The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

"Where were the massed ranks of parliamentary reformers?" 'Attitudinal' and 'contextual' approaches to parliamentary reform

"Where were the massed ranks of parliamentary reformers?" 'Attitudinal' and 'contextual' approaches to parliamentary reform
"Where were the massed ranks of parliamentary reformers?" 'Attitudinal' and 'contextual' approaches to parliamentary reform
On 14 May 2002, the House of Commons voted on proposals put forward by the Modernisation Select Committee for reform of the departmental select committee system. This article examines the origins of those proposals, and the outcome of the vote, focusing on one particular proposal to create a Committee of Nomination to place MPs onto select committees. This raises questions regarding two competing academic approaches to explaining parliamentary reform, the ‘attitudinal’ approach and the ‘contextual’ approach, and concludes that, of the two, the ‘contextual’ approach is better placed to explain the failure to create a Committee of Nomination.
1357-2334
57-76
Kelso, Alexandra
e9f198bb-27f8-412a-9360-aff01d578096
Kelso, Alexandra
e9f198bb-27f8-412a-9360-aff01d578096

Kelso, Alexandra (2003) "Where were the massed ranks of parliamentary reformers?" 'Attitudinal' and 'contextual' approaches to parliamentary reform. Journal of Legislative Studies, 9 (1), 57-76. (doi:10.1080/13523270300660004).

Record type: Article

Abstract

On 14 May 2002, the House of Commons voted on proposals put forward by the Modernisation Select Committee for reform of the departmental select committee system. This article examines the origins of those proposals, and the outcome of the vote, focusing on one particular proposal to create a Committee of Nomination to place MPs onto select committees. This raises questions regarding two competing academic approaches to explaining parliamentary reform, the ‘attitudinal’ approach and the ‘contextual’ approach, and concludes that, of the two, the ‘contextual’ approach is better placed to explain the failure to create a Committee of Nomination.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 1 March 2003

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 42755
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/42755
ISSN: 1357-2334
PURE UUID: 0ee2a7d6-73b1-46f5-8ab9-85d67bea738c

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 18 Jan 2007
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 08:50

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Alexandra Kelso

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×