For daily up to date examples and advice on how to do well in A Level Politics, make sure to follow the Politics Explained TikTok.

For detailed videos going through all of the A Level Politics content, make sure to follow the Politics Explained YouTube Channel.

UK Government Examples

The Supreme Court

Starmer And Badenoch Threaten Judicial Independence With Comments At PMQs:

• In 2025 Lady Sue Carr, the head of the judiciary and Lady Chief Justice wrote to the Government and the Opposition expressing concern regarding safeguarding the independence of judicial decisions in response to comments made during PMQs in 2025. 

• Starmer agreed in a question that a decision regarding the resettlement of a Gazan family in the UK was a "completely wrong" decision, stating that it should be Parliament, not judges, making the rules on immigration. 

  • Additionally, he said the Home Secretary would act to close a "legal loophole" to alter rulings by narrowing the human right to a family life in article 8 of the ECHR. 

  • This shows how the government can use secondary or primary legislation to change the law if they disagree with how judges are interpreting it, asserting the power of the Government over the Judiciary.

• This follows the trend of senior judges being directly criticised by politicians, particularly since the Supreme Court's interventions on Brexit and the Rwanda Scheme.

• The Lady Chief Justice said that the Government failed to visibly respect and protect the independence of the judiciary, and any dissent should be made through the appellate process not verbal attacks to protect the rule of law.

  • This threatens Judicial Independence - the idea that judges must be free from political interference, as decisions should be impartial justice under the rule of law. 

  • Government ministers, especially the Prime Minister, commenting on and criticising decisions of the court threatens both the independence of decisions and its image as an institution which impartially administers justice.

Prime Minister's Questions

Kemi Badenoch's Performance At PMQs As An Example Of Ineffective Scrutiny:

• Since becoming the leader of the Official Opposition and the Conservative Party in 2024, Kemi Badenoch has been criticised for underperforming at PMQs. 

• For example, in February 2025, she failed to challenge the PM on the Chagos Islands deal and whether the growing cost of the plan increasing to £18 billion is compatible with his pledge not to return to austerity. 

  • This meant questions on issues that are of high political importance went unanswered, undermining the purpose of PMQs to forensically pin down the PM and provide scrutiny on issues the Government would least like to talk about.

• This shows that PMQs is weak as effective scrutiny is highly dependent on the strength of the leader of the opposition. 

  • It can be argued that PMQs should be scrapped and replaced with a greater use of other scrutiny such as the liaison committee which provides far more in depth, professional and meaningful questioning on issues of high importance.

UK Politics Examples

Party Policy

The Labour And Conservative Party's Response To Ukraine As An Example Of Policy Similarity:

• In 2025, President Donald Trump described the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as a "dictator" and accused them of starting the war with Russia. In response to this Starmer aligned himself with Ukraine, describing him as a democratically elected leader and stressed the need for cooperation. 

  • Leader of the Conservative Party Kemi Badenoch also defended Zelensky as a democratically elected leader who stood up to an illegal invasion. 

• This shows that both main parties have the same foreign policy outlook of defending Ukraine against Russia, even if it means diverging from traditional closeness with the foreign policy of the US. 

  • This also shows a growing divide with Reform UK, who took considerably longer to distance themselves from Trump's comments and agreed it was "right and proper" for Trump to call for immediate elections.

Democracy and Participation

Labour Support Votes At 16 In Their 2024 Election Manifesto, But Have Yet To Introduce Legislation:

• In its 2024 manifesto, Labour pledged to lower the voting age to 16, arguing that this would empower young people and enhance democracy. 

  • They also justified this by highlighting that 16- and 17-year-olds already assume significant societal responsibilities, such as joining the workforce, and pointing to the successful implementation of votes at 16 in Scotland and Wales, where it was credited with increasing political awareness and participation among young people. 

• Despite this commitment, the policy has not yet been introduced as a bill in Parliament. Starmer stated that it would not be implemented in time for the 2025 local elections, citing the need for thorough planning and debate. 

• The proposal has been met with strong opposition from both the Conservative Party and Reform UK. The Conservative Party argues that 16- and 17-year-olds lack the maturity and life experience necessary to make informed voting decisions, and they have expressed concerns that expanding the electorate to younger age groups could disproportionately benefit Labour, as younger voters tend to lean left politically. 

  • Nigel Farage, has been particularly vocal in his criticism, accusing Labour of attempting to “rig future elections” by strategically targeting a demographic perceived to be more supportive of progressive policies. 

  • Farage argued that the policy is politically motivated rather than genuinely democratic, aimed at securing long-term electoral gains for Labour.