An example of Questions to the Prime Minister

Cameron vs Miliband - "You knifed your brother in the back!" - PMQ's 09/03/11

The Parliament: Control of the Government

Introduction

Chapter I

The House of Commons

1. Necessary Conditions to become an MP:

2. Parliamentary officials

1. The Speaker:

2. The Leader of the House of Commons:

3. The Whips:

3. Main functions of the House of Commons

Elaboration of the Laws (takes up 50% of the time)

Control of budget spending (30%)

Control of the government’s work (20%):

I.               Control of the Government:

Control of the government’s work takes up 20% of the time of parliamentary work:

This takes the form of questions addressed by MPs to the secretaries (and member of the Cabinet).

This takes place during question time or during meetings of the parliamentary committees:

This may trigger a debate and lead to a Vote of No Confidence

The Lower House may indicate its lack of support by rejecting a motion of confidence or by passing a motion of no confidence.

- Confidence motions generally originate in the government and are intended to reinforce its support in the House.

- The Opposition introduces No Confidence Motions. (Important bills that form part of the government’s agenda and are stated in the Speech from the Throne are generally considered matters of confidence. If such a bill is defeated in the House of Commons, the Government has lost the confidence of that house and the Prime Minister must either resign or ask for the dissolution of Parliament. A new election is then held.

1. Question Time

Parliamentary questions:

Question Time takes place in the House of Commons at the start of business (in both chambers), after Prayers. These questions are asked at the start of business in both chambers and are known as 'oral questions'.

From Monday to Thursday, the question period lasts about an hour on each of these days. (Oral questions are not taken on Fridays).

Parliamentary questions are used by members to seek information or to press for action.

We can distinguish between different types of questions:

a.     Questions for Oral Answer

b.     Questions to the Prime Minister

c.     Questions for Written Answer

d.     Urgent Questions (formerly called before the 2002-2003 session of Parliament as “Private Notice Questions”)

a. Questions for Oral Answer

Oral questions (i.e. questions for oral answer) are tabled 3 days in advance (excluding Fridays and week ends) so the Department concerned has the time to prepare an answer.

They are presented to the Table Office and included in the “Random computer Shuffle”, which will determine the order in which the questions will appear on the “Order of Business”. (Only those at the beginning of the list are guaranteed to be reached during the time allotted to the questions.)

Each government department answers questions according to a rota called the Order of Oral Questions. (The Order of Questions is a document published by the Vote Office which gives the dates and the times of departments answering questions an the deadlines for tabling questions.)

Ministers answer Questions for oral answer on the Floor of the House. Ministers usually have to answer questions once in a five weeks cycle on a particular day of the week.

The Prime Minister answers questions once in a week on Wednesdays.

When larger departments are questioned, junior ministers assist the Secretary of State to answer the questions.

The questions asked must relate to the responsibilities of the government department concerned. Ministers have to defend the work and decisions of their Department.

This represents a lot of work for the department because civil servants have to provide for answers and background information and briefing on which the minister may base his answer. Some questions genuinely seek for information, but others try to pinpoint flaws of the government’s policy and suggest alternative. Therefore the research has to be very thorough.

The Speaker sets the process in motion by calling the person whose question is first on the Printed Order of Business.

The MP rises, and says “N°1, Mr. Speaker”. (The Question is printed on the document and therefore he does not have to read the answer.)

Once the question has been answered, the MP who asked he question is generally the first to ask a “follow-up” (= a supplementary) question. Then other MPs ask supplementary questions. The Speaker is in charge of organising the questions in a balanced manner between the opposition and the majority.

Sometimes MPs rise to “Catch the Speaker’s Eye”. The Speaker then decides when there has been sufficient supplementary questions and proceeds with the second question on the Order of Business.

Any oral question that has not been answered receives a written answer printed in the “Hansard”. Oral questions excluded at the time of the Shuffle do not get any answer.

Question time is now divided into 2 parts.

The secretary of state or the minister will first answer questions for Oral Answers tabled in advance.

The minister will then answer what are called Topical questions, a procedure in place since 2007. (Ministers have to anticipate these questions and prepare potential answers)

b. Prime Minister's Question Time

The Prime Minister answers questions from MPs in the Commons for half an hour every Wednesday from 12pm. Harold Macmillan, who was the Conservative Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1953 to 1963 introduced this procedure in 1961.

