Nature And Sources Of The UK Constitution

Question 1

What is a constitution?

What is defined within a constitution?

Answer 1

A set of rules by which politics is conducted, displaying how a country should be governed.

The various powers and responsibilities of each branch of government is defined within the constitution, alongside the rights and civil liberties of all citizens.

Question 2

What are the general features of the British constitution?
(What is the nature of the British constitution?)

Answer 2

1. The British constitution is uncodified, meaning it is not found in one single document.
2. Defined as unitary, meaning most power lies within the centre: Westminster Parliament.
3. It is characterised by parliamentary sovereignty: parliament has the supreme power over all laws in the UK and no other court can override this authority making it the highest legal authority.
4. It operates under the rule of law, meaning the prime minister and minsters must not exceed their lawful powers.

Question 3

What is the definition of uncodified and what are the positives and negatives ?

Answer 3

Definition:
The British constitution is found in a variety of sources, making it uncodified.

Negative:
- It can make it more difficult for British subjects to understand their rights and how their political system works

Positive:
- It can make it easier to adapt, for instance through acts of parliament as no complicated procedures are required to amend it.

Question 4

What is the definition of unitary and its significance?

Answer 4

Definition:
All power derives from a central government, this is opposite to USA’s Federal constitution.

Significance:
- the Westminster parliament is sovereign and very powerful
- any power given to the regions, through devolution, is delegated not transferred permanently

Question 5

What is the definition of rule of law and its significance?

If a government or government party is found to have broken their own rules or guidelines what are they deemed to have been acting ? What can this lead to ?

Answer 5

Definition:
Everyone is subject to the laws of the land / even governments and their ministers cannot break their own laws
Described by AV Dicey as one of the twin pillars for the constitution

Significance:
- identifies Britain as a modern liberal democracy
- ensures the powers of the government are limited

If a government or a government department is found to have Brocken their own rules or guidelines they are deemed to have acted ultra vires, i.e beyond the the power of the law.
- it can lead to the government having to reverse an action, for instance in 2019 Boris Johnson was found by the courts guilty for acting illegally by attempting to prorogue parliament for 5 weeks without its consent during Brexit debates.

Question 6

Definition of parliamentary sovereignty and what does it enable parliament to do? How does this contrast from the US?

How does parliamentary sovereignty allow the consititution to be flexible and adaptable, give an example of this.

How did the Lisbon treaty of 2007 represent a clear temporary limit on parliamentary sovereignty?

Answer 6

Definition:
Parliament is the supreme authority in Britain meaning its laws cannot be stuck down by any higher authority.

Parliamentary sovereignty allows parliament to alter the constitution via statue law.
- This contrasts the US, since the us has to embody constitutional sovereignty: government and legislature must follow the constitution when passing laws.

Parliamentary sovereignty means no parliament can bind is successor: hence it can be changed / reversed over time aka easy to change and adaptable.
An example of parliamentary sovereignty enabling parliament to not bind its successor is when Britain had joined the EU in 1972, and left in 2020.

• Before the uk left the European Union in January 2020, European law indirectly formed part of the British constitution, therefore laws and treaties such as the Lisbon treaty of 2007 automatically took precedence over over any laws passed by Westminster.
  This meant they were binding to Uk government, representing a clear temporary limit on parliamentary sovereignty. M

Question 7

What are the 6 sources of the British constitution?

Answer 7

1. Statute law
2. Common law
3. The royal prerogative
4. Conventions
5. Works of authority
6. International agreements

Question 8

What are international agreements, and while they are in place what does the government obliged to do?

What ruling in November 2023, serves as an example of international agreements working in the UK constitution?

Answer 8

International agreements:
The UK is a signatory to a number of international agreements, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and protocols dealing with areas such as climate change.
- While these are in place, the government is obliged to abide by their terms or face legal challenges in the courts.

For instance the ECHR:
An example of the British constitution working is through the ECHR ruling unanimously that the Rwanda Scheme was unlawful in November 2023. This served not only as an example of the government being held accountable by the courts for not obliging to international agreements, but also as an example of a protection of Human Rights.

Question 9

Explain statute law.
What are two examples of both types of statute law?

What laws do statue laws further cover ?

What is the significance of statue law, and what is the significance of the ‘double lock’ on certain statue laws ?

Answer 9

Statute laws are any laws passed by both Houses of Parliament and given royal assent to, this makes them Acts of Parliament:
- therefore very important because they affect and alter the British constitution.

Examples:
1. Constitutional statute law such as Representation of the people act 1969 determined who could vote by lowered voting age from 21 to 18.
2. Additionally the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 set up the UK Supreme Court.

3. Most statute
   laws are not constitutional statute laws, for instance:
   - the education acts
   - or annual finance acts do not affect the constitution.
4. It further covered laws that impacted on civil liberties and human rights, for instance the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporated the the European convention on human rights (ECHR) into UK law.

