Evaluate The View That New Labourʼs Constitutional Reforms Had A Positive And Significant Impact On The UK Constitution.

Question 1

P1: Agree HoL

Answer 1

1.The House of Lords Act 1999 removed all but 92 hereditary peers. This significantly undermined the undemocratic, hereditary nature of the chamber.It removed the Conservative Party’s built-in majority in the Lords.No party can dominate, leading to a more balanced and independent chamber.
2. The Lords have been more willing to defeat the government.Blair only lost 4 votes in the Commons but was defeated 353 times in the Lords.In 2001, the Lords defeated Blair’s anti-terror bill 10 times, forcing the removal of the proposed crime of “incitement to religious hatred.”
3. Many life peers are former politicians (e.g. Lord Andrew Adonis, ex-Transport Secretary) who bring political experience. James Timpson, as CEO of Timpson Group, pioneered hiring ex-offenders to reduce reoffending. Brings unique expertise to prison reform and rehabilitation policy.

Question 2

P1: Disagree HoL

Answer 2

1. The HoL Remains Unelected and Undemocratic. Although the 1999 Act removed most hereditary peers, 92 hereditary peers remain.The second stage of reform — creating an elected second chamber — never happened.
2. Labour MPs lost interest after reducing Conservative dominance and couldn’t agree on a replacement model.The Lords remains unelected, maintaining a key undemocratic element in the constitution.
3. House of Commons is still dominant in the legislative process.Governments with large majorities can still pass laws easily, even in the face of Lords opposition. The House of Lords has limited power — it cannot block financial bills and can only delay other bills for one year.
   Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 confirm this imbalance.Blair used the Parliament Acts three times, including to pass the Hunting Act 2004.
   The reforms did not fundamentally alter the balance of power in Parliament.
4. Salisbury Convention Still Restricts the Lord. Lords cannot block bills that fulfil manifesto promises of the elected government.

Question 3

P2: Agree Devolution

Answer 3

1. Established Devolved Governments with Significant Powers.New Labour introduced devolution through acts like the Scotland Act 1998 and Government of Wales Act 1998.
   Scotland received the most extensive powers due to its strong nationalist movement.
2. Health, education, justice, agriculture, and most transport.Westminster retained key “reserved” powers (e.g. defence, foreign policy, macroeconomic policy).
3. Devolved institutions brought decision-making closer to the people, improving democratic representation.Scotland’s more left-leaning population has elected left-wing SNP governments.Free prescriptions, Free university tuition and A higher top rate of income tax than in England
4. In devolved policy areas, the Scottish Parliament and other devolved governments can legislate independently. A shift from a unitary state to a quasi-federal structure.
   Significant constitutional development: Westminster no longer solely dictates domestic policy across the UK.

Question 4

P2: Disagree Devolution

Answer 4

1. Devolution was not applied equally across the UK, which undermines the idea of equal citizenship.Scotland and Northern Ireland received far more powers than Wales.
   Scotland: full control over key services (policing, justice, education, etc.).Wales: only administrative devolution initially; no legislative powers or First Minister.Reforms after 2010 (under Conservatives) were needed to expand Welsh powers
2. No English Parliament or proper English representation was introduced.Created a democratic deficit for England.No effective outlet for English identity or regional demands.
3. Rise in Tensions and Independence Movements. Devolution failed to prevent rising nationalism, especially in Scotland.The SNP came to power in 2007 and almost secured independence in the 2014 referendum.
   Support for Scottish independence has since increased.
4. The West Lothian Question. Highlights a constitutional imbalance:Scottish MPs can vote on England-only matters in Westminster. English MPs cannot vote on devolved matters in Scotland.This creates frustration in England and undermines the legitimacy of UK-wide decisions.

Question 5

P3: Agree HRA

Answer 5

1. HRA 1998 incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law (effective from 2000).Citizens no longer need to go to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg — rights can now be protected in UK courts.
2. Protected rights include:Right to life, fair trial, privacy and family life and Freedom from torture and discrimination
3. Courts can issue “declarations of incompatibility” for laws that breach the HRA.
   Though this doesn’t invalidate the law, Parliament usually responds by amending it.
   A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2004). Anti-terrorism legislation was found incompatible with Articles 5 & 14 (detention of non-UK suspects).Led to replacement with the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005.
4. HRA empowers the judiciary to review and challenge laws.While Parliament remains sovereign, the Act creates real legal and political pressure to uphold human rights.

Question 6

P3: Disagree HRA

Answer 6

1. The HRA is not entrenched; it can be repealed or overridden by a simple Act of Parliament.Courts can only declare laws incompatible but cannot strike them down.
   The Illegal Migration Bill (2023) had a section 19 note admitting likely incompatibility with the HRA and international law, yet proceeded regardless.
2. The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024: Allowed deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda, overriding rights under the HRA and international law.
   Ministers can ignore emergency rulings from the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
3. Right-wing critics argue the HRA protects illegal migrants and terror suspects at the expense of public safety and UK citizens.
   Abu Qatada, a radical cleric, delayed deportation for 8 years citing HRA protections against evidence obtained by torture.
   Similarly, legal challenges under the HRA have blocked some deportations of illegal immigrants to Rwanda.