Constitutional Reform Flashcards
When was there significant pressure for constitutional reform and why?
in the 1990s
- demand for modernisation
- conservative rule of 1978/97 refused to undertake constitutional reforms so therefore pressure for change built up
House of Lords reform under Labour
- removal of most hereditary peers
- giving the Lords a more ‘modern appearance;
- no political party now dominants the Lords
Electoral Reform under Labour
- various forms of proportional representation introduced (for the scottish parliament, welsh assembly, northern ireland assembly and european parliament)
- it was concluded that Labour had no interest in changing arrangements for westminster
Devolution under Labour
- devolved bodies created for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
- demand for devolution in wales always weaker
- welsh assembly did not gain comparable powers to those of the scottish parliament
Human Rights Act under Labour
right to fair trial / freedom from slavery / respect for privacy etc
-judges could strike down laws that are incompatible with it
What HRA example highlights the unentrenched nature of the act?
introduction of control orders in 2005
allowing authorities to limit the freedom of movement of certain individuals
Creation of the Supreme Court under Labour
- highest court of appeal in the UK for civil cases
- highest court of appeal in the UK for criminal cases (except from Scotland)
- an example of the separation of powers
Blair’s Constitutional Reforms
- Human Rights Act 1998
- Northern Ireland Assembly 1998
- Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly 1999
- Greater London Assembly and Mayor 2000
- Referendums held to confirm new devolved bodies
- PR electoral system used for each assembly
- Removal of all but 92 hereditary peers in Lord 2000
What are the criticisms of Blair’s reforms?
- enthusiasm for constitutional reforms quickly started to fade
- reforms were half hearted and not taken seriously
- reforms reshaped existing constitutional arrangements
- they did not address deeper problems such as the electoral system and the house of lords
Changes to Devolution under the Coalition
Further Devolution to Wales - received direct law making power in all 20 policy areas that they had been devolved in
Further Devolution to Scotland - received more powers under the 2012 Scotland Act e.g. borrowing powers, right to set its own rate of income tax, control over landfill tax and stamp duty
Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011
- ended the prime ministers historic power to choose the date of a general election
- must be elected in five year intervals
- earlier contest can be held either:
if 2/3 of MPs vote for one
OR
if a PM loses a vote of no confidence and fails to form a new gov within 14 day period
Reform to House of Commons under the Coalition
- chairs of House of Commons select committees were to be chosen by MPs rather than by party leaders
- backbench business committee created who choose topics for debate
Example of backbench business committee proposing debates
proposal of e-petitions or triggering the debate surrounding justice for those affected in the 1989 Hillsborough Disaster
How did attitudes towards constitutional reform change under the coalition?
- LibDems demanded constitutional reform as part of agreeing to the coalition
- the reforms were an attempt to restore public confidence in politics at a time of public disillusionment
- both LibDem and Conservatives criticised the outgoing Labour government for failing to complete its reform programme
How and why did the plans for a mainly elected House of Lords fail under the coalition?
91 backbench Conservative MPs rebelled
it failed because of party disagreement
How did the LibDems react to the Tory rebellion for a mainly elected House of Lords?
- LibDems blocked the implementation of new legislation that would reduce the number of MPs from 650 to 600
- the effect would have been to produce smaller number of constituencies that were more equal in size
- this would mean that all votes would have more of an equal value across the country
What did Labour claim the reduce of MPs from 650 to 600 was a form of?
gerrymandering as it favoured the conservatives
How and why did electoral reform fail under the coalition?
- failed to win a referendum
- 2011 AV Referendum rejected by 68%
- major disappointment for LibDems as this was their central aim
- intially wanted STV but opted for AV under pressure from conservatives
How and why did a ‘British Bill of Rights’ proposed by the conservatives fail under the coalition?
- LibDems were major supporters of HRA
- no agreement could be found between the two parties
When was the ‘British Bill of Rights’ pledged to be revisited?
in the Conservative manifesto at the 2015 General Election
but it did not appear in May’s first Queen’s Speech
Brexit now dominated the political agenda
What has been the biggest constitutional reform since 2015?