—
Significance:
- British constitution remains flexible and adaptable
- most used towards expanding and protecting democracy and individual rights for instance giving all women the right to vote by 1928.
- in theory these rights can be diluted and removed by parliament however many have the ‘double lock’ of additional backing by the ECHR.

Question 10

Explain common law.
What are two cases that show common law in practice ?

What is limitation of common law and the significance of common law ?

Answer 10

Common law comprises of laws and rights passed down over the years by legal judgements in the courts, this process is known as judicial precedence, a result of rulings from senior judges.

Cases
1. Miller 2017
- Point: This case reinforced the constitutional principle of parliamentary sovereignty.
- Explanation: The Supreme Court ruled that the executive could not trigger Article 50 (to leave the EU) without an act of Parliament. This showed that constitutional change, such as Brexit, requires parliamentary approval and cannot be done solely through royal prerogative.
- Significance: Demonstrates how common law upholds constitutional balance and limits executive power.

2. Miller 2019:
   - Point: This case clarified the limits of royal prerogative and executive power under common law.
   - Explanation: The Court ruled that Boris Johnson’s prorogation of Parliament was unlawful as it had the effect of frustrating the work of Parliament during a crucial period of Brexit debate.
   - Significance: Reinforced parliamentary accountability and showed that even political decisions made under prerogative powers are subject to judicial review.

One significant source of the UK constitution is common law, where constitutional principles are developed by judges through court rulings. A clear example of this is the case of Miller (2017), in which the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not trigger Article 50 without parliamentary approval. This ruling emphasised the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and showed that executive power under the royal prerogative is limited by constitutional requirements. Similarly, Miller (2019) showed the judiciary acting to defend the constitution when it ruled that the Prime Minister’s prorogation of Parliament was unlawful, as it frustrated democratic scrutiny. These cases highlight the constitutional significance of common law in clarifying executive limits and upholding democratic accountability.

Limitation:
Common law is often modified by statute law: rights under common law can be modified or repealed by statue law.
For instance although the rights of property owners can be found in various ancient documents, statute laws, such as those dealing with compulsory purchase orders, modify these ancient rights.

Significance:
- Common law is evolutionary
- Does not have precedence over statute law.

Question 11

Explain the royal prerogative, and how they can range.

Explain the significance of Boris Johnson’s attempt to exploit prerogative powers in order to prorogue parliament, and the different views on the supreme courts role in this event.

Why can prerogative powers be viewed as a way to extend executive powers and what limitation is there to this view ?

Answer 11

1. The royal prerogative is the remaining powers of the monarch exercised by the prime minister and government in the name of the crown, these can range from low to high powers such as Issuing uk passports, deploying the army or seeking a dissolution or suspension of parliament.
2. August 2019 Boris Johnson sought the queen approval to prorogue parliament for a longer than 5 week period, critics viewed this as an attempt to avoid scrutiny of the governments Brexit proposals. Prorogation was granted and changed to 31st October, however this was subsequently ruled illegal by a unanimous 11-0 judgement of the UK Supreme Court in September 2019, which was of the opinion that the act was in lawful.
   ( this serves as a direct example of the courts getting involved in party politics: to Brexiteers this was a deliberate attempt from the courts to delay getting Brexit done, to others this was the judiciary acting properly to uphold parliamentary sovereignty and rein in an excessive power grab from the executive.
3. Prerogative powers can often be viewed as a way to extent and government powers, therefore increase power of executive branch however, they can be limited by Acts of Parliament. For instance the Fixed-term parliaments act 2011 removed the royal prerogative traditionally allowed the Prime Minister to call a general election at a time of their choosing. However, the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (FTPA) removed this prerogative power, instead setting general elections to occur every five years by default.

Question 12

1. Explain conventions, and the consequence of broken conventions.
2. Explain the significance of conventions ,despite not being written, allowing politics to run smoothly and give 2 examples of this.
3. What is a limitation to conventions.

Answer 12

1. Unwritten rules and procedures of parliament that facilitate the constitution to run smoothly
   When conventions are broken they often lead to problems and deadlock. For instance, the House of Lords rejecting the People budget in 1909 serves as an example of broken conventions leading to a constitutional crisis.
2. They are not written anywhere however they are agreed upon, allowing politics, specifically parliament, to run smoothly and efficiently.
   - For instance, the Salisbury-Addison convention of 1945, where the House of Lords agreed not to delay policies contained in the governing party’s manifesto.
   Another convention is that the monarch gives royal ascent to all bills that have been passed by both Houses of Parliament .
   - Another example of conventions working well is through their ability to allow David Cameron to form a coalition government after the indecisive result of the 2010 general election.

Limitation:
- conventions are not protected by anything more substantial than tradition, if a convention is to work properly, there must be a shared understanding of what that means.

Question 13

Explain works of authority, and provide a historic and modern example.

What are two limitations to works of authority ?

