Elected Second Chambers and Their Powers: An International Survey

In May 2011, Britain's Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government published proposals for reform of the House of Lords. In a White Paper and draft bill they set out detailed plans for a largely or wholly elected second chamber. These marked the latest stage in a long‐running debate on Lords reform. The government's proposals aim to change the composition of the second chamber, suggesting that there will be no change to its powers or the conventions governing relations with the House of Commons. But this expectation has been disputed. The House of Lords presently does not make full use of its powers, and many anticipate that it would if its members became elected. This paper reviews the composition of all second chambers internationally, showing that wholly directly elected chambers make up the minority, and that both mixed chambers and indirect election are common. It then reviews the formal powers of all largely and wholly elected chambers. This shows that amongst parliamentary systems the formal powers of the House of Lords are relatively great. But second chamber powers, as well as their composition, vary widely.     

A Principles‐based Approach to the Barnett Formula1

This essay argues that the Barnett formula—which determines the block grant paid annually by the UK government to each of the Devolved Administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland—be reformulated, guided by the following principles: fiscal equity, accountability, transparency, and flexibility. The rationale for change is that the current fiscal arrangements make little policy sense and may not be sustainable in a changing political and economic context. The formation of a grants commission to help develop data, calculate disparities, and provide public advice to the Chancellor of the Exchequer is also advocated.     

ECONOMIC DISCOURSE AND THE MARKET: THE CASE OF COMMUNITY CARE

The UK government has introduced fundamental reforms into the provision of social care. The'community care'programme, which was fully implemented in 1993, requires local authorities to assess the needs of potential users, to design an individual package of care that reflects those needs, and to purchase the package from a range of statutory, voluntary and private providers. Thus the new arrangement introduced a'quasi-market'in community care, along the lines of those already operating in other areas of the UK public sector, such as health and education. Hitherto, much analysis of the functioning of such markets has been conducted within a neo-classical economic framework. This article examines the relevance to the complex new community care market of three alternative theoretical perspectives: the transaction costs literature, the Austrian school and the new economic sociology. It is concluded that, although neoclassical economic discourse has been influential in shaping policy, no single perspective can capture all the issues relevant to analysing the market in community care. Therefore, in evaluating the reforms, an eclectic theoretical approach will be required which draws upon a variety of economic discourses.