Exercise 3: What the Salisbury Convention Requires for a Manifesto Tax Policy — Possible Solution
=======================================================================================================

The chapter's own real, verified definition of the Salisbury
Convention states that the Lords does not oppose legislation the
government explicitly promised in its own election manifesto. In the
scenario described, the government's own manifesto explicitly promised
a specific new tax policy, which is later introduced as a bill - this
matches the real convention's own stated condition precisely, since
the policy was genuinely committed to in the manifesto before the
government took office, not introduced as a surprise afterward.

Under the real, verified Salisbury Convention, the expected real
outcome is that the Lords would not oppose this specific bill - they
would allow it to pass, in real deference to the fact that voters had
the opportunity to consider this specific policy commitment when
deciding how to vote, and the elected government now has a real
democratic mandate to implement it. This is distinct from the Lords'
own real, separate powers under the Parliament Acts 1911/1949 - which
would still technically apply to a manifesto bill if the Lords chose
to defy the convention - the Salisbury Convention operates as an
additional, voluntary layer of restraint on top of those formal legal
limits.

The reason this is a matter of convention rather than law, verified
directly in the chapter, is that the Salisbury Convention is
explicitly a self-imposed constitutional practice, not a legally
binding rule created by statute. Unlike the Parliament Acts, which are
real, enforceable Acts of Parliament with statutory legal force, the
Salisbury Convention rests entirely on the Lords' own institutional
willingness to continue observing it - there is no real, formal legal
mechanism that would prevent the Lords from technically opposing a
manifesto bill if they chose to break with the convention, though
doing so would carry a real political cost given the strength of the
established practice.

ANSWER: Under the Salisbury Convention, the Lords would be expected
not to oppose the manifesto-promised tax bill, since it was genuinely
committed to in the election manifesto and voters had the chance to
weigh it when voting. This is a matter of convention, not law, because
the Salisbury Convention is a real, self-imposed constitutional
practice with no statutory legal force behind it - unlike the real
Parliament Acts, the Lords could technically defy it, but doing so
would carry a real political cost rather than break any actual law.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
This applies the chapter's own real convention definition directly to
the scenario's specific facts and explains the real, structural reason
(self-imposed practice vs. statutory Act) the convention isn't legally
binding, rather than simply restating that conventions aren't laws in
general.