criddle, B. (2001) ‘MPs and Candidates’, in D Kavanagh and D Butler (eds), The British General Election of
2001 (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Henn, M and Foard, N. (2012) ‘Young People, Political Participation and Trust in Britain’, Parliamentary
Affairs, 65, 1.
Kenny, M. (2011) ‘The Political Theory of Recognition: The Case of the ‘White Working Class’, British
Journal of Politcs and International Relations, 14, 1.
Fieldhouse, E. and Sobolewska, M. (2013), ‘Introduction: Are British Ethnic Minorities Politically Underrepresented?’, Parliamentary Affairs, 66, 2.
Mansbridge, J. (2011) ‘Identifying the Concept of Representation’, American Political Science Review, 105.
Norton, P. (2013) Parliament in British Politics Chapter 10
Parliamentary Affairs, special issue (2013), 66, 2.
Rossier, D., Johnston, R., and Pattie, C. (2013) ‘Representing People and Representing Places:
Community, Continuity and the Current Redistribution of Parliamentary Constituencies in the UK’,
Parliamentary Affairs, 66, 4.
Women’s Representation
Ashe,J., et al (2010) ‘A Missed Opportunity’, British Politics,
Braniff, M. and Whiting, S. (2016) ‘There's Just No Point Having a Token Woman’: Gender and
Representation in the Democratic Unionist Party in Post-Agreement Northern Ireland’, Parliamentary
Affairs, 69, 1.
Campbell, R. And Childs, S. (2010) ‘Wags, Wives and Mothers’, in Geddes, A. and Tonge, J. (ed) Britain
Votes 2010 (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press) also available as, Parliamentary Affairs, 63, 4.
Childs, S. (2002) ‘Competing Conceptions of Representation and the Passage of the Sex Discrimination
(Election Candidates) Bill’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 8, 3:90-108. Available from tutor.
Childs, S. (2003) ‘The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act and its Implications’, Representation,
39, 2. Available via Blackboard
Childs, S. and Evans, E. (2012) ‘Out of the Hands of the Parties: Women's Legislative Recruitment at
Westminster’, Political Quarterly, 83, 4.
Childs, S. and Malley, R. (2011) http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/reforming-when-mps-work/
Dahlerup, D and Friedenvall, L. (2010) ‘Judging Gender Quotas: predictions and results’, Policy and
Politics 38, 3.
Dovi, S. (2002) ‘Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black or Latino Do?’, American
Political Science Review, 96, 4.
Inter-parliamentary Union (2000) Women in National Parliaments www.ipu.org This provides global data on
levels of women’s descriptive representation.
Lovenduski, J. (2010) ‘A long Way to Go: The Final report of the Speaker’s Conference on Parliamentary
Representation’, Political Quarterly 81, 3.
Lovenduski, J. (2005) Feminizing Politics (Cambridge: Polity) Chapter 3.
Lovenduski, J. (2001) ‘Women and Politics: Minority Representation or Critical Mass?’ in P. Norris (ed)
Britain Votes 2001 (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Also published in Parliamentary Affairs 54, 4.
Lovenduski, J. (1997) ‘Gender Politics: A Breakthrough for Women?, Parliamentary Affairs, 50, 4.
Mansbridge, J. (1999) ‘Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent
‘Yes’’, The Journal of Politics, 61, 3.
Norris, P. and Lovenduski, J. (1995) Political Recruitment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
Special Issue Political Quarterly 83, 4.
Phillips, A. (1995) The Politics Of Presence (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Quota project http://www.quotaproject.org/
Learning Outcomes
To be aware of the backgrounds of MPs and Peers; be familiar with conceptual frameworks relating to
legislative recruitment and representation; be competent in debating descriptive representation and
arguments related to the composition of the House of Commons and House of Lords.
Week 3 Influence, Scrutiny and Accountability I: questions, debates, and party cohesion
Seminar
• Party Representation in the House of Commons, cohesion and rebellion
• Written and oral questions; parliamentary debates in the Chamber and Westminster Hall
• PMQs
o Use ‘Iplayer’ and look at two examples of PMQs from this Parliament
o Be prepared to critically analyze these two half-hours of parliamentary scrutiny. On what
basis might one evaluate PMQs?
Essential Seminar Reading
PMQs
1. Bates, S., et al (2012), ‘Questions to the Prime Minister: A Comparative Study of PMQs from
Thatcher to Cameron’, Parliamentary Affairs, 66, 2.
2. Hansard Society (2014) Tuned in or Turned off’ Public Attitudes to Prime Ministers Questions,
available on line
3. Kelso, A., Bennister, M. Larkin, P. (2016) The shifting landscape of prime ministerial accountability
to parliament: an analysis of Liaison Committee scrutiny sessions, forthcoming BJPIR
https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/conference/papers/2016/PSA%202016%20Paper%2C%20
KelsoBennisterLarkin_1.pdf
And
Something from (i) Rebellions literature
• Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2013) Cambo Chained, Dissension amongst the Coalition’s
Parliamentary Parties, 2012-13 http://nottspolitics.org/2013/05/14/cambo-chained-2/cambo-chained2/;
• Campbell, R. and Cowley, P. (2014) ‘Rebellion versus Loyalty, Shirking versus Working: A note on
framing parliamentary behaviour’, Representation 50, 4.
• Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2012) http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/politics/2012/05/08/the-bumperbook-of-coalition-rebellions/
• Russell, M (2014). Parliamentary Party Cohesion: Some Explanations from Psychology. Party
Politics, 20(5) 712-723 [Online]
Or (ii) Legislative/executive relations
• Goodwin, M. and Bates, S. (forthcoming) The ‘Powerless Parliament’? Agenda-setting and the role
of the UK parliament in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 British Politics Will be
available from blackboard
• Strong, J. (2015) ‘Why Parliament Now Decides on War: Tracing the Growth of the Parliamentary
Prerogative through Syria, Libya and Iraq’ BJPIR, 17, 4
Further Reading
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/business/westminster-hall-debates/ &
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmstords/1154/body.htm#10
Procedure committee on questions http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commonscommittees/procedure/201314PQMemorandum.pdf
Crewe, E. (2015) The House of Commons (London: Bloomsbury) chapter 4 Rulers and Whips and chapter
5 Scrutiny and Making Trouble.
Parliament and Constitution Centre: Prime Minister's Questions Published 06 October 2009 | Standard
notes SN05183
House of Commons Procedure Committee, Written Parliamentary Questions: Government Response
Of the Committee's Third Report of Session 2008–09, First Special Report of Session 2009–10
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmproced/129/129.pdf
Parliament and constitution Centre: http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN04401
Parliament and constitution Centre: Pre-legislative scrutiny under the Coalition GovernmentPublished 19
June 2013 | Standard notes SN05859
Parliament and constitution Centre: Post-Legislative ScrutinyPublished 23 May 2013 | Standard
notes SN05232
Baker, D. et al, (1994) ‘The Parliamentary Siege of Maastricht 1993: Conservative Divisions and British
Ratification’, Parliamentary Affairs, 47. 1.