Answer 13

Definition:
Books of constitutional experts that clarify and explain the inner workings of the constitution.
Comprise of a variety of books and documents that deal with areas of parliamentary procedures and the responsibilities and duties of govt and ministers, among these are:

Old
A.V Diceys’s - Introduction to the study of the law of the constitution 1885
- identified the ‘twin pillars’ of democracy and conventions.

Recent
Cabinet manual 2010 which set out the main laws, rules and conventions affecting the conduct and operation of the government.

Limitations:
1. Like conventions - have no legal authority, but nonetheless help the smooth running of government.
2. Not usually approved formally by parliament and can be changed easily.

Question 14

Historic milestones in the history and developments of the British constitution:

Answer 14

1. Magna Carta 1215
2. Bill of rights 1689
3. Act of settlement 1701
4. Parliament acts 1911 / 1949
5. European communities act 1972

Question 15

What was the Magna Carta, and what does it represent the first attempt of ?

What are two pros, and two cons to the Magna Carta ?

Answer 15

What was it:
- Agreement between King John and his barons establishing that everyone, including the king, was subject to the law.
- Magna Carta represents first formal attempt to try a limit the powers of the monarchy

Pros:
- Established the principle of a right to a fair trial: among its 63 clauses “to no one we will delay right or justice”
- Magna Carta seen as a landmark document in the development of human rights, heavily influencing other documents, such as American Bill of Rights1791 and the universal declaration of human rights 1948.

Cons:
- could be argued not as significant, only 4 out of it 63 clauses are remain not repealed today.
- Magna Carta didn’t give many rights to ordinary people.

Question 16

What was the Bill of Rights 1689 and what two things did it establish?
What are two reasons and one direct example as to why the Bill of rights 1689 is clearly significant?

Answer 16

What it was:
- an agreement between the monarch and parliament, where the monarchy passed the Bill of Rights in December of 1689.

1. Established the dominance of parliament over the monarchy, for instance included the principal of no taxation without parliaments agreement.
2. Established parliamentary privilege: it states that parliament must meet frequently, elections must be free and there must be complete freedom of speech within parliament.
   Parliamentary privilege: the rights of MP’s free speech within Palace of Westminster. Cannot be sued for slander or contempt of court.

