威斯敏斯特制度中的小型反对党:COVID-19 大流行如何影响英国下议院的参与、决策和监督?

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Studies Review Pub Date : 2024-05-10 DOI:10.1177/14789299241249590
Louise Thompson, Alexandra Meakin
{"title":"威斯敏斯特制度中的小型反对党:COVID-19 大流行如何影响英国下议院的参与、决策和监督?","authors":"Louise Thompson, Alexandra Meakin","doi":"10.1177/14789299241249590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Opposition parties are a key feature of parliamentary democracies, but their participation rights differ markedly. In the UK House of Commons, the institutional operation of the Westminster model facilitates a marked distinction between the rights afforded to the Official Opposition party compared to smaller opposition parties. During times of crisis, these Westminster model dynamics can shift, impacting opposition rights. This article uses a case study of the COVID-19 pandemic to assess institutional inequalities across opposition party groups. Drawing on an analysis of over 4000 contributions to parliamentary debates and interviews with MPs, we examine the pandemic’s impact on the roles of opposition parties beyond the Official Opposition. We find that the pandemic initially generated unprecedented cooperation between the government and small opposition parties but that this was short-lived. In the long term, the pandemic exacerbated existing institutional barriers and the size and geographical concentration of small opposition parties in the devolved nations brought disproportionate participation and oversight barriers. This suggests the need to guarantee formal opposition rights within Westminster systems beyond the Official Opposition party to ensure that all political parties have the capacity to carry out their functions during times of crisis.","PeriodicalId":46813,"journal":{"name":"Political Studies Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Small Opposition Parties in a Westminster System: How Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Affect Participation, Decision-Making and Oversight in the UK House of Commons?\",\"authors\":\"Louise Thompson, Alexandra Meakin\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14789299241249590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Opposition parties are a key feature of parliamentary democracies, but their participation rights differ markedly. In the UK House of Commons, the institutional operation of the Westminster model facilitates a marked distinction between the rights afforded to the Official Opposition party compared to smaller opposition parties. During times of crisis, these Westminster model dynamics can shift, impacting opposition rights. This article uses a case study of the COVID-19 pandemic to assess institutional inequalities across opposition party groups. Drawing on an analysis of over 4000 contributions to parliamentary debates and interviews with MPs, we examine the pandemic’s impact on the roles of opposition parties beyond the Official Opposition. We find that the pandemic initially generated unprecedented cooperation between the government and small opposition parties but that this was short-lived. In the long term, the pandemic exacerbated existing institutional barriers and the size and geographical concentration of small opposition parties in the devolved nations brought disproportionate participation and oversight barriers. This suggests the need to guarantee formal opposition rights within Westminster systems beyond the Official Opposition party to ensure that all political parties have the capacity to carry out their functions during times of crisis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46813,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Studies Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Studies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299241249590\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299241249590","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

反对党是议会民主的一个重要特征,但其参与权却有明显差异。在英国下议院,威斯敏斯特模式的制度运作使得官方反对党与较小的反对党在权利上有明显区别。在危机时期,这些威斯敏斯特模式的动态变化会影响反对党的权利。本文通过对 COVID-19 大流行的案例研究来评估反对党团体之间的制度不平等。通过分析议会辩论中的 4000 多篇发言和对国会议员的访谈,我们研究了大流行病对官方反对党之外的反对党角色的影响。我们发现,大流行病最初促成了政府与小型反对党之间前所未有的合作,但这种合作是短暂的。从长远来看,大流行病加剧了现有的体制障碍,而权力下放国家中的小型反对党的规模和地理集中性带来了不成比例的参与和监督障碍。这表明有必要在威斯敏斯特制度中保障除最大反对党之外的正式反对党权利,以确保所有政党在危机时期都有能力履行其职能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Small Opposition Parties in a Westminster System: How Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Affect Participation, Decision-Making and Oversight in the UK House of Commons?
Opposition parties are a key feature of parliamentary democracies, but their participation rights differ markedly. In the UK House of Commons, the institutional operation of the Westminster model facilitates a marked distinction between the rights afforded to the Official Opposition party compared to smaller opposition parties. During times of crisis, these Westminster model dynamics can shift, impacting opposition rights. This article uses a case study of the COVID-19 pandemic to assess institutional inequalities across opposition party groups. Drawing on an analysis of over 4000 contributions to parliamentary debates and interviews with MPs, we examine the pandemic’s impact on the roles of opposition parties beyond the Official Opposition. We find that the pandemic initially generated unprecedented cooperation between the government and small opposition parties but that this was short-lived. In the long term, the pandemic exacerbated existing institutional barriers and the size and geographical concentration of small opposition parties in the devolved nations brought disproportionate participation and oversight barriers. This suggests the need to guarantee formal opposition rights within Westminster systems beyond the Official Opposition party to ensure that all political parties have the capacity to carry out their functions during times of crisis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Political Studies Review
Political Studies Review POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Political Studies Review provides unrivalled review coverage of new books and literature on political science and international relations and does so in a timely and comprehensive way. In addition to providing a comprehensive range of reviews of books in politics, PSR is a forum for a range of approaches to reviews and debate in the discipline. PSR both commissions original review essays and strongly encourages submission of review articles, review symposia, longer reviews of books and debates relating to theories and methods in the study of politics. The editors are particularly keen to develop new and exciting approaches to reviewing the discipline and would be happy to consider a range of ideas and suggestions.
期刊最新文献
Commissioned Book Review: David Cutts, Andrew Russell and Joshua Townsley, The Liberal Democrats: From Hope to Despair to Where? Commissioned Book Review: Anita R. Gohdes, Repression in the Digital Age–Surveillance, Censorship, and the Dynamics of State Violence Commissioned Book Review: Robin Attfield, The Ethics of the Climate Crisis Commissioned Book Review: Elena Llaudet and Kosuke Imai, Data Analysis for Social Science: A Friendly and Practical Introduction Partisanship, Social Desirability, and Belief in Election Fraud: Evidence from the 2022 US Midterm Elections
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1