Baker, D. et al, (1993) ‘Whips or Scorpions? The Maastricht Vote and the Conservative Party’,
Parliamentary Affairs, 46, 2.
Berrington, H. (1973) Backbench Opinion in the House of Commons 1945-55 (London: Pergamon).
Childs, S. and Withey, J. (2004) ‘Women Representatives Acting for Women: Sex and the Signing of Early
Day Motions in the 1997 British Parliament’, Political Studies 52.
Childs, S. and Withey, J. (2006) ‘A Simple Case of Feminist Cause and Feminist Effect? Reducing the VAT
on Sanitary Products in the UK’, Parliamentary Affairs, 59, 1.
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2008) ‘A Rebellious Decade: Backbench Rebellions under Tony Blair, 19972007’, in Beech, M. and Lee, S. (eds), Ten Years of New Labour (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Cowley, P. (2005) The Rebels: How Blair Mislaid His Majority (London: Politicos).
Cowley, P. (2002) Revolts and Rebellions: Parliamentary Voting Under Blair (London: Politicos).
Cowley, P. and Childs, S. (2003) ‘Too Spineless to Rebel? New Labour’s Women MPs’, British Journal of
Political Science, 33, 3.
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2005). ‘Parliament: Hunting for votes’ Parliamentary Affairs, 58, 2: 258-71.
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2005). ‘Still Causing Trouble? The Parliamentary Party’, Political Quarterly, 75,
4.
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2004) ‘Parliament: More Bleak House than Great Expectations’, Parliamentary
Affairs, 57, 2.
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2003) ‘In Place of Strife? The PLP in Government, 1997-2001’, Political
Studies, 51, 2.
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (1997) ’Sodomy, Slaughter, Sunday Shopping and Seatbelts: Free Votes in the
House of Commons, 1979 to 1996’ Party Politics, 3, 1.
Cowley, P. and Norton, P. (1999) ‘Rebels and Rebellions: Conservative MPs in the 1992 Parliament’, The
British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 1.
Cowley, P. (ed) Conscience and Parliament (London: Frank Cass).
Dorey, P. (1992) ‘Much Maligned, Much Misunderstood: The Role of the Party Whips’, Talking Politics
Finer, S., Berrington, H, and Bartholomew, D. (1961) Backbench Opinion in the House of Commons, 19551959 (Oxford: Pergamon).
Lovenduski, J. (2012) ‘Prime Minister’s Questions as Political Ritual’, British Politics 7.
Korris, M. (2011) ‘Standing up for Scrutiny: How and Why Parliament Should Make Better Law’,
Parliamentary Affairs 64, 3.
Lovenduski, J. (2012) Prime Minister's Questions as Political Ritual, British Politics 7.
Franklin, M. and Norton, P. (1993) Parliamentary Questions (Oxford: OUP).
Martin, S. (2011) ‘Parliamentary Questions, the Behaviour of Legislators, and the Function of Legislatures’,
Journal of Legislative Studies, 17.
Martin, S. and Rozenberge, O. (2012) The Role and Function of Parliamentary Questions
(London:Routledge).
Norton, P. (2013) Parliament in British Politics, Chapter 6.
Plumb, A. (2015) ‘How Do MPs in Westminster Democracies Vote When Unconstrained by Party
Discipline? A Comparison of Free Vote Patterns on Marriage Equality Legislation’, Parliamentary Affairs 68,
3
Russell, M. (2013) The Contemporary House of Lords (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press).
Salmond, R. (2014) ‘Parliamentary Question Times: How Legislative Accountability Mechanisms Affect
Mass Political Engagement’, The Journal of Legislative Studies, 20, 3.
Whitaker, R. (2006) ‘Backbench Influence on Government legislation? A Flexing of Parliamentary Muscles
at Westminster’, Parliamentary Affairs, 59, 2.
Young, R. and Cracknell, R. (2003) Parliamentary Questions, Debate Contributions and Participation in
Commons Divisions. Statistics for Session 2001-02, House of Commons Research Paper, 03/32, 31
March.
Learning Outcomes
Be familiar with the major means by which Parliamentarians influence and scrutinize the Executive; be
capable of analyzing the effectiveness of these; and be able to critically engage with debates relating to
party cohesion.
Week 4 Influence, Scrutiny, and Accountability II: committees and petitions
Seminar
• Select Committees & Public Bill Committees: how might these Committees be more effective in
holding government to account?
•
E-petitions: populism or public engagement?
Essential Seminar Reading
1. Hannah, W. (2015) Being an Effective Select Committee Member, IfG
http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/being-effective-select-committee-member &
http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/select-committees-under-scrutiny
2. Benton, M. and Russell, M. (2013) ‘Assessing the Impact of Parliamentary Oversight Committees:
The Select Committees in the British House of Commons’, Parliamentary Affairs 66 , 4.
3. Russell, M., Morris, B. And Larkin, P. (2013) Fitting the Bill, Bringing Commons’ legislation
committees into Line with Best Practice (UCL Constitution Unit). http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitutionunit/research/parliament/legislative-committees/tabs/Fitting_the_Bill_complete_pdf.pdf
4. Bochel, C. (2013), ‘Petitions Systems: Contributing to Representative Democracy?’, Parliamentary
Affairs, 66, 4 or E petitions a Collaborative system
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmproced/235/235.pdf
Further Reading
Westminster hall debates: procedure committee report
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmproced/1035/103503.htm
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/backbench-businesscommittee/
House of Commons Procedure Committee Debates on Government e-Petitions in Westminster Hall
Sixth Report of Session 2012–13
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmproced/1094/1094.pdf
Parliament and Constitution Centre: e-Petitions, Published 29 October 2012 | Standard notes SN06450
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/; http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commonsselect/backbench-business-committee/e-petitions-/
Parliament and Constitution Centre: Proposals for an e-petitions system for the House of Commons,
Published 12 May 2010 | Standard notes SN04725
Parliament and Constitution Unit: Effectiveness of select committeesPublished 29 January 2013 | Standard
notes SN06499
Parliament and Constitution Unit: House of Commons Background Papers: Parliamentary questions recent issues, Published 26 July 2012 | Standard notes SN04148Amended 12 November 2012
Parliament and Constitution Unit: The Departmental Select Committee System Published 15 June 2009 |
Research papers RP09/55
Audit of Political Engagement 10
http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/press_releases/archive/2013/05/16/audit-of-political-engagement10.aspx
Audit of Political engagement 9 – www.hansardsociety.org.ukAudit of Political Engagement 8
http://hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/publications/archive/2011/04/08/audit-of-political-engagement-8.aspx
Bochel, H. And Defty, A. (2010) ‘A Question of Expertise: the House of Lords and Welfare Policy’,
Parliamentary Affairs 63, 1.
Cobb, L. (2009) ‘Adding Value to an Arena Legislature? A Preliminary Examination of Topical Debates in
the British House of Commons’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 15, 4.
