Edexcel A-Level Politics 9PL0 · Paper 2 UK Government · Content area 2 of 6

2. Devolution and reform

2.1 constitutional reform since 1997 · 2.2 devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland · 2.3 the England question · 2.4 has devolution been a success.

← All areasPurple = thinker · Orange = example

Every bar below is a drop-down and starts closed. Click one to open it.

Progress

2.1 Constitutional reform since 1997 Done

Essential The overview of the whole programme: what Labour did from 1997, what the coalition added from 2010, and what has happened since. This is the frame every reform essay sits inside.

The specification

2.1The process of constitutional reform since 1997

Labour 1997-2010 carried out the biggest reform programme of the era: devolution (1998), the Human Rights Act 1998, House of Lords reform (1999) and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. I can do this

The coalition 2010-15 added the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 and held the 2011 referendum on the voting system. I can do this

Reform since then includes the repeal of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act in 2022 and the removal of the remaining hereditary peers in 2024. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Directly: 2024 Q1b (constitutional reform, source) sets the whole programme as the question.
As the framing: the devolution questions below all sit inside this story, because devolution was the largest single reform of the post-1997 period.

Pattern. The board tests whether reform since 1997 has gone far enough. Prepare one verdict on the programme as a whole, with reforms you can sort into completed and unfinished.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers judge the programme against a clear test - did it improve democracy, disperse power, and finish what it started - rather than listing reforms one by one.
Weaker answers describe each Act in turn with no argument, which earns AO1 but little AO2 or AO3.

One way to get high marks

Credited: the programme transformed where power sits but completed very little - Lords reform stopped at stage one twice, and England was left out of devolution entirely.
Rewarded evidence: devolution (1998), the Human Rights Act 1998, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (Supreme Court open 2009), the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 and its 2022 repeal, and the removal of the last hereditary peers in 2024.
Level 5 over Level 4: reaches a verdict on the programme as a whole (for example that reform was real in direction but unfinished in stamina) instead of grading each reform separately.

The 30-mark questions. Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging throws away a third of the marks. Examiners reward a clear and consistent line of argument: decide your view before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach a substantiated judgement. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows, and you should structure by theme rather than as a list of examples. On the Question 1 source question you must use the source - compare the two opposing views it contains and judge between them; ignoring the source caps the answer.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Has constitutional reform since 1997 gone far enough?

No, it has not

Point. The biggest reforms were left unfinished. Explanation. Several flagship changes completed only their first stage and then stalled. Example. House of Lords reform removed most hereditary peers in 1999 and the rest in 2024, but no elected element was ever introduced. Evaluation. This is a strong point, because a reform that stops halfway leaves the original problem in place.
Point. Rights remain unprotected from a later majority. Explanation. The Human Rights Act 1998 is an ordinary statute that any government can amend or repeal. Example. The 2022 Bill of Rights Bill tried to replace it and the Safety of Rwanda Act 2024 disapplied parts of it. Evaluation. This shows the rights settlement is still contested rather than secure, so reform has more to do.

Yes, broadly

Point. The programme dispersed power on a scale not seen for a century. Explanation. Power moved outward to the nations and across to the courts. Example. Devolution created three new legislatures from 1998 and the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 produced a separate Supreme Court. Evaluation. This is a powerful counter, because these were genuine, lasting transfers of power.
Point. The flexibility of the uncodified constitution let mistakes be corrected. Explanation. A reform that fails can be undone by ordinary statute. Example. The Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 produced the 2019 deadlock and was repealed in 2022. Evaluation. This shows the system can self-correct, so endless further reform is not obviously needed.

Best judgement. Reform since 1997 went a long way in dispersing power but stopped short of finishing the job, so the honest verdict is that the direction was right and the programme is real but incomplete, with the Lords, rights and England the clearest unfinished business.

Using it in essays

30-mark: has-reform-gone-far-enough questions (2024 Q1b).
Topic sentence: "Constitutional reform since 1997 transformed where power sits in the UK, but left its largest projects unfinished."
Final judgement: real and far-reaching in direction, but incomplete - the Lords, rights and the England question all remain open.

Practise this on PantherReform since 1997 grid Devolution timeline

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

A clean way to hold the whole programme together is to sort each reform into completed or unfinished. Only the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 is a clean completion; devolution, the Lords and rights are all still being argued over, which is itself the verdict on the era.

