Cases for and against codified UK constitution

Question 1

Ministers, Civil servants and Parliamentarians.

Answer 1

Pro codification.

Allows everyone to know the rules that governed these people and their institutions - making it easier.

Question 2

Rights

Answer 2

Pro codification.

Codification allows people to understand and recognise their rights, like the citizens of the USA

Question 3

Accessibility

Answer 3

Pro codification.

Currently only politicians access the “full” UK constitution - making it codified would make it available for the public.

Question 4

Reform

Answer 4

Pro codification.

Governing parties can easily push measures onto the statute book to benefit themselves. Having.a codified constitution would set procedures to prevent this ability.

Question 5

History of uncodified constitution

Answer 5

Against codification.

If it ain’t broke don’t fix it - parliament has never relied on a single codified document in its history.

Question 6

Understanding conventions

Answer 6

Pro codification

Codification would provide greater clarity on what is and what is not constitutional. This is especially true with conventions, which are not written down and understood poorly.

Question 7

Flexibility

Answer 7

Against codification.

Our current constitution allows for adaption and flexibility.
This was true with the fixed term parliament act of 2011.

Question 8

Judiciary

Answer 8

Against codification.

This would give judges too much power, as they would be able to decide if something is unconstitutional, like they do in USA. This would most likely politicise the supreme court.

Question 9

Popularity of codification / constitution change in general.

Answer 9

Against codification.

There is a lack of popular demand for codification, or any major constitutional change. Case in point 2011 AV referendum, with only 42%. turnout, and 68% against.