1.4 - Debates on Further Reform

Question 1

Should reforms since 1997 be taken further - Reform of the judiciary - Successes of current reform of the judiciary

Answer 1

• Possibly the biggest success of reform in general
• SC is now established and seen as genuinely independent of gov – key to HR protection
• Courts are now also able to keep the other branches of gov in check

Question 2

Should reforms since 1997 be taken further - Issues with judiciary today and what it would take to resolve these?

Answer 2

• However, powers of the court still limited by P sovereignty
• Resolving this would mean introducing a codified constitution which is highly unlikely and would shake up British politics too much
• Also could entrench part of the HRA to give the court greater powers but this again seems unlikely with the current Con gov

Question 3

Should reforms since 1997 be taken further - Devolution - State of devolution in the three regions and the possibility of further devolution?

Answer 3

• Devolution has proved popular in Wales and Scotland
• There have been problems with NI but devolution has been enough to keep the peace in the region for the better part of 25 years
• However, there is still a strong case for further devolution and possible independence especially from SC, though not from Westminster

Question 4

Should reforms since 1997 be taken further - House of Lords - Pros and cons of first reform?

Answer 4

• Removal of hereditary peers added greater legitimacy to the HoL
• However, the fact that the 92 hereditary peers were only a temporary compromise shows that this reform doesn’t go far enough

Question 5

Should reforms since 1997 be taken further - House of Lords - How could House of Lords reform be taken further and issues to do with legitimacy?

Answer 5

• In many ways the only way of further reform is through the establishment of a fully elected chamber, as proposed by Kier Starmer, but it remains to be seen whether this plan will actually come to fruition
• Lords scandals with the recent Tory gov and Blair administration such as various cash for peerages scandals also detract from the legitimacy of the HoL

Question 6

Debates over further reform in England - Arguments for (3)

Answer 6

• It would extend democracy and improve democratic accountability by bringing gov closer to communities
• Devolved gov could better reflect the problems to specific regions
• It would help to prevent excessive differences between living standards and the quality of life in different parts of the UK

Question 7

Debates over further reform in England - Arguments against (3)

Answer 7

• It would create a new layer of gov that would be too expensive
• It would create a need for too many elections, prompting voter apathy
• There are few signs of any great demand for such devolution

Question 8

Should the UK Constitution be changed to be entrenched and codified? - Arguments for (7)

Answer 8

• Clarify the nature of the political system to citizens, esp after changes such as devolution and HoL reform
• Introduction of a two-tiered legal system would mean constitutional laws would be more clearly identified
• Process of judicial review = more precise and transparent
• Liberals argue that it would better safeguard citizens’ rights
• Might prevent the further drift towards excessive executive power
• UK needs to clarify its relationship with the EU
• It would bring the UK in line with most other modern democracies

Question 9

Should the UK Constitution be changed to be entrenched and codified? - Arguments against (5)

Answer 9

• Uncodified constitution is flexible and can be easily amended to adapt to changing circumstances EG referendum use and HoL reform – if it was codified, constitutional changes would be difficult and time consuming – it can also respond quickly to a changing political climate
• Cons argue it is not necessary – the UK has enjoyed a stable political system without a codified constitution
• As the UK operates under a large number of unwritten conventions, especially in relation to the monarchy and prerogative powers, it would be difficult to transfer them into written form
• Lack of constitutional constraint allows executive gov to be strong and decisive
• Codified constitution would bring unelected judges into the political arena