UK 25 markers
The sources and nature of the constitution
The UK does not need a codified constitution.’ Analyse and evaluate this
statement
‘The UK constitution operates with clarity and is effective.’ Analyse and evaluate
this statement.
‘Statute law is the best defender of citizens’ rights in the UK.’ Analyse and
evaluate this statement.
‘UK citizens are protected despite a flexible constitution.’ Analyse and evaluate
this state
Intro:
- The UK lacks a codified constitution such as the US
# instead, sources of constitution can be found through statute law,
common law and conventions
- On one hand, codified constitutions would allow for greater entrenchment
# better protection of rights
# this could give judges power to interpret constitution of make decisions
that protect citizens
- On the other hand, codified constitutions are rigid and difficult to change,
compared to flexible and adapting nature of current system
P1
Point (agree):
- The UK does not a codified constitution as it has proven to be flexible and
adaptable due to unwritten nature
# the principles of a constitution must reflect wider society
Must be able to change over time, in order to keep up with
everchanging nature of society
# uncodified means it can be easily updated to meet modern needs
In 1998, the Scotland Act was passed, granting primary and secondary
legislative power to Scottish parliament after greater demand for
independence
# highlights flexibility
- The constitution is highly responsive to social and political pressure
2013 Marriage Act legalising same sex marriage
# there is no need for a codified constitution as current system is capable
to adapting to problems
- Unsuccessful reforms to HRA
2022 Bill of Rights bill (also mocked as the removal of rights bill)
# lowered level of protection given to human rights
Synoptic Link – Links to organic conservative view of constitution championed by
Burke
Link:
- Therefore, the UK does not need a codified constitution because the
unwritten nature allows it to be flexible and change over time
# codified constitution is rigid and fixed, unable to adapt to current times
Less representative
The sources and nature of the constitution
The UK does not need a codified constitution.’ Analyse and evaluate this
statement
‘The UK constitution operates with clarity and is effective.’ Analyse and evaluate
this statement.
‘Statute law is the best defender of citizens’ rights in the UK.’ Analyse and
evaluate this statement.
‘UK citizens are protected despite a flexible constitution.’ Analyse and evaluate
this state
Intro:
- The UK lacks a codified constitution such as the US
# instead, sources of constitution can be found through statute law,
common law and conventions
- On one hand, codified constitutions would allow for greater entrenchment
# better protection of rights
# this could give judges power to interpret constitution of make decisions
that protect citizens
- On the other hand, codified constitutions are rigid and difficult to change,
compared to flexible and adapting nature of current system
P1
Point (agree):
- The UK does not a codified constitution as it has proven to be flexible and
adaptable due to unwritten nature
# the principles of a constitution must reflect wider society
Must be able to change over time, in order to keep up with
everchanging nature of society
# uncodified means it can be easily updated to meet modern needs
In 1998, the Scotland Act was passed, granting primary and secondary
legislative power to Scottish parliament after greater demand for
independence
# highlights flexibility
- The constitution is highly responsive to social and political pressure
2013 Marriage Act legalising same sex marriage
# there is no need for a codified constitution as current system is capable
to adapting to problems
- Unsuccessful reforms to HRA
2022 Bill of Rights bill (also mocked as the removal of rights bill)
# lowered level of protection given to human rights
Synoptic Link – Links to organic conservative view of constitution championed by
Burke
Link:
- Therefore, the UK does not need a codified constitution because the
unwritten nature allows it to be flexible and change over time
# codified constitution is rigid and fixed, unable to adapt to current times
Less representative
