📚 The relationship between the executive and parliament | 行政机关与议会的关系
In the UK Westminster model, the executive, made up of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and Parliament, comprising the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the monarch, are formally separate institutions. Yet they are intimately connected because ministers are drawn from Parliament and normally command the confidence of the House of Commons. This article examines the shifting balance of power between the executive and Parliament, the mechanisms through which Parliament holds the executive to account, and the factors that make the executive dominant or vulnerable.
在英国威斯敏斯特模式下，由首相和内阁组成的行政机关，与由上议院、下议院和君主组成的议会，在形式上是相互独立的机构。但由于大臣来自议会且通常掌握下议院的信任，二者关系极为密切。本文探讨行政机关与议会之间权力平衡的变化、议会追究行政机关责任的机制，以及使行政机关处于主导或脆弱地位的因素。
1. The UK executive and parliamentary sovereignty | 英国行政机关与议会主权
The UK executive consists of the Prime Minister, Cabinet ministers, junior ministers and the wider civil service. Parliament consists of the House of Commons, the House of Lords and the monarch, with the Commons being the elected chamber that holds ministers to account. Ministers are normally members of one of the Houses, which creates a fusion of powers rather than a strict separation.
英国行政机关由首相、内阁大臣、初级大臣和更广泛的公务员体系组成。议会由上议院、下议院和君主组成，其中下议院是民选议院，负责追究大臣责任。大臣通常来自其中一个议院，这形成了权力融合而非严格的三权分立。
The principle of parliamentary sovereignty means that Parliament is the supreme legal authority and can make or repeal any law. In theory this makes Parliament superior to the executive, but in practice the executive usually controls a majority in the Commons and therefore dominates the legislative timetable and policy agenda.
议会主权原则意味着议会是最高法律权威，可以制定或废除任何法律。理论上这使议会高于行政机关，但在实践中行政机关通常掌握下议院多数，因此主导立法时间表和政策议程。
2. Sources of executive power | 行政机关权力的来源
Executive power derives from three main sources: the royal prerogative, statute law, and the authority flowing from party leadership. Prerogative powers allow ministers to deploy armed forces, make treaties and appoint peers without fresh legislation, which gives the executive considerable freedom of action.
行政机关的权力主要来自三个来源：皇家特权、成文法和政党领导权。特权权力使大臣无需新立法即可部署军队、缔结条约和册封贵族，这赋予行政机关相当大的行动自由。
Statutory powers come from Acts of Parliament that delegate authority to ministers, often through secondary or delegated legislation. The executive can therefore make detailed rules without full parliamentary scrutiny, which strengthens its dominance between elections and reduces the practical impact of parliamentary sovereignty.
法定权力来自议会立法对大臣的授权，通常通过次级立法或授权立法实现。因此行政机关可以在未经议会充分审查的情况下制定详细规则，这加强了其在两次大选之间的主导地位，并削弱了议会主权的实际影响。
3. Mechanisms of parliamentary scrutiny | 议会对行政机关的审查机制
Parliament scrutinises the executive through oral and written questions, urgent questions, debates, select committees and opposition days. These tools force ministers to explain policy, justify decisions and respond to criticism in public, which is central to the convention of ministerial responsibility.
议会通过口头与书面质询、紧急质询、辩论、专门委员会和反对党日对行政机关进行审查。这些工具迫使大臣公开解释政策、为决策辩护并回应批评，这是大臣责任制惯例的核心。
However, the effectiveness of scrutiny depends on the size of the government majority, the independence of MPs and the willingness of select committees to challenge ministers. A large majority often weakens opposition-led scrutiny because the government can safely ignore critical reports and defeat opposition motions.
然而，审查的有效性取决于政府多数席位的规模、议员的独立性以及专门委员会挑战大臣的意愿。多数席位过大往往会削弱反对党主导的审查，因为政府可以安然无视批评性报告并击败反对党动议。
4. Prime Minister’s Questions and ministerial questions | 首相问答与大臣质询
Prime Minister’s Questions takes place for around thirty minutes each Wednesday. It is intended to make the Prime Minister directly answerable to MPs, but in practice it is heavily dominated by set-piece exchanges between party leaders and often rewards rhetorical performance rather than detailed accountability.
首相问答每周三进行约三十分钟。它旨在使首相直接向议员负责，但实际上主要被政党领袖之间的固定交锋所主导，通常奖励口头表演而非细致的问责。
Written questions allow MPs to obtain detailed information from departments, and ministers are expected to answer within a specified period. Although useful for exposing facts, answers can be evasive or delayed, limiting their effectiveness as a scrutiny mechanism.
书面质询使议员能够从政府部门获取详细信息，大臣应在规定期限内答复。尽管书面质询有助于揭露事实，但答复可能避重就轻或拖延，从而限制其作为审查机制的效果。
5. Select committees and their impact | 专门委员会及其影响
Departmental select committees shadow each government department, take evidence from ministers and officials, and publish reports. Since 2010, committee chairs have been elected by the whole House, giving them greater independence from party leaders and strengthening their scrutiny role.
