Paper 1 · 2021 · 30 marks
Using the source, evaluate the view that in a democracy MPs are free to ignore referendum results and their own political party's manifesto.
Democracy & Participation
Source
Source 2 depicts two letters with differing opinions printed in a newspaper concerning the importance and scope of the manifestos of political parties.
Letter 2: MPs should be free to exercise independent judgement
Manifesto promises and referendum decisions should be subject to change when facts or public opinion change. Democracy is bigger than any mandate, manifesto or referendum. Edmund Burke in 1774 told his electors in Bristol: 'Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.' Democracy must mean that MPs are free to change their minds. MPs can or do swap parties or change allegiances. On certain issues they have a right to vote according to their conscience. Political parties have had too much power for too long and democracy should allow greater freedom.
Letter 1: MPs must honour manifesto commitments and referendum results
In the 2017 General Election both Conservative and Labour parties made explicit manifesto commitments. MPs should always obey the policies in their party's manifesto, and not vote against them. They are trustees of political parties and should follow the policies on which they stood. MPs should faithfully represent the constituents who elected them. Our democracy relies on clear manifestos, one of which is converted by the winning party into a legitimate mandate for government. MPs are also expected to implement the outcomes of referendums.
Mark scheme: agreement
AO1: When facts and circumstances change MPs should be free to change their minds.
AO2: New information and circumstances may mean that earlier promises were wrong and the right thing to do is to alter tack.
AO3: We can conclude that MPs can be flexible and react to events and can change their minds.
AO1: MPs have the right to vote according to their conscience.
AO2: Some issues go above party politics. They remain accountable to their constituents at the next election.
AO3: We can conclude that elected representatives must be free to vote with their conscience but will still be held to account by the electorate.
AO1: According to Burke, MPs are chosen for their overall ability and have licence to act freely.
AO2: MPs are seen to be professional politicians and should think long term and for the good of the wider community they represent.
AO3: We can conclude that MPs are specialists in whom the electorate surrender their views to once elected.
AO1: MPs should be free of the confines and restrictions of political parties.
AO2: It could be argued that political parties quash free and open debate within their ranks and are run by a narrow elite.
AO3: For democracy to serve the interests of the whole, we can conclude that the narrow views of parties can be ignored.
Mark scheme: disagreement
AO1: MPs gain their positions via political party affiliation.
AO2: MPs stand under the banner of a political party - upholding the views set out in their manifesto. The party organises their campaign both physically and financially. If MPs swap parties or become independent, they should seek re-election.
AO3: We can conclude that it is an abandonment of trust and honour if they deviate from the official party line.
AO1: MPs have a duty to follow the wishes of the electorate who voted for them.
AO2: The electorate put their faith in the MP they chose - and the views on key topics that were expressed before the election. They have a duty to abide by those wishes.
AO3: Democracy and legitimacy, we may conclude, would be clouded and uncertain if MPs did not abide by the preferences their electorate had made.
AO1: It is undemocratic to make decisions which go against previous promises which were made by a party.
AO2: We can view that MPs who are elected by their constituents standing on a party ticket are not free to make individual decisions. Their position is instead one of a party representative.
AO3: We reach the verdict that those elected by their constituents have a type of binding contract to uphold and keep in line with their previous platform.
AO1: A mandate is linked to the manifesto as an endorsed plan which will be enacted if elected.
AO2: The system of democracy works on a commitment to election manifestos and party unity within Parliament. MPs who go against this undermine their own legitimacy.
AO3: We can reach the verdict that the legitimacy of the political system relies on MPs being faithful to the electorate.