The Prime Minister has to answer supplementary questions which have to arise out of the Original question. Supplementary questions do not have to be tabled 3 days in advance and can therefore be right up to date.

This means, in theory, that the Prime Minister will not know what questions will be asked of him but he will be extensively briefed by government departments.

c. Written questions

MPs and Peers can also ask government ministers questions for written answer. These are often used to obtain detailed information about policies and statistics on the activities of government departments.

d. Urgent Questions (= “Private Notice Questions”)

At times, members may wish to ask an urgent question to a Minister. These questions are subject to the standard rules for questions, but they also must be urgent, and of public importance. The relevant government department is informed at once of the urgent question to be answered this day. It is up to the speaker to allow or not an urgent question. If allowed the question is taken directly after question time.

2. Debate on the Adjournment

An adjournment debate is a way in the Commons of having a general debate without requiring the House to vote.

In the House of Commons, there is a half-hour adjournment debate at the end of each day’s sitting.

Subject matters of adjournment debates are varied; examples include debates on defence issues, pensions and combating benefit fraud. The Speaker chooses Thursday’s subject; for other days, MPs are selected by ballot.

At the end of the day’s business, the Speaker calls a government whip to move ‘That this House do now adjourn’. (Members apply for an adjournment debate to the Speakers Office.)

The MP who tabled the relevant adjournment debate is called to speak and a Minister will reply. The MP has no right of response, but can intervene in the Minister’s speech if he or she is willing to allow it (called ‘giving way’).

3. Select Committees:

This system of Committees was established in 1979.

There are departmental Select Committees but also Non departmental select committees.

Departmental Select Committees are “cross-party” groups of MPs (that is to say, including members from different parties), composed of 11 to 14 members.

The composition of Select Committees reflects the composition of the house. This means that a majority of the members of the committee belong to the governing party. The other members come from the other parties and small parties will not be able to be represented in each committee.

At the Start of each Parliament, the Committee of Selection proposes the names of the members of each Select Committee, which is validated by the house.  (Members as a matter of practice are backbenchers.

They generally meet twice a week. 

Select Committees are responsible for government scrutiny. They Shadow a government department. They examine “expenditure administration and policy” of the relevant “government department” and associated public bodies such as “quangos” (quasi-autonomous non-governmental associations).

They decide upon their own subject for inquiry within their scope of competence.

They may obtain written as well as oral evidence from people concerned by their inquiry. The cross-examination of witnesses takes place in public. The government department concerned is then also asked to produce written evidence.

The committee then publishes a report, which includes recommendations directed to the government department. The government has to issue a reply within 60 days, which is published by the committee as a public document. 

"Partisanship is a worthy foe in debate on stimulus" Summary

"Partisanship is a worthy foe in debate on stimulus"

Summary 

By way of introduction, (…)

The document deals with the Congressional response to Obama’s proposed legislation on a stimulus package.

At first / Originally / initially, Obama intended to (/planned to) downplay (/ to minimise) rivalry between political parties in Congress.

To intend to do something

However, as he met with entrenched opposition, he has been induced to (/he has been prompted to) (/ he has been led to) adopt a firmer stance (/ a different strategy), pressuring / pressurizing Congressmen and Senators to turn a more favourable eye on his proposed legislation.

To meet with entrenched opposition

To induce someone to do something

To prompt someone to do something

To pressurize someone (to pressure someone) to do something

(Justify by quoting from the text: Indeed the text reads: “Frustrated that the debate over the bill was being dominated by Republican’s criticism, and that his overtures had yielded little in the way of support from across the aisle” l. 12-13)

Obama’s difficulties are threefold (twofold / threefold / fourfold…)

First, he did not know much about the workings of Congress.

(House democrats had warned Obama that republicans would not support (/ would be reluctant to) support his stimulus legislation).

To be reluctant to do something

He has to contend with (/ to put up with)

By attempting to (/ trying to) reach out to (/ to appeal to) (/ to court) Republicans, Obama runs the risk of antagonising his fellow Democrats in Congress…

To court Republicans

To reach out to Republicans = to “reach across the aisle”

To run the risk of + V-ing

On top of this / In addition / What’s more / Besides, the House proves to be even more partisan than in the past (/ than it used to be), and there are even less moderate Republicans ready to (/ willing to / inclined to) make compromises on the stimulus package.