Significant:
It’s clearly significant:
1. parliament has continued to meet every year since 1689.
2. It effectively embodies and created the notion of parliamentary sovereignty.
~~~
3. Example in politics today:
- enables MP’s to speak freely in parliament, for instance July 2021 when SDLP MP Colum Eastwood used it to name ‘solider F’, a British solider accused of involvement n the 1972 Bloody Sunday shootings in Northern Ireland.

Question 17

What was the Act of Settlement 1701?

Why was it viewed as a key milestone in the development of the constitution and what’s an example of a key development?

Why could the Act of Settlements be viewed as a backwards step in terms of equality and fairness in modern politics ?

Answer 17

What it was:
- A follow up to the bill of rights
- Ensured a Protestant follow up to the throne

It’s viewed as a key milestone in the development of the British constitution due to serving as another instance of parliaments assertion of power over the monarchy.
- For example, it established the fundamental principle that the monarchy existed on parliaments terms, not vise versa.

Backward step:
Parliament forced the notion that direct hereditary succession was decreed less significant that religious affiliation, for twenty first century politics this could be viewed as an outdated retrograde step in terms of equality and fairness.

Question 18

Explain what the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 were, and why they were brought about.

How did this serve as a significant increase of the democratic accountability of Westminster ?

Answer 18

What it was:
Acts that significantly reduced the power of lords after the conservative-unionist dominated lords chamber rejected liberal governments ‘People’s budget’ in 1909, facilitating a constitutional crisis.
After two inconclusive general elections in 1910, new laws were passed which restricted their power to delay bills for 2 years / then to 1 year.
1. 1911 Act removed their power of absolute veto over legislation and limited their power to delay to 2 years
2. 1949 Act reduced that delay to ended the absolute veto of the lords over legislation, restricted their power to delay bills for 2 years / then to 1 year.

Significance:
- significantly increased democratic accountability of Westminster, no longer could the unelected chamber, Lords, frustrated the elected chamber, Commons: therefore any bill passed by commons would now automatically become a law after a year.

Question 19

1. What was the European Communities Act of 1972, what other Acts were added onto it and how did it serve as an example of Euro scepticism?
2. Despite it becoming a major role is British politics and constitution, how did it represent a weakening of parliamentary sovereignty? How did events in 2016 and 2020 show this loss of sovereignty as temporary ?
3. What argument proves the EU membership did not fundamentally change domestic policy ?

Answer 19

What it is was:
Marked the entry of UK law into the EU, a decision made by Edward Heaths Conservative government.
- Acct was added to by further measures: Single European Act 1987 / Lisbon Treaty 2007.
- passed second reading by 309-301 votes, conveying Euro scepticism and its long history in uk politics

2. Despite it becoming a major role is British politics and constitution, it represented a weakening of parliamentary sovereignty as all British law had to conform to and comply with EU law.
   - although theres criticism of the erosion of parliamentary sovereignty since 1972, events in 2016 and 2020 showed this loss of sovereignty is temporary, classic example of what one arl I amend giveth, another taketh away when the EU Withdrawal Acts of 2018 and 2020 repealed the 1972 Act.
3. Argument as to why EU membership did not fundamentally change domestic policy:
   - Although the EU membership was very important in areas of agriculture, trade and fisheries, it had little to nothing to do in key areas of domestic policy such as defence and education.
   - One could argue therefore that the European Communities act of 1972 did not fundamentally change the way Uk does domestic policies.

Question 20

What are the 4 issues and debates around recent constitutional changes?

Answer 20

1. Modernisation: modernisation of political institutions such as the House of Lords and the top rung of the judiciary.
2. Greater democracy: greater democracy in the political system for example elected mayors, more use of referdums and some degree of electoral reform.
3. Devolution: the devolution of powers away from Westminster, to the regions Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
4. Human rights: an emphasis on human rights, especially those of minority groups.

Question 21

What is the significance of Constitutional developments since 1997?
And which UK government pursued a modest programme of ongoing constitutional changes after 1997?

Answer 21

The British constitution has evolved and developed over the centuries, specifically after 1997 Tony Blairs labour government, which made constitutional reform a major part of their legislative agenda.

What government pursued a modest programme of ongoing constitutional changes?
—
Conservative David Camerons coalition government of 2010-2015.
This included a referendum of replacing the electoral system for general elections, limiting the power of the prime minister to dissolve parliament and ncreasing the powers of the devolved administrations in Scotland and wiles, this was rejected.

Question 22

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes

Examples and explanations for the modernisation of political institutions.

Answer 22

1. House of Lords Act 1999: removed all the Lords but 92 hereditary peers while introducing nominated life peers including ‘peoples peers’. Didn’t allow for elected members for the lords.
2. Constitutional Reform Act 2005: replaced the law lords in the House of Lords, and created a separate Supreme Court, which became the highest court in the land. This allowed for a greater sense of judicial independence and separation of powers.
3. House of Lords Reform Bill 2012: proposed that Lords should compromise of 80% elected members and 20% nominated peers, removing Hereditary pees completely. Bill abandoned after 91 conservative backbenchers voted against it.
4. Succession to the Crown Act 2013: enabled eldest child of the monarch to ascend to the throne, regardless of gender. Only applied to royal offspring born after October 2011. Also allowed an heir who married a Roman Catholic to remain their right of succession to the throne.
5. House of Lords Reform Act 2014: gave existing peers the right to resign or retire from their seats while also enabling the removal of peers convicted of serious criminal offences or non-attendance. By 2020, 6 peers had been removed for non attendance, including business person Baron Wolfson in 2017, and 106 had retired, including Lord LLoyd Webber.

Question 23

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes

Successes:
