Codification and changes to constitution since 1997 Flashcards
(28 cards)
Why did New Labour adopt policies of constitutional reform
-Became more prominent in the late 20th century due to growing popularity of Lib Dems and Labour leader John Smith.
-Growth in support for nationalist movements created pressure for devolution
-New Labour sought the appearance of modern party seeking radical change
4 Key principles of New Labours Constitutional Reform Programme
-Democratisation, reforming the undemocratic features of the UK constitution and extending democracy
-Decentralization, devolution
-Restoration of Rights, bringing Britain in line with the rest of Europe
-Modernization, reforming both the Commons and Lords to improve the effectiveness of Parliament
Why New Labour Sought to reform the House of Lords
-Majority of peers were ‘hereditary peers’ who were there because they came from aristocratic families
-Unelected and therefore seen as undemocratic
-Strong COnservative Majority
New Labour’s plan to reform the House of Lords
-Stage 1, would remove all hereditary peers
-Stage 2, would replace the House of Lords with a new second chamber
How New Labour’s Lords reform turned out in practice
Stage 1 carried out in 1999 House of Lords Act, which removed the vast majority of hereditary peers. 92 peers remained as a compromise.
-2000 onwards, House of Lords Appointment Commission began to nominate ‘life peers’.
-Stage 2 was meant to follow, but never did as many Labour MPs felt that the key problems had been dealt with, and there was a lack of agreement on what the new chamber should look like
Reforms positive and significant
-Undermined the hereditary basis of Lords, removed in-built Conservative majority
-New ‘life peers’ made the Lords more professional and significant
Reforms limited
-Failed at ‘stage 2’, lords still undemocratic
-There are still 92 hereditary peers and 26 bishops
-Ex PMs still able to make appointments to the Lords
Arguments for lords being replace dwith an elected second chamber
-Fundamentally undemocratic, should be based on popular consent
-Embolden second chamber and result in more effective scrutiny of government legislation
-Could be elected using PR, to challenge Commons
Arguments against elected second chamber
-Second chamber could claim democratic legitimacy and cause gridlock in parliament
-Appointment can be seen as an advantage, life peers have expertise, appointments by ex pms could be fixed without resorting to elected chamber
-Would likely be more concerned with party politics than anything else, e.g. Australia and America
Keir Starmer’s proposed house of lords reforms
-2022, announced plans to abolish the Lords and replace it with a democratically elected second chamber
-Removing politicians’ power to make appointments to the Lords and replacing it with an elected chamber that represents the UKs nations and regions
-Criticized Tory governments for handing peerages to ‘lackeys and donors’, such as Johnson’s friend Evgeny Lebedev and David Harding
HRA 1998
Introduced the ECHR into UK law`
HRA positive and significant
-UK has developed a ‘rights-based culture’, as legislation must be compliant with the act, as well as judicial review
-Joint Committee on Human Rights in Parliament ensures bills are compatible with HRA.
HRA reforms limited
-Gives unelected judges too much power
-Not entrenched, could still be repealed by an act of parliament
-E.g. Illegal Migration Bill introduced in 2023 included a section 19 note stating that the government would proceed with the bill regardless of incompatibility with HRA
Potential Further Reforms
-Conservative Party has backed replaced HRA with British Bill of Rights, which would make it easier to deport foreign criminals
-Would make the Supreme Court the final court of appeal, rather than ECHR
How were electoral reforms introduced
-AMS introduced for Welsh Assembly and Scottish Parliament
-STV introduced for Northern Ireland Assembly
Electoral reform positive and significant
-Resulted in more proportionale election results and fairer representation for small parties
Electoral reform limited
-FPTP in UK parliament wasnt changed
-Labour had great success under FPTP, resistant to change a system that granted them signficant majorities
How was devolution introduced
Following referendums 1997-1998, devolved bodies were introduced in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Scottish devolution
-Gained most power
-Control over public services and most transport. ‘Service devolution.’
-Scotland has gained more powers, including significant fiscal and constitutional powers
Wales Devolution
-Far fewer powers, low democratic mandate from referendum
-Granted more powers, ‘service devolution’
Northern Ireland Devolution
-1998 Good Friday Agreement
-Executive must be led by a first minister and deputy first minister
Devolution positive and significant
-Created governments clsoer to the people
-Reduced sovereignty of UK parliament
-Restored peace in Northern Ireland
Devolution reforms limited
-At first, Wales received limited legislative powers
-Arguably increased tensions, hasn’t been able to stop a growing Scottish independence movement.
West Lothian question
-Question of whether Scottish, Northern Irish and Welsh MPs who sit in the House of Commons should be able to vote in matters concerning only England, when English MPs can’t do the same
-English devolution or an English parliament could solve this.
