issues and debates about more recent constitutional documents Flashcards
impact of Tony Blair:
-promised the biggest change to democracy ever proposed in 1997
-aims were to modernise political institutions, have greater democracy, greater decentralisation and greater protection of rights
-these would all be constitutional change
impact of David Cameron:
-he made more modest changes, but still reformed the constitution
-he approved same sex marriages and civil partnerships
modernisation of political institutions: House of Lords
-house of lords act 1999:
-it removed all but 92 hereditary peers from the house of lords, and allowed for the introduction of more life peers (who were appointed for their expertise)
-house of lords act 2014:
-gave existing peers the right to resign and allowed the removal of peers for serious crimes or not attending
-in contrast to the commons, many independents sit in the house of lords
modernisation of political institutions: Constitutional reform act
-2005
-separation of powers - created a separate supreme court, replacing the house of lords as the highest court in the UK
-changed the role of the lord chancellor from being the head of the judiciary to being a political appointment
-created greater independence for the judiciary
modernisation of political institutions: greater democracy
-referendums (scotland and wales) act 1997
-police reform and social responsibility act 2011
-fixed term parliament act - required the PM to secure the support of 2/3rds of MPs to be able to call an early general election. this allowed our elected representatives to voice the opinion of their constituents in parliament
modernisation of political institutions: human rights act
-1998
-it incorporated the european convention on human rights into UK law
-enables UK courts to take the ECHR into account when judging cases involving human rights
-the act makes it unlawful for a public body to act incompatibly with ECHR rights
-it lets you defend your rights in UK courts and compels public organisations yo treat everybody with fairness
-weakness = gov can change or get rid of it, and other statutues coud clash with it
-strength = citizens can now take cases to the UK court instead of having to go to the EU court, and you can also now take government to court with this act
evaluating constitutional reforms post 1997: modernisation of political institutions
-successes: HoL is smaller, more diverse and less cons. dominated. it’s easier to remove peers. improved separation of powers, gender equality in the royal family.
-failures: HoL reform is unfinished (second chamber). too much power is now in the hands of a small number of judges who are unelected and unaccountable.
evaluating constitutional reforms post 1997: democratisation
-successes: greater autonomy in some large cities (mayors). direct election of police commissioners. more referendums for major changes e.g Brexit
-failures: not all regions have a mayor. referendums have low turnout.
evaluating constitutional reforms post 1997: human rights
-successes: HRA enables citizens to take human rights issues directly to UK courts. supreme court ensures all legislation is made in accordance with HRA. other laws introduced to protect human rights e.g. the freedom of information act
-failures: HRA can be removed or changed especially now the UK has left the EU. the supreme court is becoming more politicised in its decision making
should the british constitution be codified? YES
-would protect human rights as it can’t be easily altered to removed them
-currently it’s difficult to know what rights we have
-would limit extremism as those with extremist views would be less likely to change the system
should the british constitution be codified? NO
-entrenched constitutions are hard to change and therefore difficult to modernise and adapt over time
-there is significant time and cost to change it
-flexibility allows law to be changed in emergencies e.g. terrorism act, covid rules
How well does the constitution defend citizen’s rights? WELL
-the constitution values civil liberties, and there is formal support of human rights by the government
-current legislation provides a strong legal protection for core rights via the HRA and ECHR mechanisms
-the UK has a relatively strong institutional frame work for protecting rights, which extends beyond the courts e.g. the equalities and human rights commission
-large numbers of people and pressure groups use the courts to assert their rights and demand access to information
How well does the constitution defend citizen’s rights? NOT WELL
-there is little political consensus between parties as to the actual substance of human rights guarantees, and the existing framework of UK legal rights protection is vunrable to political attack
-brexit is removing the safety net for certain non-discrimination, migrant and labour rights previously provided by EU law
-UK governments have been repeatedly able to pass legislation diluting rights protection
-social and economic rights are seen by some as poorly established and weakly protected
-international human rights law has had a very limited impact in practice on government policy
-no rights are entrenched or inalienable
-because the constitution is uncodified, people are unaware of their rights
