Why Does the Government get Defeated in the House of Lords?: The Lords, the Party System and British Politics
Why Does the Government get Defeated in the House of Lords?: The Lords, the Party System and British Politics
复制标题
政府为何在上议院落败？：上议院、政党制度与英国政治
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Sciara
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Russell;M. Sciara
虽然下议院的失败威胁引起了极大的关注，但我们很少听到上议院的失败。然而，在这个议会厅，政府经常被击败-自1997年以来超过400次。我们分析了是什么导致了这些失败，使用投票数据从六个完整的议会会议，因为（大多数）世袭的同行被从会议厅在1999年删除，补充数据从同行的调查。有各种各样的团体--工党反叛者、独立的“国会议员”、主教、保守党和自由民主党--可能会导致失败。但商会也以独立和无党派而闻名。我们发现，这并不能转化为投票模式，交叉投票，以及独立人士的投票，往往没有影响力。在大多数情况下，上议院的关键群体是反对党，他们团结一致地投票，尽管缺席率很高。1999年的改革创造了一个没有任何政党拥有全面控制权的议院，从而增加了英国政治体系中否决权参与者的数量。特别是，自由民主党在英国政治中获得了新的重要性，但尚未得到广泛的认可。
Although the threat of defeat in the House of Commons attracts significant attention, we hear a lot less about defeats in the House of Lords. Yet in this chamber of parliament, government is defeated regularly — over 400 times since 1997. We analyse what contributes to these defeats, using voting data from six full parliamentary sessions since the (majority of) hereditary peers were removed from the chamber in 1999, supplemented by data from a survey of peers. There are various groups — Labour rebels, independent ‘Crossbenchers’, Bishops, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats — who may contribute to defeat. But the chamber also has a reputation for being independent and non-partisan. We find that this does not translate into voting patterns, and that cross-voting, and the votes of independents, tend not to be influential. In most cases, the pivotal groups in the House of Lords are the opposition parties, who vote cohesively, albeit with high levels of absenteeism. The 1999 reform created a chamber in which no party had overall control, and has thus increased the number of veto players in the British political system. In particular, the Liberal Democrats have gained a new importance in British politics that has not yet been widely appreciated.