The last few years has been an era in which the British constitution has been severely tested. Most notably, the decision of the Brexit referendum on 23 June 2016 to leave the European Union inevitably created constitutional problems, as the United Kingdom sought to extricate itself from the EU and its supranational legal arrangements that applied to all member states, and had done so to the UK since 1 January 1973 when it became an EU member. The resulting upheaval included an attempt by the then Government in 2016, with Boris Johnson as Prime Minister, to seek to withdraw from the EU without obtaining Parliamentary approval. In the resulting case of R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, the Supreme Court declared such a step to be unconstitutional. More recently, the governments of both Boris Johnson and Liz Truss threatened to breach international law in reneging on a previous agreement with the EU in respect of the constitutional status of Northern Ireland.
Events such as these have led to criticisms of the British constitution, including the following: “Britain’s ramshackle constitution allows plenty of scope for such shenanigans". Whereas every other Western democracy has codified its system of government, Britain’s constitution is a mish-mash of laws and conventions, customs and courtesies. Britain sees no need for the legalistic or (worse) European idea of writing down its constitution in one place.” (Britain’s good-chap model of government is coming apart: The Economist December 2018)
In examining such an assertion, however, the first step is to gain a clear understanding of the key features of what is undoubtedly a ‘quirky’ constitution, which differs substantially from that of most other countries. This will provide the basis to consider the claim that it is ‘ramshackle’ and, consequently, in need of reform. Alternatively, there is the argument that the constitution and its informal arrangements work well, in providing flexibility that allows for practical solutions to constitutional issues without major political upheaval. The aim is, therefore, to consider some key elements of the constitution of the United Kingdom, with each of the following constituting a theme for a SIG session
1) The House of Lords - ‘Fit for purpose’ or ‘In need of reform’?
2) ‘Evolutionary not revolutionary’: the impact of the turbulent 17th century on the development of the constitution
3) Westminster Style Government: Do we do things better than the USA? Is separation of powers all it is claimed to be?
4) Sovereignty of Parliament: A need for reform? “ Britain’s unwritten constitution has proven singularly inadequate to the challenges of the 21st century…” (Prospect Robert Saunders. August 2021). Should an entrenched written constitution be introduced or would this just create problems such as the second amendment of the US constitution’s ‘right to bear arms’ and gun control?
5) The rule of law and its practical application in the UK constitution.
6) The Human Rights Act 1998: Would a British Bill of Rights be better?
The session on Thursday, 27 June was entitled The Constitution and the General Election. This session explored some important, yet little known, elements of the British Constitution that relate to General Elections, including the one held on 4 July. The session also explored some possible reforms to the constitution that might be implemented by a forthcoming Government. A set of PowerPoint slides that was used during the session can be viewed from this link.
The following documents have been considered at past meetings of the SIG
"Making Sense of the British Constitution"
House of Lords - An Introduction
You may also be interested in the slides used in the 2024 Spring Term session with the title: Does Prison Work, the slides used on 19th September with the title "House of Lords Reform" and the slides used on 7th November with the title "Devolution".