1. How has the modernisation of political institutions possibly improved the House of Lords since 1997? What’s a limitation to this ?

2. What did the creation of the Supreme Court enable? What is a limitation to this ?
3. How has the modernisation of political institutions reach the royal family. What is a limitation to this ?

Answer 23

Successes:
1. since 1997, the House of Lords is smaller, more diverse, and far less conservative-dominated. It is also easier to remove peers for misconduct or non-attendance.
- reform of the unique entirely unelected second chamber House of Lords remains incomplete and unfinished. Attempts to build on the 1998 measure, for instance like in 2012, have been failures.

2. creation of the Supreme Court has enabled a clear separation from powers between the executive and the judiciary. It’s remained politically neutral and apolitical unlike its US counterpart.
   - creation of the independent Supreme Court has arguably led to too much power resident with unelected and unaccountable justices, therefore undermining parliament.
3. notions of gender and equality has even reached the traditions of the royal family.
   - alteration of the line of succession is a minor tweak, it remains illegal for the monarch to be Roman Catholic.

Question 24

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes

Examples and explanations for the greater democracy within the political systems.

Answer 24

1. Referendums (Scotland and Wales) Act 1997: allowed referendums to be held in Scotland and Wales over the creation of devolved assemblies. ‘Yes’ vote i both countries (wales slim) meant that devolution could now take place.
2. Greater London Authority Act 1999: allowed for the setting up of a directly elected mayor for London. The local Government Act 2000 contained provisions for elected mayors is other cities following local referendums.
3. European Parliamentary Elections Act 1999: changed the electoral system for European Parliament elections in England, Scotland and Wales from first past the post to a form of proportional representation.
4. Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011: allowed for the direct election of Police and Crime Commissioners, this first took place in 2012.
5. 2011 Fixed-term Parliamentary Act: required the prime minister to secure the support of at least two-thirds of MP’s to call an early general election, instead of just doing it unilaterally.

Question 25

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes 1. How does greater Manchester serve as a success of greater democratisation ? What’s are two limitations to this ? 2. How does the reform of European Parliament election serve as a success of greater democracy? What is a limitation to this ? 3. How has greater democracy increased political participation and local democracy ? 4. How does FTPA serve as a bad example of effective greater democratisation?

Answer 25

1. large cities such as Greater Manchester have embraced the chance for greater autonomy, with prominent leaders such as the Labour politician Andy Burnham as elected mayor of GM in 2017. Limitations - mayor of London can be considered a successful reform however, in regions where referendums have been held, the majority of cities voted against establishing mayor elections, rejecting the proposal. Torbay voted to get rid of mayor elections in 2016, despite having approved it in 2005. - Turnout in many mayoral and PCC elections are abysmal, even at local govt election standards. 15% of the electorate voted voted to retain Middlesbrough elected mayor in 2013, and 11.6% turned out in 2012 to elect the PCC for Staffordshire - this number doubled in 2016. 2. reform of European Parliament elections has over the years enabled a greater variety of parties to be represented, for instance UKIP / Brexit and BNP, alongside with Greens and Liberal Democrat’s. However: - Efforts to reform electoral systems are often unpopular with the public, as seen in the overwhelming rejection of the national referendum held may 2011 to change the electoral system for Westminster to the alternative vote in place of first-past-the-post. This move as defeated 68% to 32% - suggesting limited democratic support for changes like those made in the 1999 Act. 3. the direct election of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCC) has also increased opportunities for political participation and local democracy. 4. The provisions of the FTPA were easily overcome in both 2017 and 2019 to bring about early general elections.

Question 26

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes Examples and explanations for Human rights.

Answer 26

1. **Human Rights Act 1998**: incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law. This enables the uk courts to take the ECHR into account when judging cases on HR. Since individuals could seek justice domestically, this reduced the number of cases referred to the European court of human rights in Strasbourg. 2. **Freedom of Information Act 2000**: gave people greater access to the information held by public bodies including local and national government, this made public institutions more accountable and transparent 3. **Equality Act 2010**: 116 individual measures in the areas of race, gender, disability and sex brought into a single act in aims of combating discrimination and promoting a fairer society. 4. **Protection of Freedoms Across 2012**: Increased oversight of state powers. This act offered citizens greater protection from the state by enhancing scrutiny of the security services, such as M15 and M16. 5. **Data Protection Act 2018**: The Data Protection Act 2018 implemented the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in all EU member states, including the UK. In aims of enhancing citizens rights to privacy over their personal details, it placed strict control on the handling and saving of all personal data by both government and private bodies such as businesses, schools and local councils.

Question 27

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes 1. How has an emphasis on human rights legislation benefited the rights of people? What has this led to a rise of and how does it serve as a limitation ? 2. How has en emphasis on human rights made public bodies and other powerful institutions more accountable and responsible ? 3. What institutions role has further increased the protection of citizens rights ? Using an example, why has this growing role caused controversy ? 3. How has an emphasis on human rights reduced the risk of state overreach ? As a result, how does this show active limits on the government ? 4. What is a limit to the freedom of information act ?

Answer 27

