The Role of British Backbenchers in the Modification of Government Policy

Abstract

ARLIAMENT no longer exists.' This charge, angrily thrown forth in the House of Commons by Dame Irene Ward, exemplifies the concern of politicians and scholars alike in recent years over the role of the British legislature. The problem, by no means limited to Great Britain, is that if legislators fail to contribute meaningfully to the decision-making process in a representative democracy, if they are unable to check and modify the decisions of the executive, then the existing political arrangements are clearly inconsistent with the concept of representative government. The British have been especially sensitive to the issue. Many writers claim that Britain's representative chamber, the House of Commons, is involved in the rule-making process in only the most peripheral manner. Such critics argue that the development of a stable two-party system, capable of sending a well-disciplined majority to the House of Commons, has led to a system of government in which the cabinet rules with largely unchecked decision-making powers. The backbenchers, the individual members of Parliament who are part of neither the establishment nor the opposition's shadow government, have, in the view of such critics, lost their raison d'etre. Indeed, backbenchers have been likened to a flock of mindless sheep, ready to be driven routinely through the division lobbies whenever the House is asked to put some matter to a vote.2 The purpose of this paper is to suggest that although there may be some question about the effectiveness of opposition backbenchers in the House of Commons, government backbenchers have influenced government policy more than most observers seem willing to admit. By tradition members of the opposition are granted the role of government critic, but criticism and pressure from the opposition is routine, and the government accepts it as simply a necessary ingredient in the parliamentary game. This is particularly true since the opposition, no matter how intense their feelings on an issue, cannot change the fact that the government with rare exceptions remains secure behind its majority support in the House, and accordingly is little moved by criticism from across the aisle. When the government is confident that its policy is correct, it is indeed unlikely that threats or pleas from the opposition will cause the government to amend that policy. Criticism from backbenchers of the government party, on the other hand, commands special attention in spite of the much discussed party discipline in