Commission to Strengthen Parliament, Strengthening Parliament (2000).
Benton, M, and Russell, M. (2012) ‘Assessing the Impact of Parliamentary Oversight Committees, the
Select Committees in the British House of Commons’, Parliamentary Affairs
http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/05/15/pa.gss009.full.pdf
Brazier, A. (2007) ‘The Fiscal Maze: Parliament, Government and Public Money’, Parliamentary Affairs, 60,
2.
Brazier, A. and Ram, V. (2005) Inside the Counting House. A Discussion Paper on Parliamentary Scrutiny
of Government Finance (London: Hansard Society).
Brazier, A. And Fox, R. (2010) ‘Enhancing the Backbench MP's Role As a Legislator: The Case for Urgent
Reform of Private Members Bills’, Parliam Aff 63, 1.
Brazier, A. et al, (2008) Law in the Making: Influence and Change in the Legislative Process (London:
Hansard Society).
Brazier, A. And Fox, R. (2011) ‘Reviewing Select Committee Tasks and Modes of Operation’,
Parliamentary Affairs, 64, 2.
Brazier, A. (2004) Parliament, Politics and Law-making (London: Hansard Society)
http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/publications/archive/2007/09/19/parliament-politics-and-lawmaking-issues-and-developments-in-the-legislative-process.aspx
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (2014). In the Brown Stuff?: Labour backbench dissent under Gordon Brown,
2007-2010 Contemporary British History. 28, 1.
Cowley, P. and Stuart, M. (1997) ‘Sodomy, Slaughter, Sunday Shopping and Seatbelts: Free Votes in the
House of Commons’, Party Politics 3, 1.
Downs, S. J. (1985) ‘The House of Commons: Structural Changes’, in P. Norton (ed), Parliament in the
1980s (London: Blackwell).
Drewry, G. (1989) The New Select Committees, 2nd ed, (Oxford: OUP).
Giddings, P. (1994) ‘Select Committees and Parliamentary Scrutiny: plus ca change?’, Parliamentary
Affairs 47,4.
The Hansard Commission on Parliamentary Scrutiny, The Challenge for Parliament: Making Government
Accountable (2001).
Hindmoor, A. et al (2009) ‘Assessing the Influence of Select Committees in the UK: The Education and
Skills Committee, 1997-2005’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 15, 1.
Hough, R, (2012) ‘Do Legislative Petitions Systems Enhance the Relationship between Parliament and
Citizen?’, Journal of Legislative Studies, 18.
Kelso, A. (2016) Political leadership in Parliament: the role of select committee chairs in the UK House of
Commons. Politics and Governance, 1-32.
Kubala, M. (2011) ‘Select Committees in the House of Commons and the Media’, Parliamentary Affairs, 64,
4.
Korris, M. (2011) Making Better Law (London: Hansard Society)
http://hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/publications/archive/2010/12/13/making-better-law-reform-of-thelegislative-process-from-policy-to-act.aspx
Levy, J. (2010) ‘Public Bill Committees: An Assessment Scrutiny Sought; Scrutiny Gained’, Parliamentary
Affairs, 63, 3.
Levy, J. (2009) Strengthening Parliament’s Powers of Scrutiny? An assessment of the introduction of Public
Bill Committees (UCL Constitution Unit, July) (available online).
Liaison Committee (2012) ‘Written Evidence: Papers and Briefing produced for the Liaison Committees’
Working Group on Committee resources and support’
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmliaisn/697/697vw.pdf
Maer, L., Gay, O. and Kelly, R. (2009) The Departmental Select Committee System, House of Commons
Research Paper, 09/55, 15 June 2009 (available online).
Maer, L. and Sandford, M. (2004) Select Committees under Scrutiny (The Constitution Unit, Jun 2004)
(available online).
Marsh, I. (1988) ‘Interest Groups and Policy Making: A New Role for Select Committees’, Parlia Affairs, 41,
4.
Norton, P. (1997) ‘Parliamentary Oversight’ in P Dunleavy et al (eds), Developments in British Politics 5
(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).
Page, E. C. (2001) Governing By Numbers (Oxford: Hart).
Issues in Law Making – Briefing Paper 1: Private Members’ Bills (Hansard Society, May 2003) (available
online).
Pedersen, H.H., Halpern, D. And Rasmussen, A. (2015) ‘Who Gives Evidence to Parliamentary
Committees? A Comparative Investigation of Parliamentary Committees and their Constituencies’, Journal
of Legislative Studies 21, 3
Russell, R., Gover,D., and Kristina Wollter (2016) ‘Does the Executive Dominate the Westminster
Legislative Process?: Six Reasons for Doubt’, Parliamentary Affairs 69,2.
Russell, M., Gover, D., Wollter, K. and Benton, M. (2015). Actors, Motivations and Outcomes in the
Legislative Process: Policy Influence at Westminster. Government and Opposition
Russell, M. and Cowley, P. (2015, forthcoming). The Policy Power of the Westminster Parliament: The
'Parliamentary State' and the Empirical Evidence. Governance
Russell, M. and Wright, T. (2013) Evidence to the Procedure Committee http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitutionunit/constitution-unit-news/210613
Russell, M. and Benton, M. (2011) Selective Influence: The Policy Impact of House of Commons Select
Committees (London: Constitution Unit). http://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/publications/tabs/unitpublications/153.pdf
Russell, M. et al (2010) Select Committee Impact and Effectiveness: Early Reflections (The Constitution
Unit, 22 Jul 2010).
Shephard, M. (2009) ‘Parliamentary Scrutiny and Oversight of the British 'War on Terror': From Accretion of
Executive Power and Evasion of Scrutiny to Embarrassment and Concessions’, Journal of Legislative
Studies, 15, 2-3.
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/procedurecommittee/publications/ link to procedure committee reports
Smookler, J. (2006) ‘Making A Difference? The Effectiveness of Pre-Legislative Scrutiny’, Parlia Affairs 59,
3.
Thompson L. (2014) 'Evidence taking under the microscope: How has oral evidence affected the scrutiny of
legislation in House of Commons committees?'. British Politics, 9, 4: 385-400.
Learning Outcomes
To have acquired in-depth knowledge of the types and workings of committees in Parliament and be
familiar with debates about how they might be made more effective; be able to evaluate the claim that the
House of Lords offers expert and more effective scrutiny of the Executive than the Commons; and
undertaken discussion of the role of e-petitions within Parliament and in connecting Parliament to the
Public.
Week 5 classes are postponed as Prof Childs is attending a seminar with Mr Speaker at the
University of Sheffield
Week 6 Bespoke Research Trip to Parliament (Reading Week)
Arrangements will be confirmed nearer the time; you should make your own travel arrangements - national
express coaches and megabus are v.cheap; there is funding available, although it will only cover bus and
NOT train travel.
Week 7 The Backbencher: Private Members’ Bills; Early Day Motions; APPGs
Seminar
• Reforming Private Members Bills
• EDMs –‘parliamentary graffiti’ or an important site for interest representation?
