The UK Constitution class discussion


THE BRITISH CONSITUTION

A constitution is the body of rules which lays down the relationship between the individual citizen and the state, and between the different parts of the state: government, parliament and the courts.  The powers which the government has to make and enforce laws, and our rights as citizens, are defined by the constitution, which therefore affects us all.

Importantly, the UK has no single written constitutional document. Much is written in a number of different documents, including within statutes, court judgments, and treaties as well as unwritten sources, including parliamentary conventions and royal prerogatives. At present Parliament can change the constitution as it wishes. Recent constitutional reforms have taken place on a piecemeal basis and without formal public debate on their long-term implications or consideration of the impact on other elements of the constitution.

The British constitution remains a ramshackle construction, but generally it is flexible, political and has largely been the product of incremental, peaceful change - no revolutions in Britain and no defeats after a war. It is said to more `legalised' as EU law must be implemented, above UK law if there is a conflict, and the Human Rights Act must be followed.

Britain, along with Israel and New Zealand,  is one of only 3 democracies in the world not to have a written constitution so constitutional reform is high on the current political agenda, and reforms were promised in the manifestos of all three main political parties. Previously it was accepted changes to the Constitution would only be made after a period of consultation and with broad cross-party support.

In contemporary Britain, the government of the day does not see the need to draw any distinction between changes to the constitution and changes in, for example, health or education policy.  The players in the political game can change the rules of the game itself, and regularly do so, in a way which is not possible in other developed democracies. Under our current system, Parliament - meaning in practice the government of the day - can pass any law it likes.

If a written constitution were entrenched (either by requiring a `supermajority' of MPs to agree to pass legislation or by introducing an external method of confirmation, such as a referendum) then the government's power would be restricted.  In this sense, parliamentary sovereignty might remain in principle without being fully operable in practise.  

What do you think?

`If it ain't broke, don't fix it” as the saying goes - should this apply to the UK Constitution?

Other countries, e.g. Canada, have made the transition from an unwritten to a written constitution so it is not beyond the realms of possibility. Should the British Government be considering whether to start this process?

Should other checks on Parliamentary sovereignty be imposed, e.g. by requiring a two-thirds parliamentary majority or a referendum to endorse constitutional amendments?



Wyszukiwarka

Podobne podstrony:
The Civil List class discussion
Monarchy vs Republic class discussion
Język angielski Political System In The UK
Politically neutral or not class discussion
HANDOUT Police in the UK
The?t of Settlement class discussion
Commonwealth class discussion
HANDOUT Local Press in the UK
immigration in the uk
Erosion of Secular Spaces in the UK
COMPANIES in the UK short
HANDOUT Churches in the UK
The political system in the UK loskominos
Migration of Poles to the UK major project
50 popular female names in the uk ev1
Education Education in the UK and the USA (tłumaczenie)
Education Education in the UK and the USA (122)
LECTURE 7 Religion in the UK
Robert A Dahl How Democratic is the American Constitution (2001)

więcej podobnych podstron