Examination priority

Important Learn the programme as one story with dated reforms you can group. It is the backbone of every Paper 2 constitution and devolution essay.

2.2 Devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland Done

Essential The heart of the topic: the three settlements, the powers each holds, and the asymmetry between them that runs through every devolution question.

The specification

2.2The devolution settlements and how they differ

Devolution is the statutory transfer of powers from Westminster to elected legislatures, while Westminster keeps ultimate sovereignty. I can do this

Scotland has the deepest settlement (Scotland Acts 1998, 2012, 2016), Wales has caught up but lacks justice and full tax powers (Wales Act 2017), and Northern Ireland has power-sharing under the Good Friday Agreement 1998. I can do this

The settlements are asymmetric - different in scope and structure - and the Sewel Convention manages the politics between Westminster and the devolved bodies. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Directly: 2021 Q2a (devolution has been good for Wales) turns on the Welsh settlement specifically.
As the framing: 2022 Q1b (what devolution has created, source) and 2019 Q1a (devolution is in danger, source) both rest on how the three settlements work.

Pattern. Know the comparative powers table cold. The asymmetry across the nations is the evidence base for every devolution question, whichever way it is framed.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers use precise knowledge of who holds what power - full income tax in Scotland, none in Northern Ireland - and turn that asymmetry into an argument.
Weaker answers treat the three settlements as the same thing, missing the differences that the question usually rests on.

One way to get high marks

Credited: the settlements are asymmetric by design - Scotland deepest, Wales catching up, Northern Ireland power-sharing - and that unevenness is the central feature of the modern constitution.
Rewarded evidence: the Scotland Act 2016 (full income tax rates and bands), the Wales Act 2017 (reserved-powers model, Welsh rates of income tax from 2019), the Good Friday Agreement 1998, and Miller (No 1) 2017 on the Sewel Convention.
Level 5: shows the asymmetry is deliberate, not accidental, and uses it to judge whether the settlements are equal in power.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Has devolution been good for Wales?

Yes

Point. The Welsh settlement has deepened steadily with consent. Explanation. Wales began with the least power but has gained more at each stage, each time built on a popular vote. Example. A 2011 referendum granted primary law-making by 63%, the Wales Act 2017 brought the reserved-powers model, and Welsh rates of income tax followed in 2019. Evaluation. This is a strong case, because power has grown in step with public approval rather than being imposed.
Point. Devolution has let Wales make its own policy choices. Explanation. Holding devolved powers means Wales can diverge from England where its voters want to. Example. Wales abolished prescription charges and runs its own curriculum and exam system through the WJEC. Evaluation. Visible, sustained divergence shows the powers are real and used, not just symbolic.

Not entirely

Point. The Welsh settlement is still the shallowest of the three. Explanation. Wales lacks powers that Scotland and Northern Ireland hold. Example. Justice and policing remain reserved to Westminster, and only 10p of each income tax band is devolved against Scotland's full rates and bands. Evaluation. This limits how far Wales can really chart its own course, so the gains are real but partial.
Point. The founding mandate was weak. Explanation. The original settlement rested on the narrowest popular consent of any nation. Example. The 1997 Welsh referendum passed by just 50.3% on a 50% turnout. Evaluation. The later 2011 vote repaired this, so the objection has weakened over time rather than disappeared.

Best judgement. Devolution has been good for Wales on balance, because the settlement has deepened with consent and produced real policy divergence, but it remains the shallowest of the three and the absence of justice and full tax powers is the clearest gap still to close.

Using it in essays

30-mark: nation-specific questions (2021 Q2a) and source questions on what devolution has produced (2022 Q1b).
Topic sentence: "Devolution has steadily strengthened Welsh self-government with consent, even if the Welsh settlement remains the shallowest of the three."
Final judgement: good for Wales on balance, with justice and full tax powers the obvious unfinished business.

Practise this on PantherDevolution walk-through Devolution judgement grid

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

For any settlement, ask three questions: what can it legislate on, how strong was its founding mandate, and what stays reserved to Westminster. Running those three across Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland produces the asymmetry table the exam rewards.