• All Party Groups - cross party institutions; vanity projects; and, or the next parliamentary ‘scandal’?
o Designated APG task: Identify an APPG from the parliament website; analyze its
membership - follow up MPs' backgrounds, interests etc; see what other APPGs they may
be members of; critically consider the remit/activities of the APPG; look to see who/what
organizations are associated with the APPG;
Essential Seminar Reading
1. Brazier, A. And Fox, R. (2010) ‘Enhancing the Backbench MP's Role As a Legislator: The Case for
Urgent Reform of Private Members Bills’, Parliamentary Affairs 63, 1.
2. Procedure Committee 3rd Report on PMBs
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmproced/684/68402.htm
3. Childs, S. and Withey, J. (2004) ‘Women Representatives Acting for Women: Sex and the Signing
of Early Day Motions in the 1997 British Parliament’, 52, 3.
4. House of Commons Committee on Standards (2013) All-Party Parliamentary Groups, Sixth Report
of Session 2013–14,
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmstnprv/357/357.pdf
Further Reading
House of Commons Procedure Committee (2013) Private Members’ bills Second Report of Session 2013–
14, available on line
House of Commons Procedure Committee Private Members’ bills: Government response and revised
proposals
Fifth Report of Session 2013–14
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmproced/189/189.pdf
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmproced/1171/1171.pdf
House of Commons Procedure Committee Early Day Motions First Report of Session 2013–14
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmproced/189/189.pdf
APGs http://www.parliament.uk/documents/pcfs/all-party-groups/guide-to-the-rules-on-apgs.pdf
Parliament and Constitution Centre: All-Party Groups, Published 30 August 2012 | Standard
notes SN06409Amended 03 September 2012
Parliament and Constitution Centre: Debate on 20 January: Constitutional and Parliamentary Effect of
Coalition Government, Published 17 January 2011 | Library notes LLN 2011/002Amended 01 November
2011
Brazier, A, and Fox, R. (2010) ‘Enhancing the backbench MPs’ Role as a Legislator: the Case for Urgent
Reform of PMBs’, Parliamentary Affairs 63, 1.
Cowley, P. 2006. ‘Making Parliament Matter?’ in P. Dunleavy, et al (eds.) Developments in British Politics
8, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Flinders, M. (2009) Democratic Drift (Oxford: OUP).
Flinders, M. (2002) ‘Shifting the Balance? Parliament, the Executive and the British Constitution’ Political
Studies, 50, 1: 23-42.
Fox, R. And Korris, M. (2012), ‘A Fresh Start? The Orientation and Induction of New MPs at Westminster
Following the 2010 General Election’, Parliamentary Affairs, 65, 3.
Gray, A. And Jenkins, B. (2004) ‘Government and Administration: Too Much Checking, Not enough Doing?’
Parliamentary Affairs, 57, 2.
Hazell, R. And Young, B. (2012) The Politics of Coalition (Oxford: Hart).
Hood, C., James, O. And Scott, C. (2000) ‘Regulation of Government: Has it increased, is it increasing,
should it be diminished?’, Public Administration, 78, 2.
Speaker’s Working Group on APGs (2012) Report to the Speaker and the Lord Speaker (London:
Speakers’ Working Group) http://www.parliament.uk/documents/speaker/Speakers-Working-Group-onAPGs-report.pdf
The Prime Minister, Core Executive and the Legislature
Buller, J. and James, T. (2012) ‘Statecraft and the Assessment of National Political Leaders: The Case
of New Labour and Tony Blair’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 14, 4.
Bennister, M. Heffernan, R. (2012), ‘Cameron as Prime Minister: The Intra-Executive Politics of Britain's
Coalition Government’, Parliamentary Affairs, 65, 4.
Burch, M. and Holliday, I. (2004) ‘The Blair Government and the Core Executive’ Government and
Opposition, 39, 1: 1-21.
Cowley, P. (2012) ‘Arise Novice Leaders’, Politics, 32, 1.
Foley, M. (2004) ‘Presidential Attribution as an Agency of Prime Ministerial Critique in a Parliamentary
Democracy’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6, 3.
Foster, C. (2005) British Government in Crisis (Oxford: Hart).
Hay, C. And Richards, D. (2001) ‘The Tangled Webs of Westminster and Whitehall: The Discourse,
Strategy and Practice of Networking within the British Core Executive’, Public Administration, 78, 1.
Heffernan, R. (2010) ‘The Predominant Party Leader as Predominant Prime Minister? David Cameron in
Downing Street’. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1669422
Heffernan, R. (2005) ‘Exploring and Explaining the British Prime Minister’, British Journal of Politics and
International Relations, 7, 4.
Heffernan, R. (2005) ‘Why the Prime Minister Cannot be a President: Comparing Institutional Imperatives in
Britain and the US’, Parliamentary Affairs, 58,1.
Heffernan. R. (2003) ‘Prime Ministerial Predominance? Core Executive Politics in the UK’, British Journal of
Politics and International Relations, 5, 3.
Hennessy, P. (2005) ‘The Blair Style of Government’, Parliamentary Affairs, 58, 1.
Hennessy, P. (2000) ‘The Blair Style and the Requirements of Twenty-First Century Premiership’. Political
Quarterly, 76, 1.
Hennessy, P. (2000)The Prime Minister: The Office and its Holders since 1945 (London: Penguin).
Holliday, I. (2000) ‘Is the British State Hollowing Out?’, Political Quarterly, 71, 2.
James, S. (1999) British Cabinet Government (London: Routledge).
Judge, D. (2004) ‘Whatever Happened to Parliamentary Democracy in the United Kingdom?’,
Parliamentary Affairs, 57, 3.
Plant, R. (2003) ‘A Public Service Ethic and Political Accountability’, Parliamentary Affairs, 56, 4.
Renwick, A. http://www.psa.ac.uk/PSAPubs/HLReformBriefingPaper.pdf
Riddell, P. (2000) Parliament Under Blair (London: Politico’s).
Rhodes, R.A.W. and Dunelavy, P. (1995). Prime Minister, Cabinet and Core Executive, London: Macmillan.
Rhodes, R.A.W. (2000) ‘New Labour’s Civil Service: Summing-up Joining-up’, Political Quarterly, 71, 2.
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-04256.pdf prime ministers
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-03813.pdf special advisers
Stevens, D, and Karp, J (2012) ‘Leadership Traits and Media Influence in Britain’, Political Studies, 60,
4.
Learning Outcomes
To be familiar with, and competent in debating the roles and functions of backbench MPs in the UK
Parliament; be able to discuss reforms to various backbench MP institutions; be conversant in debates
relating to executive- legislative relations and be able to consider the impact of 2010-15 Coalition
government on the relative position of the legislature compared to the executive.