1. emphasis on landmark legislation for human rights has increased awareness and visibility of rights, especially those of minority groups. - expansion of rights has led to the rise of ‘identity politics’ - new term used to describe people of a particular race, sexuality. Campaigning on these issues moves away from traditional party politics. 2. privacy and access to information laws have enhanced the rights of everyone, making public bodies and other powerful institutions such as employers more accountable and responsible for the information they hold. 3. role of Supreme Court interpreting this legislation has increased the protection of citizens rights. - growing role of Supreme Court in human rights cases has caused controversy. For instance 2010, the Supreme Court ruled parts of the anti-terror laws, such as the govt power to freeze assets of suspected terrorist as a violation of the human rights act. 4. introducing new safeguards over surveillance and biometric data collection, reduced the risk of state overreach and protected individual freedoms. As a result, this shows how the constitutional framework actively limits government powers in sensitive areas like national security, ensuring that citizens’ rights to privacy and liberty are not unnecessarily infringed. 4. Freedom of information act, many requests for information are declined.

Question 28

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes Examples and explanations for devolution.

Answer 28

1. **Scotland Act 1998, Wales Act 1998, Northern Ireland Act 1998**: set up elected bodies / parliaments in these countries. Further powers were devolved in subsequent acts, for instance to Scotland and Wales in 2006, and to Scotland again in 2016 and Wales 2017. November 2004, in the north-east of England, a regional referendum for the creation of an elected regional assembly was held - rejected 78% to 22%

Question 29

Evaluating post-1997 constitutional changes 1. What countries has devolution worked predominantly well in and why ? 2. How is wales serve as an increase in the popularity of devolution? 3. How is devolution a potential reason as to why Scotland stopped full backing of a separation from the uk? 4. What’s a positive to devolution in Northern Ireland ? And a negative ? 5. What does the 2004 proposal prove about devolution in England ?

Answer 29

1. devolution has worked predominantly well in Scotland and Wales, with an increase in devolved powers. 2. popularity for devolution has increased, for instance devolution in wales 1997 passed by slim 50.3% - 49.7%, when there was another vote in 2011 to expand law making powers passed, it passed by 63.5% 3. A devolved parliament arguably stopped Scotland backing full separation from the uk in the 2014 independence referendum. 4. Positive: Devolution in Northern Ireland, although problematic, helped solve the violent period ‘The troubles’ Negative: - devolution has not succeeded everywhere, in Northern Ireland policy disagreements and a scandal over a failed renewable energy scheme caused the assembly to be suspended January 2017 - January 2020. 5. Support for devolution in England has not increased, as seen in 2004 when the proposal was rejected by 78%.

Question 30

1. What was the fixed term parliament act and? 2. What were the 4 main reasons as to why this act was introduced? 3. What were the main terms of this act and the only exceptions to it ? 4. Is the act considered successful? What is a limit to this? 5. How does Boris Johnson’s attempts in 2019 weaken the effectiveness of FPTP? 6. By 2019, what did both Labour and Conservative manifestos promise and why? What happened as a result of this? 7. How does FPTP serve as a good example of Parliamentary Sovereignty?

Answer 30

1. What it was: - Fixed term parliament act was an act made during the 2011 Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition government, to remove the traditional right of the Prime Minister alone to seek a dissolution of parliament and call an early election via the royal prerogative. 2. Reason why the FTPA was introduced: a) The rights to seek a dissolution of parliament or call an early general election was brought to the Queen, in which by convention, she would have to grant. b) Prior to the Act, it was a common tactic of prime ministers to ‘go to the country’ early, often around a year in advance of a proposed general election, when the polls looked favourable. Margaret Thatcher did this in 1983 and Tony Blair in 2001. c) desire to create stability and permanence for the first coalition government since 1945. d) it was a long-term Liberal Democrat policy and it further protect Liberal Democrats from being ditched by their Conservative partners when the polls looked favourable. 3. Main terms of the Act: 1. The prime minister cannot unilaterally go to the monarch and seek a dissolution of parliament and an early election. The only exceptions to this rule is: a) the government loses a vote of no confidence in the House of Commons, followed by a confirmed vote of no confidence 2 weeks later - this automatically triggers a general election. b) when two-thirds of MPs (i.e. 434 or more) vote to hold an early election. 4. How well the Act has worked is open to debate: - On the one hand it fulfilled its initial aim of guaranteeing a 5-year term for the coalition government and ensuring political stability. - On the other, there are strong grounds for assessing it as much less successful. It was easily overridden by Theresa May just 2 years into her government, when the Commons voted 522-13 in favour of calling an early election. 5. 2019, Prime Minister Boris Johnson tried three times to call an early election to find a way out of the Brexit issues, but failed to get the two-thirds majority. a) The Act was eventually circumvented by a new piece of legislation, the Early Parliamentary General Election Act, which only required a simple majority. b) It passed at the end of October 2019 by 438-20 votes with 181 abstentions of mostly Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs. c) The Act was fast-tracked through parliament and became law within 2 days of getting through the Commons. 6. In 2019, both Labour and Conservative manifestos promised repeal. Labour argued that the Act ’stifled democracy and propped up weak governments’ while the Conservatives stated it ‘led to paralysis at a time the country needed decisive action’. A draft bill for its abolition was introduced in December 2020 and the Act was officially repealed by the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022. 7. Serves as a good example of both parliamentary sovereignty due to the simplicity with which constitutional changes can be implemented but also reversed, for instance FTPA could be both passed originally and overridden on two occasions within 2 years.

Question 31

Key points and strengths and weaknesses of the fixed term parliament Act:

Answer 31