Examination priority

Important This is the knowledge core of the area. Learn the comparative powers table and the founding dates for all three nations.

2.3 The England question and the case for further devolution Done

Important The unsolved problem: England has no parliament. EVEL, metro mayors and the rejected regional assemblies are the attempts to answer who speaks for England inside an asymmetric Union.

The specification

2.3The English question and devolution within England

England is the only nation with no devolved legislature - English laws are made at Westminster, where MPs from all four nations vote on them. I can do this

English Votes for English Laws ran from 2015 to its abolition in 2021; the 2004 North East referendum rejected a regional assembly by 78%. I can do this

Devolution within England has happened patchily through combined authorities led by directly elected metro mayors, who hold budgets but no law-making power. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Directly: 2023 mock Q2a (devolution has not gone far enough) is largely argued through the England gap.
As the framing: 2019 Q1a (devolution is in danger, source) draws on the funding and asymmetry tensions the England question raises.

Pattern. The further-devolution question reaches for England first. Have the West Lothian question, EVEL, metro mayors and the 2004 referendum ready as a single block of evidence.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers treat England as the test of the whole settlement - the largest nation left out - rather than as a footnote to the Scottish and Welsh story.
Weaker answers assume England simply needs its own parliament, missing that English voters rejected regional devolution when they were offered it.

One way to get high marks

Credited: the England question complicates the asymmetry complaint, because England lacks devolution partly because English voters, when asked in 2004, said no.
Rewarded evidence: the West Lothian question, English Votes for English Laws (2015-21, abolished), the 2004 North East referendum (78% No), the metro mayors such as Greater Manchester and London, and the Barnett Formula.
Level 5: judges whether the metro-mayor model is a real answer to the England question or only a patchwork that leaves it open.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Has devolution gone far enough?

Yes

Point. The devolved settlements are now substantial and stable. Explanation. The nations that wanted devolution have it, expanded repeatedly, and it has held for decades. Example. The Scotland Act 2016 and Wales Act 2017 were major recent transfers, and the settlements have lasted without collapse. Evaluation. This is a fair point for the nations, though it says nothing about England.
Point. English voters have rejected more devolution when offered it. Explanation. The one attempt to build English regional government was put to the public and lost heavily. Example. The 2004 North East referendum rejected a regional assembly by 78%. Evaluation. This weakens the case for forcing English devolution, though it does not settle the West Lothian question.

No, not in England

Point. England has no devolved legislature at all. Explanation. The largest nation makes its laws at Westminster, where MPs from the other nations can vote on English-only matters. Example. Around 84% of the UK population lives in the one nation with no devolved parliament, and EVEL, the one attempt to fix this, was abolished in 2021. Evaluation. This is a powerful objection, because the asymmetry is sharpest exactly where the population is largest.
Point. Devolution within England is patchy and unequal. Explanation. Metro mayors give some city regions a voice but leave large parts of England with none, and they hold budgets rather than law-making power. Example. Greater Manchester and London have powerful mayors, while many areas have no combined authority at all. Evaluation. A mayoral patchwork is not a national settlement, so devolution remains unfinished in England.

Best judgement. Devolution has gone far enough for the three nations that wanted it, but not for England, where the absence of a legislature and the patchiness of metro mayors leave the West Lothian question and the funding rows unresolved.

Using it in essays

30-mark: has-it-gone-far-enough questions (2023 mock Q2a).
Topic sentence: "Devolution has matured for the nations that wanted it, but England remains the gap that keeps the settlement unfinished."
Final judgement: far enough for the nations, not for England - the England question is the standing item on the reform agenda.

Practise this on PantherDevolution walk-through Reform since 1997 grid

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

The England question has three parts that an essay can take in turn: the West Lothian question (who votes on English laws), the funding question (Barnett and the per-head gap), and the structural question (no parliament, only uneven metro mayors). Naming all three reads as Level 5.

Examination priority

Important Hold the England material as one ready block. It is the first place the further-reform essays go.

2.4 Has devolution been a success, and should it go further? Done

Essential The most-set 30-marker: has devolution strengthened or weakened the Union, and should the UK move towards federalism? Learn both sides and one clear line of argument.