To be willing to do something

To be inclined to do something

To be ready to do something

Similarly / In a similar fashion, the Senate is quite partisan, and Republican senators are even more conservative.

Lastly / Last but not least, Obama must be careful not to alienate either House democrats or grassroots groups, or bloggers.

V négatif é either / or

(Structure quelque peu maladroite: Obama must take care to alienate neither House democrats nor grassroots groups, nor bloggers. (V affirmatif é Neither / Nor))

NB: lastly ≠ at last

Obama’s repeated / his attempts at + V-ing

Partisanship Is a Worthy Foe in Debate on Stimulus

February 7, 2009

By Jackie Calmes

The New York Times

WASHINGTON — With the Senate on track to pass its version of the economic stimulus legislation, President Obama is widely expected to win final Congressional approval of the plan soon, and thus make good on an assortment of his campaign promises. But in the process, he is confronting the impediments to his most ambitious pledge: to end the capital’s partisan warfare.

Mr. Obama has been frustrated by an array of forces, from an often bitter and personal history of partisanship on Capitol Hill to the near-extinction of Republican moderates in the House to the deep ideological gulf between the parties on economic policy. And as his aspiration of putting aside petty politics has met the necessity of winning legislative votes — no more than two or three Senate Republicans are expected to support him, which is two or three more than did so in the House — he has gone through a public evolution that has left him showing sharper edges when it comes to the ways of Washington.

Frustrated that debate over the bill was being dominated by Republicans’ criticism, and that his overtures had yielded little in the way of support from across the aisle, the president who began the week hosting Republicans for a Super Bowl party had by Friday switched to publicly pressuring them, and rallying fellow Democrats, with a hard-line message about his unwillingness to compromise his priorities. Mr. Obama seized on Friday’s worse-than-expected jobless numbers to criticize the Senate impasse as Republicans withheld the few votes he needs.

(…)

“His problem is not his administration. It is the institutional forces around here that have been built up over the years,” Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, said before Mr. Obama chose him to be commerce secretary.

Those forces are several. First, while Mr. Obama is a relative novice to Washington, Democrats and Republicans in Congress have memories of partisan wars going back to Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Partisan habits in Congress are hard to break, and perhaps impossible in the House given its makeup.

Already, House Democrats are becoming increasingly grudging in their acquiescence toward Mr. Obama’s outreach, underscoring the balancing act the president faces. He must make concessions to Republicans without angering Democrats not only in Congress but also among bloggers and grass-roots groups that worked so hard for his election.

When not a single Republican voted for the House package last week, House Democrats basically told administration officials, “I told you so.” Both chambers have fewer of the centrist Republicans that typically cut deals, a consequence of Democrats’ election gains in 2006 and 2008. In the Senate, many Republicans are recent House graduates, more ideologically conservative than the Republicans they replaced and schooled in the House’s more confrontational ways.

After eight years under President George W. Bush, six of them with Republicans in control of Congress, Democrats have pent-up demands for domestic spending that they believe the election validated. Republicans, for their part, interpreted their defeats as a sign that they were not conservative enough in opposing spending and pushing tax cuts.

I. Find in the text an equivalent for:

A promise:

To strike a bargain:

Objection, opposition:

Composition:

II. Answer the following questions by referring to the text :

1. Present the document. What is the topic of the article?
2. How would you describe the atmosphere (between political parties) in Capitol Hill? How can this situation be explained?
3. What is President Obama’s approach towards Congress?
4. How do democrats’ and republicans’ react to Barak Obama’s political strategy?
5. What sort of difficulties does B. Obama meet with.? 

Remarks of President Barak Obama

Inaugural Address (Excerpts)

Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Washington, D.C.

/ Introduction

My fellow citizens:

(…)

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath.

(…)

Paragraph 1

So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

(…)

Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America - they will be met.

(…)

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

(…)

Paragraph 2

We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

Reference to Historical crises which American people have overcome (…)

Paragraph 3

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them - that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account - to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous (…)

/ Common defense

Allusions to Bush’s policy…

Ref to Iraq / Afghanistan / nuclear threat / warming planet / terrorism (…)

Paragraph 4

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

(…)

Paragraph 5

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.

Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends - hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. (…)

Understanding the text:

1. Read the Document and summarize in one or two sentences the theme of each paragraph.

2. Translate paragraph 4.