1. Passed following the formation of the Coalition government between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats after the 2010 general election. 2. Weakened the power of the prime minister to call a snap election by dissolving parliament unilaterally. 3. Parliament now needs to vote by a two-thirds majority to call an early general election. Alternatively, if there is a vote of no confidence in the government, this must be confirmed by another vote within two weeks. 4. Designed to enhance the stability of a potentially fragile coalition government and reduce the scope for the prime minister to gain political advantage by going to the polls when the chances of victory seem highest. 5. Following the Conservatives’ 2019 manifesto pledge, the Act was due to be repealed in 2021. Labour had also promised to repeal the Act if elected in 2019. Strengths: 1. It allowed the Coalition government to work well in a stable and effective manner over its full five-year term. This political stability in turn was seen as beneficial for economic growth and longer-term policy making. 2. It is fairer on the junior member of a coalition (e.g. the Liberal Democrats after the 2010 general election), as they would not have to face an early election over which they had no say in timing. Weaknesses: - The Act was only passed in the first place because of political circumstances and expediency, not out of high principles. Had it not been for the need to provide stability to the Coalition government, it is unlikely such an Act would have been passed. 2. It could also be argued that it even failed in its political aim to protect the Liberal Democrats who, after the full five years in coalition, crashed from 57 MPs to just 9 in 2015. 3. Prime Minister Boris Johnson got around the Act to call an early election by a vote of 438 to 20 in autumn 2019.

Question 32

1. What was the freedom of information act 2000? 2. Why did they pass the act? 3. What aims did the act have in terms of the two main obligations public institutions had? 4. What is the significance of the freedom of information act and give two examples.

Answer 32

1. What it was: - Freedom of Information act was an act passed to strengthen accountability and transparency public bodies and government. 2. Why did they pass this Act: - they passed the act in order to promote openness and transparency from most public bodies including local councils, police forces, the BBC and universities, as well as central government. 3. Aims a) Aim one, public institution were obliged to publish and make freely available, for example via free online access, certain information about their activities, e.g minutes of meetings, public policy documents etc. b) Another aim of the act was to oblige public institutions to reply to information and data requests from members of the public and pressure groups within 20 days, and are only allowed to decline requests under certain circumstances. 4. The significance of the Freedom of Information Act is that it allowed the public and the media to submit FOI requests to uncover information held by public bodies / institutions hold them accountable. - These requests required local councils, for example, to disclose how many individuals they recorded sleeping rough at any stage in 2019, following a request by the BBC. - Furthermore, the Act played a crucial role in exposing the 2009 MPs’ expenses scandal. Journalists used FOI requests to obtain details about MPs’ expenses claims, revealing widespread misuse of public funds. - This eventually led to public outrage, criminal investigations, and the imprisonment of five Labour MPs and two Conservative peers.

Question 33

1. What did the act promote and what did this cause as a result? 2. What is an example the act was popular but what’s a limit to this ? 3. What has the act provided a major boost in and what was the reason for this? 4. How has the act benifited businesses and what’s an example of this ? 5. How has the act allowed public scrutiny of policies in practice, give an example of this. 6. What can those initially denied access to information allowed to do ? 7. How many requests were declined in 2020, and what are the potential reasons to this? 8. How can the act lead to a conflict between an individuals right to privacy and the right of the public to gain access to information ?

Answer 33

1. The Act promoted openness and transparency among public bodies that benefit as a result this had boosted public trust in such organisations. 2. It was popular, over 44,000 requests were made in 2020 and from July to September 2020 alone, 11,042 requests were received. A total of 86% were responded to in time, and around three-quarters were deemed resolvable'. i.e. the information could be gathered. However, only 40% were answered in full, 35% were denied in full and the remainder were answered in part. There are several grounds for legitimately denying requests, for example on the grounds of national security, commercial confidentiality, or that to collect the information would be disproportionately expensive. 3. Provided major boost to open a transparent government since the Act has been invaluable for investigative journalists, pressure groups and ordinary people seeking information that public bodies might otherwise prefer not to reveal. 4. It can also be used by businesses. For example, in 2021 an FOI request about jewellery thefts was made to UK police forces by the retailer jewellerybox. It showed that in 2020 the largest number occurred in Kensington & Chelsea, with 967 cases of jewellery thefts. 5. Allowed public scrutiny of policy initiatives and how well they work in practice. For example, in 2006 there was a highly publicised knife amnesty. An FOI request forced the publication of a report into the impact of the amnesty by the Metropolitan Police. This showed it had minimal impact on the rates of knife-related crime. 6. Those initially denied access to the requested information can appeal to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). There were 311 such appeals in 2019/20. 7. Public bodies can and often do refuse requests for information. This can be for a variety of reasons including national security, commercial sensitivity, cost or because the request is deemed ‘vexatious’. 2. In 2020 around 50% of all requests were declined, either in full or in part. 8. It is often the case that requests for information are declined because they would involve the release of private or personal information about individuals. The Act can therefore lead to a conflict between an individual’s right to privacy and the right of the public to gain access to information about public officials.

Question 34

Could the British constitution be reformed further ?

Answer 34

- Lowering the voting age to 16 across the UK (as already occurs in Scotland and Wales) - Making voting compulsory, as it is in Australia - Introducing an elected component to the House of Lords - Reforming the voting system for Westminster elections to one that is more proportional - making more use of e-democracy such as online voting - extending devolution to England - Widening public participation in candidate selection by political parties, for example by using a US-style primary system

Question 35

How rights are protected in the UK: How does the protection of rights in the UK constitution differ from the protection of rights in the USA?

Answer 35

