How successful were Elizabeth I and her ministers in managing Parliament?

Introduction: Outline key features of introduction in relation to questionHistoriographical justification for question: Neale would suggest that she was very unsuccessful; cites examples of vocal Protestant opposition. Elton discredits this argument. Definition of successful management- management by Elizabeth and her minister that ensured the co-operation between Parliament and the council in key matters. Co-operation rather than conflict. Outline of argument: Key parliamentary functions were passing legislation, raising/granting subsidies and hearing private bills. Potential areas of conflict were finance, religion and succession: ultimately essay discusses whether these three issues inhibited key parliamentary functioned. If they didn't, then management can be deemed successful. MAIN BODY: In discussion of this, outline how to structure paragraphs e.g with opening sentence addressing theme of paragraph.Para 1: Finance- most co-operation, least amount of conflict due to united PC and matter not of royal prerogative Granted 12 of 13 subsidies in full thus didn’t prevent this function (because PC and Queen successfully managed them)  Conflict over Monopolies in 1601: Threatened to prevent main function of parliament ( grant subsidies) but equally this was managed by small concessionArguably most serious conflict as it came entirely from MPs rather than PC. At the same time easiest to resolve for the same reason e.g.through golden speech. Para 2: Religion- also largely co-operative due to united PC but conflicts arguably more serious due to matter of Royal prerogativeConflict over religious settlement which threatened to prevent Parliament from performing another function (passing legislation) but resolved easilyMore serious due to MP’s trying to undermine royal prerogative- e.g. Antony Cope in 1585. Best example of Neale’s view- but dealt with easily.Thus more serious than monopolies but just as easily dealt with. (Comparison here important for Exam Criteria)Para 3: Succession- Area of most conflict- undermined prerogative powers and recurred1586 MQS0- undermined royal prerogative as Elizabeth was forced to go against what she had wanted due to Parliamentary pressure  Issue recurred and thus threatened to undermined function of parliament (hearing private bills) e.g. dominated 1576 parliament.  Also in 1566/7, she had to take a reduced subsidy to resolve issue.Both prevented functioning of parliament and undermined her royal prerogative. However- due to PC using Parliament against her. Christopher Haigh’s view that it was actually PC that was un-cooperative rather than Parliament. Failure of Elizabeth to manage ministers rather than manage parliament. Conc: Discuss what needs to be included in a conclusion e.g summary of argument, any further routes for investigation. e.g Elizabeth's parliaments were largely well managed (esp. in comparison to earlier and later monarchs),  conflict occurred in some areas but often resolved. When it couldn’t be resolved it was because it was actually between Queen and PC. PC also increased ambition of MPs and thus increased conflict indirectly.