Week 8 Constituency Representation
Seminar
• The ‘good’ constituency MP and the ‘problematic’ turn towards the constituency
• The political saliency of ‘the local’ in contemporary UK politics
Essential Seminar Reading
1. Crewe, E. (2015) The House of Commons (London: Bloomsbury) chapter 3, ‘Constituents’
Champions’
2. Gay, O. (2005) ‘MPs go back to their constituencies’, Political Quarterly, 76.
3. Childs, S. and Cowley, P. (2011) ‘The Politics of Local Presence. Is there a case for local
representation?’ Political Studies 59, 1
4. André, A., Bradbury, J., and Depauw, A. (2015) ‘Explaining Cooperation over Casework between
Members of National and Regional Parliaments ‘, Parliamentary Affairs 68, 4.
Further Reading
Arter, D. (2011) The Michael Marsh Question: How do Finns do Constituency Service? , Parliamentary
Affairs, 64, 1.
Campbell, R. and Cowley, P. (2013) ‘What Voters Want: Reactions to Candidate Characteristics in a
Survey Experiment’, Political Studies.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9248.12048/pdf
Campbell , R. and Cowley, P. (2013) ‘Rich Man, Poor Man, Politician Man: Wealth Effects in a Candidate
Biography Survey Experiment’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, in press.
Childs, S. (2004) New Labour’s Women MPs (London: Routledge) Chapter 6.
Fox, R. (2012), ‘Disgruntled, Disillusioned and Disengaged: Public Attitudes to Politics in Britain Today’,
Parliamentary Affairs, 65, 4.
Gould, B. (1978) ‘The MP and Constituency Cases’, in J P Mackintosh (ed), People and Parliament
(Hansard Society).
Marsh, J. W. (1985) ‘The House of Commons: Representational Changes’, in P. Norton (ed), Parliament in
the 1980s
Norton, P. and Wood, D. M. (1990) ‘Constituency Service by Members of Parliament: Does it Contribute to
a Personal Vote?’, Parliamentary Affairs 43, 2.
Norton, P (2002) ‘The United Kingdom: Building the Link Between Constituent and MP’ in P. Norton (ed)
Parliaments and Citizens in Western Europe .
Norris, P. and Lovenduski, J. (1995) Political Recruitment (Cambridge: CUP) Chapter11.
Norton, P. (2012), ‘Parliament and Citizens in the United Kingdom’, Journal of legislative Studies, 18, 3-4.
Norton, P. (1994) ‘The Growth of the Constituency Role of the MP’, Parliamentary Affairs, 47, 4.
Norton, P. (1985) ‘“Dear Minister”. The importance of MP-to-Minister Correspondence’, Parliamentary
Affairs, 35.
Norton, P. and Wood, D. M. (1993) Back From Westminster (Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky. Press).
Ram, V. (2006) ‘Public Attitudes to Politics, Politicians and Parliament’, Parliamentary Affairs 59, 1.
Rawlings, R (1990) ‘The MP’s Complaint Service’, Modern Law Review, Part 1: January; Part 2: March.
Mark Todd MP, adjournment speech, HC Debs, 7 April 2010, cols. 1146-1149.
Public Petitions and Early Day Motions: Fifth Report from the House of Commons Procedure Report,
Session 2006-07, HC 513.
Constituency Representation & New Media
Joshi, D. & Rosenfield, E. (2013) ‘MP Transparency, Communication Links and Social Media: A
Comparative Assessment of 184 Parliamentary Websites’, The Journal of Legislative Studies
Connecting with constituents – MPs and Digital Engagement, Hansard Society, 7 July 2010 online.
MPs on Facebook. Digital Papers, Issue 1 (Hansard Society, 2009) (available online)
Coleman, S (2003) ‘Democracy Online: What do we want from MPs’ web sites?’ (available from the
Hansard Society’s website).
Allan, R. (2006) ‘Parliaments, Elected Representatives and Technology, 1997-2005 – Good in Parts?’,
Parliamentary Affairs , 59,2.
Drew, D. and Leighton, E. (2010) ‘Up for Debate: Consultations, the Constitution and the Communications
Allowance’, The Political Quarterly, 81, 2.
Jackson, N. And Lilleker, D. (2011) ‘Microblogging, Constituency service and Impression Management’,
Journal of Legislative Studies, 17, 1.
Lusoli, W. et al, (2006) ‘(Re)connecting Politics? Parliament, the Public and the Internet’, Parliamentary
Affairs 59, 1.
Norton, P. (2013) Parliament in British Politics, Chapter 13.
Williamson, A. (2008) ‘The Effect of Digital Media on MPs’ Communication with Constituents’,
Parliamentary Affairs, 61, 4.
Williamson, A. (2009) MPs Online: Connecting with Constituents (Hansard Society, Feb 2009) (available
online)
Twitter: Communication tool or pointless vanity? Digital Papers, Issue 2 (Hansard Society, Oct 2009)
(available online).
Learning Outcomes
To be aware of the nature and extent of constituency representation undertaken by British MPs; and to be
able to evaluate the importance or otherwise of this role, both in the constituency and in respect of
Parliamentary activities.
Week 9 The Commons: the Wright Reforms and After
Seminar
• How might – and how should - one reform the House of Commons?
• Designing the ‘ideal’ House of Commons. Come to the class with a 2-side briefing outlining three
key reforms you would make; a rationale for these; and an implementation plan
Essential Seminar Reading
1. Russell, M. (2011) ‘Never Allow a Crisis Go To Waste’: The Wright Committee Reforms to
Strengthen the House of Commons’, Parliamentary Affairs 64, 4.
2. Foster, D. (2013) ‘Going ‘Where Angels Fear to Tread’: How Effective was the Backbench Business
Committee in the 2010−2012 Parliamentary Session?’, Parliamentary Affairs, 66, 2
3. Judge, D. (2013) ‘Recall of MPs in the UK: ‘If I Were You I Wouldn't Start from Here’, Parliamentary
Affairs 66 , 4.
4. Norton, P. (2016) ‘The Fixed-term Parliaments Act and Votes of Confidence’, Parliamentary Affairs
69, 1.
Further Reading
Wright Commission Report
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmrefhoc/1117/111702.htm
Parliament and Constitution Centre: Recall of Parliament, Published 11 April 2013 | Standard
notes SN01186. This Note discusses the procedure for recalling Parliament, as well as recent occasions
when Parliament has been recalled.
Refer to reading from previous weeks.
Reducing the size of the House of Commons Published 28 July 2010 | Standard notes SN05570
Parliament and Constitution Centre: The Separation of Powers, Published 16 August 2011 | Standard
notes SN06053
Blick, N. (2016) ‘Constitutional Implications of the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011’, Parliamentary Affairs
69, 1.
Flinders, M. and Kelso, K. (2011) ‘Mind the Gap: Political Analysis, Public Expectations and the
Parliamentary Decline Thesis’, BJPIR 13, 2.
Kelso, A. (2009) Parliamentary Reform at Westminster (Manchester: Manchester University Press).
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/ (for up to date information about the passage of various parliament
related legislation – follow links to bills, debates, and H of C guidance notes.)
