debates on constitutional reform

successful reforms since 1997

• Devolution

  • Devolution has been successful in improving the independence of Scotland and Wales and helped to ensure peace in NI

  • Regional devolution in England has led to power being decentralised

• Reform of the judicial system

  • 2005 Constitutional Reform Act established the Supreme Court which is independent and politically-neutral

• Electoral reform

  • Proportional representation is used in elections in devolved assemblies, improving the representation of voters

failed reforms since 1997

• Fixed term elections

  • The 2011 Fixed Term Elections Act was repealed in 2022, returning the prerogative power of calling elections to the PM and executive

• Electoral reform

  • General elections still use the FTFP system which results in unrepresentative outcomes

• House of Lords

  • The House of Lords still remains unelected, making it undemocratic

  • It is still not socially representative based on race, gender and religion

  • The House still has 92 hereditary peers

FOR further devolution to england

• Further devolution would improve accountability by bringing the government closer to people and communities

• More devolution would prevent significant differences in living standards between different parts of the UK

• Devolution may increase political participation

• Having devolved government would ensure regional problems are better addressed

AGAINST further devolution to England

• Devolution would increase divisions in English society by promoting disunity

• Further devolution could result in too many elections taking place which causes voter apathy

• There is not significant demand for further devolution in England

FOR a codified constitution

• A codified constitution provides a stronger protection of human rights

  • The HRA’s adoption of the ECHR is an example of human rights being codified but it still remains weak as Parliament can override it

• A codified constitution is more clear, improving understanding and public awareness of the constitution in the UK

• A codified constitution would ensure that written checks and balances would be in place to limit the power of the executive

• Under a codified constitution, parliament would have clear powers to control the executive

AGAINST a codified constitution

• Uncodified constitutions allows for a strong government that can carry out actions and deal with issues decisively

• Uncodified constitutions are flexible

  • Changing a written constitution would be a difficult process

  • The UK already has many unwritten conventions, such as prerogative powers, which would require writing down into any codified constitution

  • The uncodified nature of the constitution allowed the development of a new set of principles that allowed for a coalition government

• Codified constitutions politicise the judiciary

  • A codified constitution could lead the Supreme Court to have to deal with disputes over the meaning of the Constitution, meaning the SC would become involved in political issues despite not being elected