The specification

2.4The strengths and weaknesses of devolution, and federalism

The central debate is whether devolution has strengthened or weakened the Union, and whether it should go further towards a federal UK. I can do this

The case it weakened the Union: the 2014 Scottish referendum (45% Yes), SNP dominance, and post-Brexit strains such as the Internal Market Act 2020. I can do this

The case it strengthened the Union: 2014 was a clear No, Northern Ireland power-sharing returned in 2024, and Welsh independence support is far lower than Scottish. I can do this

Wording above follows the Pearson specification. Tick a line only when you could answer on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined

Directly: 2026 Q2b (devolution has been a success) is the core question.
Related: 2023 mock Q2a (devolution has not gone far enough) and Sample Q1a (a logical next step towards federalism, source) push the same debate towards what should happen next.

Pattern. Whether devolution has succeeded, and whether it should go further, is a banker 30-mark question. Lock in the safety-valve judgement and four dated examples.

What examiners reward and penalise

Stronger answers separate two things - has devolution worked, and should it become federalism - and reach a clear line on each rather than blurring them.
Weaker answers argue success or failure in the abstract, with no test of what would count as either and no named evidence.

One way to get high marks

Credited: devolution can weaken the Union's legal simplicity while strengthening its political durability - the safety-valve reading lets you take a side without ignoring the other.
Rewarded evidence: the 2014 Scottish referendum (45% Yes, 55% No, 85% turnout), the Internal Market Act 2020, the return of Northern Ireland power-sharing in February 2024, and Welsh independence polling near 20% against Scotland's 40-50%.
Level 5: sustains a judgement (for example that devolution has succeeded as a safety valve but federalism is a step too far) instead of listing strengths and weaknesses.

Open any past question linked above to read its full mark scheme and examiner report in the Question Bank.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Has devolution been a success?

Yes

Point. Devolution has held the Union together through its hardest test. Explanation. It gave Scotland a route to decide its future without rupture. Example. The 2014 independence referendum produced a clear No (55% to 45%) on an 85% turnout, with the Union intact afterwards. Evaluation. This is a strong success claim, though 45% Yes also showed independence is now a normalised option.
Point. It has delivered stable self-government and real policy choice. Explanation. The devolved bodies have lasted for decades and used their powers. Example. Scotland has full income tax powers and free university tuition, and Wales abolished prescription charges. Evaluation. Sustained divergence on this scale is firm evidence the settlement works in practice.

No

Point. Devolution has fuelled rather than settled the independence question. Explanation. It built a national platform from which separation could be argued permanently. Example. The SNP governed Scotland from 2007 to 2024 and independence support has stayed around 40-50% in polling. Evaluation. This is a serious objection, though Labour's 2024 Scottish recovery shows the trend is not one-way.
Point. The settlement is fragile and unevenly applied. Explanation. One nation's institutions keep collapsing and the largest nation has no settlement at all. Example. Stormont was suspended from 2022 to February 2024, and England still has no parliament. Evaluation. Fragility in Northern Ireland and the England gap show the success is partial, not complete.

Best judgement. Devolution has been a success as a constitutional safety valve, because it contained the 2014 crisis and delivered lasting self-government, but federalism would be a step too far while England has no settlement, so the answer is yes to devolution, not yet to a federal UK.

Using it in essays

30-mark: has-devolution-succeeded questions (2026 Q2b) and federalism questions (Sample Q1a).
Topic sentence: "Devolution has succeeded as a safety valve that holds the Union together, even though it has not settled the independence question or answered the England gap."
Final judgement: a qualified success - yes to devolution as it stands, but federalism is premature while England lacks a settlement.

Practise this on PantherDevolution judgement grid Devolution quiz

Wider context

Helpful context (background, not a spec requirement)

Federalism is the natural next step the question reaches for, so be ready to say why the UK is not federal: Westminster stays sovereign, the settlements are statutory not constitutional, and England has no unit to take a federal share. That single contrast separates devolution from federalism every time.

Examination priority

Important This is the single most-set question in the area. Have the safety-valve judgement and a clear line on federalism ready to argue.

Test Section test - 12 questions

Twelve mixed questions covering the whole area. Your most recent score shows in the top bar.

Practise this topic on Panther

Notes Walk-through Judgement grid Reform since 1997 grid Timeline Flashcards Quiz

← The constitution Parliament →