部门专门委员会对应各政府部门，听取大臣和官员证词并发布报告。自2010年以来，委员会主席由全院投票选举产生，增强了其相对于政党领袖的独立性，并强化了其审查职能。
Their main strength is cross-party, evidence-based inquiry, which can damage the executive by exposing failures. However, their reports are advisory and government is not obliged to implement recommendations. The executive can reject criticism, especially when it has a large majority and chair elections still favour larger parties.
其主要优势在于跨党派、基于证据的调查，能够通过曝光失误打击行政机关。然而，报告属于建议性质，政府没有义务落实建议。行政机关可以拒绝批评，尤其是在拥有较大多数席位且主席选举仍有利于大党的情况下。
6. The role of the whip and party discipline | 党鞭与政党纪律的作用
Party whips are MPs or peers appointed to maintain party discipline. They issue instructions on how to vote, and the threat of losing promotion or selection discourages rebellion. Most votes in the House of Commons are whipped, meaning MPs are expected to follow the party line.
党鞭是被任命维持政党纪律的议员或贵族。他们发布投票指令，并以失去晋升或候选人资格相威胁，从而抑制反叛。下议院的大多数投票都受到党鞭约束，意味着议员应遵循政党路线。
The whip system strengthens the executive because the government can normally rely on its MPs to support its programme. Parliament appears less independent when most votes follow party lines rather than individual judgement, and this is a major reason why a majority government can dominate Parliament.
党鞭制度加强了行政机关，因为政府通常可以依靠本党议员支持其纲领。当大多数投票遵循政党路线而非个人判断时，议会显得独立性较弱，这也是多数政府能够主导议会的主要原因。
7. Backbench rebellions and executive vulnerability | 后座议员反叛与行政机关的脆弱性
Backbench rebellions occur when MPs vote against their own party. The larger the government majority, the more rebels are needed for a defeat; hence small majorities make the executive vulnerable. A government with a working majority of only a few seats can be defeated by a small group of dissatisfied backbenchers.
后座议员反叛指议员投票反对本党。政府多数席位越大，造成失败所需的反叛票就越多；因此微弱多数使行政机关变得脆弱。一个只有几个席位的有效多数政府，可能被一小群不满的后座议员击败。
Notable examples include Conservative backbenchers rebelling over military action in Syria in 2013 and repeated defeats of Theresa May’s Brexit deal between 2018 and 2019. These show that Parliament can exert real power during periods of internal party division and when the executive lacks a stable majority.
著名例子包括2013年保守党后座议员在叙利亚军事行动上反叛，以及2018至2019年特蕾莎·梅的脱欧协议多次被击败。这些表明在政党内部分裂以及行政机关缺乏稳定多数的时期，议会能够发挥实际权力。
8. Votes of no confidence and the Fixed-term Parliaments Act | 不信任投票与《固定任期议会法》
By convention, the government must resign or seek a dissolution if it loses a vote of no confidence in the House of Commons. This is a fundamental way in which Parliament can remove the executive, and it ensures that the government must maintain the confidence of the elected chamber.
按照惯例，若政府在下议院不信任投票中失败，就必须辞职或请求解散议会。这是议会罢免行政机关的根本方式，并确保政府必须维持民选议院的信任。
The Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 set five-year terms and required special majorities for early elections, but this was repealed by the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, restoring the Prime Minister’s prerogative to call elections. No-confidence motions remain especially important in a minority government, where the executive cannot rely on automatic support.
2011年《固定任期议会法》规定五年任期并要求提前大选须获特定多数，但该法于2022年被《解散和召集议会法》废除，恢复了首相提前举行大选的特权。在少数政府时期，不信任动议仍然尤为重要，因为行政机关不能依靠自动支持。
9. Prerogative powers and parliamentary authorisation | 特权权力与议会授权
Prerogative powers were historically exercised by the monarch but are now exercised by ministers. Parliament has gained more say over some prerogatives, such as military intervention and treaty ratification, through convention and statute, so the executive can no longer assume it may act completely without parliamentary support.
特权权力历史上由君主行使，现在由大臣行使。通过惯例和成文法，议会在军事干预和条约批准等某些特权上获得了更多发言权，因此行政机关不能再假定它可以完全不依靠议会支持而行动。
The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 gave Parliament a statutory role in approving treaties. Similarly, the willingness of MPs to withhold support for military action has made governments seek prior parliamentary authorisation in practice, as seen before the Syria vote in 2013.
2010年《宪政改革与治理法》赋予议会在批准条约方面的法定作用。同样，议员们拒绝支持军事行动的意愿使政府在实践中寻求议会事先授权，2013年叙利亚投票前就是如此。
10. Coalition, minority government and the balance of power | 联合政府、少数政府与权力平衡
Coalition government from 2010 to 2015 meant the executive had to negotiate policy with the Liberal Democrats, but the government still controlled a stable majority and most of its programme passed. Coalition agreements constrained the Prime Minister, yet the executive remained the dominant
Published by TutorHao | A-Level Mathematics Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
屏轩国际教育cambridge primary/secondary checkpoint, cat4, ukiset,ukcat,igcse,alevel,PAT,STEP,MAT, ibdp,ap,ssat,sat,sat2课程辅导，国外大学本科硕士研究生博士课程论文辅导Cancel reply