Lucas, C. (2015) Honourable Friends? (London: Portobello).
Norton, P. (2014) ‘From Flexible to Semi-Fixed: The Fixed-Term Parliaments Act’, Journal of International
and Comparative Law, 1, 2: 203-20.
Power, G. (2007) ‘The Politics of Parliamentary Reform: Lessons from the House of Commons 2001-5),
Parliamentary Affairs, 60, 3.
Williamson, A. And Fallon, F. (2011) ‘Transforming the Future Parliament through the Effective Use of
Digital Media’, Parliamentary Affairs 64.
See also extended reading in week I.
EVEL: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmproced/410/41002.html
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/procedure/Letter-to-the-Chair-from-Leader-ofthe-House-the-Govt%E2%80%99s-response-on-EVEL.pdf
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/441848/English_votes_for_E
nglish_laws_explanatory_guide.pdf
http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2015/october/english-votes-for-english-laws-motion-to-approvestanding-orders/
Learning Outcomes
To be in a position to offer a robust consideration of academic and practitioner debates about reform of the
House of Commons, noting the difference between modernization and reform, and their relative effect on
legislature/executive relations; and be able to advocate for, and substantiate, a series of Commons’
reforms.
Week 10 The Good Parliament
Seminar
• The IPU’s Gender Sensitive Parliament framework
• Re-gendering the UK House of Commons
Essential Seminar reading
1. Childs, S. (2016) The Good Parliament http://www.bristol.ac.uk/medialibrary/sites/news/2016/july/20%20Jul%20Prof%20Sarah%20Childs%20The%20Good%20Parliame
nt%20report.pdf
2. Childs, S. (2013) ‘Negotiating Gendered Institutions: Women’s Parliamentary Friendships’, Politics
and Gender, 9, 2
3. Crewe, E. (2015) Commons and Lords (London: Haus Curiosities), chapter 3, Women in Parliament
4. Marc Geddes
https://www.academia.edu/23327403/Taking_Evidence_Witnesses_and_the_evidencegathering_process_of_select_committees_in_the_House_of_Commons
Further Reading
Family Friendly Parliament, Westminster Hall debate, Nov 2015
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/cm151110/halltext/151110h0001.htm (scroll
down two-thirds) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06rlshw/westminster-hall-16112015
Parliament and Constitution Centre: Breastfeeding in parliament Published 21 May 2003 | Standard
notes SN00508
APPG Women In Parliament Improving Parliament Report
http://appgimprovingparliamentreport.co.uk/download/APPG-Women-In-Parliament-Report-2014.pdf
Allen, P., Cutts, D. and Winn, M. (forthcoming) ‘Understanding legislator experiences of family-friendly
working practices in political institutions’ Politics & Gender.
Campbell, R, and Childs, S (2015) Deeds and Words (Essex: ECPR) chapters by 5 and 8, and vignettes by
May, Brown, Howe, and Ashley.
Campbell, R. And Childs, S. ‘Parents in Parliament, Where’s Mum’, Political Quarterly
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-923X.12092/abstract
Childs, S. and Malley, R. (2011) http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/2011/07/12/reforming-when-mpswork/
Chappell, L. and Waylen, G. ‘Gender and the Hidden Life of Institutions’, forthcoming Public
Administration (In-press)
Crewe, E. (2015) The House of Commons (London: Bloomsbury).
Crewe, E (2005) Lords of Parliament (Manchester: MUP).
House of Commons Service, Members and Members’ staff Interview Project Team (2015) Report for the
House of Commons Administration Committee on the findings of the interview study with Members on
women’s experience in Parliament. Available from http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commonscommittees/admin-committee/Memoranda.pdf
IPSA (Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority) (2015) Review of the MPs’ Scheme of Business
Costs and Expenses and IPSA’s publication Policy, A Consultation. Available from
http://parliamentarystandards.org.uk/Pages/default.aspx
IPU (Inter-Parliamentary Union) (2011) Gender-Sensitive Parliaments: A Global Review (Geneva: IPU).
IPU Gender Sensitive Parliaments http://www.ipu.org/pdf/publications/gsp11-e.pdf &
http://www.ipu.org/pdf/publications/action-gender-e.pdf
IPU (Inter-Parliamentary Union) (2012) A Plan of Action for Gender-Sensitive Parliaments (Geneva: IPU).
Krook, M. L. and Mackay, F. (2010) Gender, Politics and Institutions (Basingstoke: Palgrave).
Lovenduski, J. (2015) Gendering Politics, Feminizing Political Science (Essex, ECPR)
Mackay, F. (2001) Love and Politics (London: Continuum)
Malley, R. (2011) Unpublished PhD, University of Bristol.
Malley, R. (2012) ‘Feeling at Home: Inclusion at Westminster and the Scottish Parliament’, Political
Quarterly, 83, 4.
Learning Outcomes
Students will have acquired knowledge about, and be able to debate the concept of Gender Sensitive
Parliaments, and to do so within the context of re-gendering reform debates in the UK Parliament, and in
light of Professor Childs’ Impact research on the Commons
Week 11 House of Lords Reform
Seminar
• The failure of the 2010-15 Coalition government reform of the Lords
• The size, composition and powers of the Lords
Essential Seminar Reading
1. Russell, M. (2013). Rethinking Bicameral Strength: A Three-Dimensional Approach. Journal of
Legislative Studies, 19, 3: 370-391
2. Gover, D. and Russell, M. (2015). The House of Commons' "Financial Privilege" on Lords
Amendments: Perceived Problems and Possible Solutions. Public Law, 1
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/publications/tabs/otherpublications/financialprivilegepubliclaw.pdf
3. Strathclyde review
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmpubadm/752/752.pdf
4. Read two or three of these blogs: http://constitution-unit.com/2013/07/25/take-a-closer-look-at-thehouse-of-lords-it-may-not-be-quite-what-you-think/; https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitutionunit/publications/tabs/unit-publications/161.pdf; http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/houseor-lords-reform-red-benches-grey-hair; http://lordsoftheblog.net/2015/08/27/new-creations/;
http://lordsoftheblog.net/2015/07/29/creating-a-link-that-doesnt-exist/, http://constitutionunit.com/tag/meg-russell/
Further Reading
Select Committee on the Constitution 7th Report of Session 2013–14 House of Lords Reform (No. 2) Bill,
HoL website. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldselect/ldconst/155/155.pdf
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/houselordsreform.html
Dorey, P. and Kelso, A. (2012) House of Lords Reform since 1911. Must the Lords Go? (Basingstoke:
Palgrave).
Dorey, P. (2008) ‘Stumbling Through 'Stage Two': New Labour and House of Lords Reform,’ British Politics,
3,1: 22-44.
HM Government (2007) White Paper, “The House of Lords: Reform” (Cm 7027) Available at:
http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm70/7027/7027.asp
Kelso, A. (2006). ‘Reforming the House of Lords: Navigating Representation, Democracy and Legitimacy at
Westminster,’ Parliamentary Affairs, 59, 4.
