Debates on Constitutional Reform
Context
The UK has a highly flexible, uncodified constitution (it isn't written in a single document and can
be changed by a simple Act of Parliament)
Despite its flexibility, there are several out of date, undemocratic elements and institutions and
protection of rights are not, and cannot, be properly entrenched
Liberals have long campaigned for change and many want a new entrenched constitution
Some changes have been brought in by governments since 1997
Arguments for codification are often based on the risk of democracy and fear of rights being
removed under the current system (though opponents suggest this is far-fetched)
Conservative ideology suggests that an uncodified, flexible constitution offers the best
opportunity to change and preserve going forward
Arguments for a Codified Constitution Arguments against a Codified Constitution
Rights would be safeguarded as they Note: Many of the counter arguments are
can’t be arbitrarily removed by practical ones
government (example, Conservative
Manifesto pledge) There is no agreement of how a codified
Enshrined rights would make people constitution would be created or who
clearer and more educated on their rights would write it
It’s best to have protection against future The UK has not had a revolution or
government action than to assume they similar which would usually precede the
won’t restrict people’s rights creation of a new constitution
No clear mechanism for drafting,
It would clarify what is and isn’t debating and ratifying a constitution
‘constitutional’
The UK public are often left unsure over No census as to what it would contain
what the government and key individuals Political argument on the issue would
can and cannot do, and clarification likely lead to vastly different proposals
would allow key figures to be held and would possibly cease to agree a
accountable compromise unless all those deciding
Examples include Johnson’s proroguing of were like-minded (which would be biased
parliament, and the role of Bercow as and undemocratic)
speaker during the BREXIT debates in What should not be a party-political issue
parliament (2016-19) would inevitably become one
Its creation would likely contain
Codification could provide clear compromise and embed attitudes of the
separation and limits to the powers of current time, despite our fluid socio-
institutions economic climate
The UK currently has weak separation of The constitution would have to walk a
powers with the executive generally fine line between being too specific as to
Context
The UK has a highly flexible, uncodified constitution (it isn't written in a single document and can
be changed by a simple Act of Parliament)
Despite its flexibility, there are several out of date, undemocratic elements and institutions and
protection of rights are not, and cannot, be properly entrenched
Liberals have long campaigned for change and many want a new entrenched constitution
Some changes have been brought in by governments since 1997
Arguments for codification are often based on the risk of democracy and fear of rights being
removed under the current system (though opponents suggest this is far-fetched)
Conservative ideology suggests that an uncodified, flexible constitution offers the best
opportunity to change and preserve going forward
Arguments for a Codified Constitution Arguments against a Codified Constitution
Rights would be safeguarded as they Note: Many of the counter arguments are
can’t be arbitrarily removed by practical ones
government (example, Conservative
Manifesto pledge) There is no agreement of how a codified
Enshrined rights would make people constitution would be created or who
clearer and more educated on their rights would write it
It’s best to have protection against future The UK has not had a revolution or
government action than to assume they similar which would usually precede the
won’t restrict people’s rights creation of a new constitution
No clear mechanism for drafting,
It would clarify what is and isn’t debating and ratifying a constitution
‘constitutional’
The UK public are often left unsure over No census as to what it would contain
what the government and key individuals Political argument on the issue would
can and cannot do, and clarification likely lead to vastly different proposals
would allow key figures to be held and would possibly cease to agree a
accountable compromise unless all those deciding
Examples include Johnson’s proroguing of were like-minded (which would be biased
parliament, and the role of Bercow as and undemocratic)
speaker during the BREXIT debates in What should not be a party-political issue
parliament (2016-19) would inevitably become one
Its creation would likely contain
Codification could provide clear compromise and embed attitudes of the
separation and limits to the powers of current time, despite our fluid socio-
institutions economic climate
The UK currently has weak separation of The constitution would have to walk a
powers with the executive generally fine line between being too specific as to