Brexit
this means that UK is free to set its own trade policy and can negotiate deals with other countries such as US, Australia and New Zealand (countries that currently do not have free trade deals with the EU)
How can we argue that the withdrawal from the EU has regained parliamentary sovereignty?
- it coverts EU legislation into statute law
- this means that it can be amended or replaced by parliament
- governments are free to make treaties/trade agreements with countries outside the EU
- parliamentary law is now supreme rather than EU law which was the case when Britain was apart of the EU
What did the White Paper published on 2nd February 2017 say about the decision to leave the EU?
it was titled ‘Taking control of our own laws’
“the sovereignty of Parliament is a fundamental principle of the UK constitution”
“whilst parliament has remained sovereign throughout our membership of the EU, it has not always felt like that”
How can we argue that parliament has not regained sovereignty after leaving the EU?
- it never lost sovereignty to the EU but instead it was a part of a pooled sovereignty
- the UK had influence over laws across the EU making Parliament more powerful and influential
- it was always possible to leave so it never lost its sovereignty
Scotland Act 2016
after the 2014 Scottish Referendum the government fulfilled a promise to transfer more powers to Scotland (Dev Max)
Scotland had greater financial independence, new welfare powers and more legislative powers
English Votes for English Laws
Debates for further devolution
- England is the most prosperous and heavily populated part of the uK yet is the only one without a devolved body
- the devolution settlement is uneven so a federal solution would promote greater uniformity and equality between different parts of the UK
- areas which have strong regional identity such as Cornwall and Devon could be a basis for regional assemblies
Debate for further reform of EVEL
EVEL makes Scottish MPs second class representatives at Westminster, weakening unity of the UK and does not really solve the West Lothian question
Debates against a federal solution in the UK
- England’s size and wealth would mean it would dominate a federal structure
- a separate English executive could clash with the UK Gov at Westminster over the handling of domestic English issues
Debates against further devolution in the UK
- EVEL may have resolved the WLQ
- most English people don’t make a logical distinction between England and Britain as a whole, and see Westminster as ‘their’ parliament
- defeat of Blair’s proposals in 2004 suggests there isn’t a strong enough sense of identity across the UK to make regional assemblies viable
Arguments against further Electoral Reform
- rejection of AV in 2011 referendum suggests there is no public appetite for the extension of reform to Westminster
- FPTP usually delivers strong governments with a clear mandate
- FPTP preserves the valuable link between MPs and their constituencies
Arguments for further Electoral Reform
- the under representation of smaller parties with the current system
- the way in which FPTP produces a government with a majority of seats but a minority of votes
Arguments for further reform to the House of Lords
- not representative of wider public (no enough women or ethnic minorities)
- lacks democratic legitimacy
- cannot effectively fulfil its purpose of scrutiny
- lacks authority and power to do its job as a revising chamber due to its lack of democratic legitimacy
Arguments against further reform to the House of Lords
- greater assertiveness in holding the government to account as the government is regularly defeated by a more assertive Lords
- membership of Lords has become more representative due to HoL Appointments Commission
- an elected Lords would mirror the Commons becoming a house dominated by professional politicians and reducing the range of expertise currently available
House of Lords Appointments Commission
vets all nominees for life peers including those nominated by party leaders
Debates for further reform to the Human Rights Act
- its unentrenched nature means the government can modify it in any way it likes e.g. control orders 2005
- it needs to be strengthened on the ground that governments have the power to take away important liberties by a simple majority vote in parliament
- Conservative critics would like to see the act replaced with a British Bill of Rights which could make the UK SC the final judge of citizens rights
Arguments against further reform to the HRA
provides protection of citizens rights without threatening parliamentary sovereignty
How may we argue that no further constitutional reform is needed?
- current settlement protects the rights of citizens and recognises the desire for autonomy in the component parts of the UK
- simultaneously enables the election of strong governments who are able to act in the national interest
- there is a lack of clear agreement on the form that any further change should take
How is the UK out of step with most other Western democracies and therefore needs reform ?
in having an unelected upper house and having a voting system that imperfectly reflects the preferences of the electorate
in many respects we can argue the current settlement is incomplete and illogical