Maclean, I., Spirling, A. and Russell, M. (2003) ‘None of the Above: The UK House of Commons Votes on
Reforming the House of Lords’, Political Quarterly, 74, 3.
Parkinson, J. (2007) ‘The House of Lords: A Deliberative Democratic Defence’ The Political Quarterly, 78,
3.
Renwick, A (2011). House of Lords Reform: A Briefing Paper (Political Studies Association, 2011).
https://www.psa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/HL%20Reform%20briefing%20paper.pdf
Richard, I, and Welfare, D. (1999) Unfinished Business: Reforming the House of Lords (London: Vintage).
Representation Reforming the House of Lords, Special Issue of Representation, 37 (2000).
Russell, M. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/publications/tabs/unit-publications/161.pdf regulating
prime ministerial appointments to the lords
Russell, M. on lords and financial privilege https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/publications/tabs/unitpublications/160
Russell, M. (2013) The Contemporary House of Lords (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press).
Russell, M. (2012) ‘Elected Second Chambers and Their Powers: An International Survey’, Political
Quarterly, 83, 1.
Russell, M. (2011) House Full: Time to Get a Grip on Lords Appointments. London: Constitution Unit online
Russell, M. (2001) ‘What are Second Chambers for?’, Parliamentary Affairs, 54, 3.
Russell, M. (2000) Reforming the House of Lords: Lessons From Overseas (Oxford: OUP).
Russell, M. (2010). A Stronger Second Chamber? Assessing the Impact of House of Lords Reform in 1999
and the Lessons for Bicameralism. Political Studies 58, 5.
Russell, M., Benton, M. (2010), Analysis of Existing Data on the Breadth of Expertise and Experience in the
House of Lords. London: Constitution Unit on line
Russell, M. (2009) ‘House of Lords reform: Are We Nearly There Yet?’, The Political Quarterly, 80, 1.
Week 12 Seminar Presentations
Seminar
• Each student will make a 10 minute powerpoint presentation
• Students should seek advice on their presentation from the Unit Owner in her office hours and refer
to the SPAIS Study Skills Handbook (please use no more than 5 slides).
Learning Outcomes
To acquire and develop oral presentation skills; acquire and develop Powerpoint skills; and present initial
workings on the student’s intended essay topic.
Appendix A
Instructions on how to submit essays electronically
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Log in to Blackboard and select the Blackboard course for the unit you are submitting work for. If you
cannot see it, please e-mail [email protected] with you username and ask to be added.
Click on the "Submit Work Here" option at the top on the left hand menu and then find the correct
assessment from the list.
Select ‘view/complete’ for the appropriate piece of work. It is your responsibility to ensure that you
have selected both the correct unit and the correct piece of work.
The screen will display ‘single file upload’ and your name. Enter your name (for FORMATIVE
ASSESSMENTS ONLY) or candidate number (for SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENTS ONLY) as a
submission title, and then select the file that you wish to upload by clicking the ‘browse’ button. Click
on the ‘upload’ button at the bottom.
You will then be shown the essay to be submitted. Check that you have selected the correct essay and
click the ‘Submit’ button. This step must be completed or the submission is not complete.
You will be informed of a successful submission. A digital receipt is displayed on screen and a copy
sent to your email address for your records.
Important notes
• You are only allowed to submit one file to Blackboard (single file upload), so ensure that all parts of
your work – references, bibliography etc. – are included in one single document and that you upload
the correct version. You will not be able to change the file once you have uploaded.
• Blackboard will accept a variety of file formats, but the School can only accept work submitted in .rtf
(Rich Text Format) or .doc/.docx (Word Document) format. If you use another word processing
package, please ensure you save in a compatible format.
• By submitting your essay, you are confirming that you have read the regulations on plagiarism and
confirm that the submission is not plagiarised. You also confirm that the word count stated on the
essay is an accurate statement of essay length.
• If Blackboard is not working email your assessment to [email protected] with the unit code and
title in the subject line.
How to confirm that your essay has been submitted
• You will have received a digital receipt by email and If you click on the assessment again (steps 14), you will see the title and submission date of the essay you have submitted. If you click on
submit, you will not be able to submit again. This table also displays the date of submission. If you
click on the title of the essay, it will open in a new window and you can also see what time the essay
was submitted.
Appendix B
Summary of Relevant School Regulations
(Further information is in the year handbook)
Attendance at classes
SPAIS takes attendance and participation in classes very seriously. Seminars form an essential part
of your learning and you need to make sure you arrive on time, have done the required reading and
participate fully. Attendance at all seminars is monitored, with absence only condoned in cases of
illness or for other exceptional reasons.
If you are unable to attend a seminar you must inform your seminar tutor, as well as email [email protected]. You should also provide evidence to explain your absence, such as a selfcertification and/or medical note, counselling letter or other official document. If you are unable to
provide evidence then please still email [email protected] to explain why you are unable
to attend. If you are ill or are experiencing some other kind of difficulty which is preventing you from
attending seminars for a prolonged period, please inform your personal tutor, the Undergraduate
Office or the Student Administration Manager.
Requirements for credit points
In order to be awarded credit points for the unit, you must achieve:
• Satisfactory attendance in classes, or satisfactory completion of catch up work in lieu of poor
attendance
• Satisfactory formative assessment
• An overall mark of 40 or above in the summative assessment/s. In some circumstances, a
mark of 35 or above can be awarded credit points.
Presentation of written work
Coursework must be word-processed. As a guide, use a clear, easy-to-read font such as Arial or
Times New Roman, in at least 11pt. You may double–space or single–space your essays as you
prefer. Your tutor will let you know if they have a preference.
All pages should be numbered.
Ensure that the essay title appears on the first page.
All pages should include headers containing the following information:
Formative work
Name: e.g. Joe Bloggs
Unit e.g. SOCI10004
Seminar Tutor e.g. Dr J. Haynes
Word Count .e.g. 1500 words
Summative work
**Candidate Number**: e.g. 12345
Unit: e.g. SOCI10004
Seminar Tutor: e.g. Dr J. Haynes
Word Count: e.g. 3000 words
Candidate numbers are required on summative work in order to ensure that marking is anonymous.
Note that your candidate number is not the same as your student number.
Assessment Length
Each piece of coursework must not exceed the stipulated maximum length for the assignment (the
‘word count’) listed in the unit guide. Summative work that exceeds the maximum length will be
subject to penalties. The word count is absolute (there is no 10% leeway, as commonly rumoured).
Five marks will be deducted for every 100 words or part thereof over the word limit. Thus, an essay
that is 1 word over the word limit will be penalised 5 marks; an essay that is 101 words over the word
limit will be penalised 10 marks, and so on.
The word count includes all text, numbers, footnotes/endnotes, Harvard referencing in the body of the
text and direct quotes. It excludes, the title, candidate number, bibliography, and appendices.
However, appendices should only be used for reproducing documents, not additional text written by
you.
