Evaluate The View That Constitutional Reforms Introduced Since 2010 Have Had A Significant Impact On The UK Constitution.

Introduction

Paragraph Focus

• Para 1 = Brexit

• Para 2 = Further Devolution

• Para 3 = Parliamentary Reforms

Para 1 = Weaker Argument - No Significant Impact

• it can be argued that Brexit has had a limited impact as the EU only had control over a limited number of areas of policy .

• The EU mostly controlled trade, competition policy and customs and tariffs

• In all other areas, however, the UK Parliament was already sovereign when a member of the EU: including most taxation, national defence and education

• It can therefore be argued that Brexit hasn’t had a significant impact on the constitution, as Parliament was largely sovereign when the UK was a member of the EU

Para 1 = Stronger Argument - Had a Significant Impact

• Brexit had a most significant change to the UK constitution due to the fact that it resulted in Parliament regaining significant sovereignty

• When Britain was a member of the EU, the UK accepted the supremacy of EU Law over laws passed by Parliament and therefore the sovereignty of EU law

• Now that the UK has left the EU, there is no longer a higher court that can strike down laws passed by the UK Parliament.

• This means that the sovereignty of parliament, a key cornerstone of the UK’s constitution, has been regained.

• Parliament can now legislate on almost any area of policy it wants to, rather than having to draft legislation that is in line with EU law.

• A good example is the Illegal Migration Bill introduced by the government in March 2023

Para 2 = Weaker Argument - No Significant Impact

• it can be argued that these reforms had a minor impact, as the true change to the UK Constitution through devolution had already occurred.

• Though these reforms did increase the powers of the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments, these increases can be seen as marginal.

• The true point of constitutional change was introduced by New Labour in the late 1990s.

• This was when significant power was devolved away from the UK Parliament for the first time.

• Reforms since then only build on this

Para 2 = Stronger Argument - Had a Significant Impact

• Following a 2011 referendum in which 64% voted in favour, Wales gained primary legislative control over devolved areas

• Following the referendum, the coalition government set up the Silk Commission to consider even further devolution,

• this lead to the 2014 Government of Wales Act which renamed the Welsh executive the Welsh government and also gave it control over landfill tax & stamp duty

• This can be seen as significant reform to the constitution as it resulted in a further decentralisation of power and sovereignty away from the UK Parliament

Para 3 = Weaker Argument - No Significant Impact

• On the other hand, it can be argued that all three of these parliamentary reforms had a limited impact on the UK Constitution.

• English Votes For English Laws can be argued to have had a limited impact on the UK Constitution.

• It failed to allow English MPs to make their own laws, failed to provide a viable expression for English identity and simply added unnecessary complications to the legislative process.

• As a result, it was scrapped by Johnson government in July 2021.

• The Recall of MPs Act can be seen as limited as it only introduces an element of direct democracy and accountability for MPs who have broken the law or been suspended from Parliament, rather than for all MPs.

Para 3 = Stronger Argument - Had a Significant Impact

• The Fixed Term Parliaments Act, introduced by the coalition government in 2011

• it removed the power of the Prime Minister to call a snap election when it suited them, by requiring ⅔ of Parliament to support a snap election before it was called.

• It performed its role during the coalition government, which lasted the whole 5 years.

• It can be seen as a significant constitutional changes as it removed the prerogative power of the Prime Minister to call a snap election, therefore significantly limiting the power of the PM