Referencing and Plagiarism
Where sources are used they must be cited using the Harvard referencing system. Inadequate
referencing is likely to result in penalties being imposed. See the Study Skills Guide for advice on
referencing and how poor referencing/plagiarism are processed. Unless otherwise stated, essays
must contain a bibliography.
Extensions
Extensions to coursework deadlines will only be granted in exceptional circumstances. If you want to
request an extension, complete an extension request form (available at Blackboard/SPAIS_UG
Administration/forms to download and School policies) and submit the form with your evidence (e.g.
self-certification, medical certificate, death certificate, or hospital letter) to Catherine Foster in the
Undergraduate Office.
Extension requests cannot be submitted by email, and will not be considered if there is no supporting
evidence. If you are waiting for evidence then you can submit the form and state that it has been
requested.
All extension requests should be submitted at least 72 hours prior to the assessment deadline. If the
circumstance occurs after this point, then please either telephone or see the Student Administration
Manager in person. In their absence you can contact Catherine Foster in the UG Office, again in
person or by telephone.
Extensions can only be granted by the Student Administration Manager. They cannot be granted by
unit convenors or seminar tutors.
You will receive an email to confirm whether your extension request has been granted.
Submitting Essays
Formative essays
Summative essays
Unless otherwise stated, all formative essay
submissions must be submitted electronically via
Blackboard
All summative essay submissions must be
submitted electronically via Blackboard.
Electronic copies enable an efficient system of receipting, providing the student and the School with a
record of exactly when an essay was submitted. It also enables the School to systematically check
the length of submitted essays and to safeguard against plagiarism.
Late Submissions
Penalties are imposed for work submitted late without an approved extension. Any kind of
computer/electronic failure is not accepted as a valid reason for an extension, so make sure you back
up your work on another computer, memory stick or in the cloud (e.g. Google Drive or Dropbox). Also
ensure that the clock on your computer is correct.
The following schema of marks deduction for late/non-submission is applied to both formative work
and summative work:
Up to 24 hours late, or part thereof
For each additional 24 hours late, or part
thereof
Assessment submitted over one week late
•
•
•
Penalty of 10 marks
A further 5 marks deduction for each 24 hours, or
part thereof
Treated as a non-submission: fail and mark of zero
recorded. This will be noted on your transcript.
The 24 hour period runs from the deadline for submission, and includes Saturdays, Sundays,
bank holidays and university closure days.
If an essay submitted less than one week late fails solely due to the imposition of a late
penalty, then the mark will be capped at 40.
If a fail due to non-submission is recorded, you will have the opportunity to submit the essay
as a second attempt for a capped mark of 40 in order to receive credit points for the unit.
Marks and Feedback
In addition to an overall mark, students will receive written feedback on their assessed work.
The process of marking and providing detailed feedback is a labour-intensive one, with most 2-3000
word essays taking at least half an hour to assess and comment upon. Summative work also needs
to be checked for plagiarism and length and moderated by a second member of staff to ensure
marking is fair and consistent. For these reasons, the University regulations are that feedback will be
returned to students within three weeks of the submission deadline.
If work is submitted late, then it may not be possible to return feedback within the three week period.
Fails and Resits
If you fail the unit overall, you will normally be required to resubmit or resit. In units where there are
two pieces of summative assessment, you will normally only have to re-sit/resubmit the highestweighted piece of assessment.
Exam resits only take place once a year, in late August/early September. If you have to re-sit an
exam then you will need to be available during this period. If you are not available to take a resit
examination, then you will be required to take a supplementary year in order to retake the unit.
Appendix C
Level 6 Marking and Assessment Criteria (Third / Final Year)
1st (70+)
o
o
o
o
o
2:1 (60–69)
o
o
o
o
o
2:2 (50–59)
o
o
o
o
o
3rd (40–49)
o
o
o
o
o
Excellent comprehension of the implications of the question and
critical understanding of the theoretical & methodological issues
A critical, analytical and sophisticated argument that is logically
structured and well-supported
Evidence of independent thought and ability to ‘see beyond the
question’
Evidence of reading widely beyond the prescribed reading list and
creative use of evidence to enhance the overall argument
Extremely well presented: minimal grammatical or spelling errors;
written in a fluent and engaging style; exemplary referencing and
bibliographic formatting
Very good comprehension of the implications of the question and
fairly extensive and accurate knowledge and understanding
Very good awareness of underlying theoretical and methodological
issues, though not always displaying an understanding of how they
link to the question
A generally critical, analytical argument, which shows attempts at
independent thinking and is sensibly structured and generally wellsupported
Clear and generally critical knowledge of relevant literature; use of
works beyond the prescribed reading list; demonstrating the ability to
be selective in the range of material used, and the capacity to
synthesise rather than describe
Very well presented: no significant grammatical or spelling errors;
written clearly and concisely; fairly consistent referencing and
bibliographic formatting
Generally clear and accurate knowledge, though there may be some
errors and/or gaps and some awareness of underlying
theoretical/methodological issues with little understanding of how
they relate to the question
Some attempt at analysis but a tendency to be descriptive rather
than critical;
Tendency to assert/state opinion rather than argue on the basis of
reason and evidence; structure may not be entirely clear or logical
Good attempt to go beyond or criticise the ‘essential reading’ for the
unit; but displaying limited capacity to discern between relevant and
non-relevant material
Adequately presented: writing style conveys meaning but is
sometimes awkward; some significant grammatical and spelling
errors; inconsistent referencing but generally accurate bibliography.
Limited knowledge and understanding with significant errors and
omissions and generally ignorant or confused awareness of key
theoretical/ methodological issues
Largely misses the point of the question, asserts rather than argues a
case; underdeveloped or chaotic structure; evidence mentioned but
used inappropriately or incorrectly
Very little attempt at analysis or synthesis, tending towards excessive
description
Limited, uncritical and generally confused account of a narrow range
of sources
Poorly presented: not always easy to follow; frequent grammatical
and spelling errors; limited attempt at providing references (e.g. only
referencing direct quotations) and containing bibliographic omissions.
Marginal
Fail
o
o
(35–39)
o
o
o
Outright
Fail
(0–34)
o
o
o
o
o
Unsatisfactory level of knowledge and understanding of subject;
limited or no understanding of theoretical/methodological issues
Very little comprehension of the implications of the question and
lacking a coherent structure
Lacking any attempt at analysis and critical engagement with issues,
based on description or opinion
Little use of sources and what is used reflects a very narrow range or
are irrelevant and/or misunderstood
Unsatisfactory presentation: difficult to follow; very limited attempt at
providing references (e.g. only referencing direct quotations) and
containing bibliographic omissions
Very limited, and seriously flawed, knowledge and understanding
No comprehension of the implications of the question and no attempt
to provide a structure
No attempt at analysis
Limited, uncritical and generally confused account of a very narrow
range of sources
Very poorly presented: lacking any coherence, significant problems
with spelling and grammar, missing or no references and containing
bibliographic omissions