1. Unlike the USA, where rights are entrenched in a codified constitution, human rights in the UK’s are protected by the Human Rights Act 1998 which incorporated the ECHR into UK law. Parliament could repeal these. 2. Since leaving the EU, the UK could withdraw from the ECHR, a move supported by some Conservative politicians who propose a British Bill of Rights. However, this would face strong political and legal opposition. - The Council of Europe, which oversees the ECHR, includes all European countries except Vatican City and Belarus. 4. From 1966 to 2010, 14,460 cases were brought against the UK at the ECHR, but only 1.3% resulted in a ruling against the government, suggesting UK citizens’ rights are generally well protected.

Question 36

How well does the British constitution protect rights?

Answer 36

**It protects them well** 1. The UK’s constitutional culture values civil liberties. There is formal support of human rights by the government. For example, every parliamentary Act contains a declaration that the Act complies with the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998. 2. Current legislation provides a strong legal protection for core rights via the interlinked HRA and European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) mechanisms. The HRA incorporates the ECHR into UK law. EU law also provided additional protection, for example in the area of workers’ rights. 3. The UK has a relatively strong institutional framework for protecting rights, which extends beyond the courts, including the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, which often brings cases under the Equality Act 2010. **Doesn’t protect them**: 1. Little political consensus exists between parties: different political parties in the UK disagree on what human rights should include and how they should be protected. Some parties might prioritize certain rights over others or interpret them differently. The existing framework of UK legal rights protection (based on the HRA and ECHR) is vulnerable to political attack, with Conservative calls for a ‘British Bill of Rights’. European judgements that go against UK policies regularly spark media attacks on the European Court of Human Rights or, more frequently nowadays, UK courts. 2. Brexit is removing the safety net for certain non-discrimination, migrant and labour rights formerly provided by EU law. 3. UK governments have been repeatedly able to introduce and pass legislation diluting rights protection, especially in areas like national security with recent anti-terror laws, and measures that seek to reform immigration and entitlement to social benefits and housing. 4. Social and economic rights, for example to receive appropriate healthcare, 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.

Question 37

Should the British constitution be codified?

Answer 37

- In times of political crisis, there have been renewed calls for a modern codified constitution. For example, during the protracted struggle over Brexit between 2017 and 2019 parliament and the government appeared incapable of finding a way forward despite the various options of a second referendum, a Brexit deal, a no-deal Brexit or calling another election. For once, the rules were not working. In the event, the December 2019 election returned a government with a strong majority, Brexit was achieved, in principle if not in detail, and parliament resumed. But the argument for a codified constitution lingers on.

Question 38

Arguments for and against a codified constitution:

Answer 38

For codification: 1. It would provide greater clarity on what is and what is not constitutional and so lawful. A problem with conventions, as constitutional expert Vernon Bogdanor remarked, is that ‘The understandings are not always understood.’ 2. Removing the vagueness of custom and tradition would represent a desirable modernisation of the political process. 3. It would provide further and more easily understood rights for all citizens, as the Constitution could entrench key rights as opposed to leaving them to the mercy of parliament. 4. It could reduce the concentration of power in the hands of the executive. It would enable local government and the regional assemblies outside England to enjoy proper constitutional protection and permanence. 5. It would end the process of piecemeal codification such as the Cabinet Manual and the Osmotherly Rules - Rules from 1980 and revised in 2014, giving guidance to civil servants and other government officials when appearing before select committees. 6. Conventions can and are broken, for example with the Lords and the 1909 Budget, or when Boris Johnson sought to prorogue (suspend) parliament for 5 weeks in 2019. Only a unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court stopped this attempt. By convention, prorogation lasts for a much shorter period. 7. The UK is one of only three countries (the others are Israel and New Zealand) not to have a codified constitution Against codification: 1. The current constitution encourages flexibility and adaptability, e.g. in regard to the calling of early elections. Codified constitutions are by nature far more rigid. 2. Codification would go against the tradition of UK politics, which is one of constitutional evolution not revolution. 3. Parliament would struggle to come to a consensus on much of the content of a codified constitution. Should it stipulate a particular voting system, and if so, which one? 4. It would give unaccountable judges greater power, as they would be required to make rulings on what Acts or measures were constitutional, much as they do in the USA. It would also in all likelihood considerably politicise the judiciary. 5. The issue of education and awareness about the British Constitution is best met by better political education in schools. 6. There is a marked lack of popular demand for such a reform.The alternative vote referendum of 2011 is a case in point. 6. It would seriously undermine parliamentary sovereignty, which has served the country's politics well over the centuries. Philip Johnstone, writing in the Daily Telegraph in January 2020 after the Brexit bill was passed, commented that ‘It turns out our system wasn't broken after all.'

Question 39

Does the British constitution defend citizens’ rights effectively?

Answer 39

No 1. Many laws have loopholes and gaps and can be ineffective (e.g. the 2018 furore over unequal pay for many female journalists at the BBC). FOI requests are often refused. 2. The uncodified nature of the constitution means that people are unaware of their rights, unlike in the USA where fundamental rights (such as the right to free expression) are enshrined in the constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. 3. Because of parliamentary sovereignty, no rights are entrenched or inalienable. Parliament could, in theory, repeal or change laws and citizens would be powerless to stop this. 4. With Brexit, the ‘double lock’ of reinforcement by EU law/the ECHR will be lost, making citizens’ rights more vulnerable. Yes: 1. Over time, especially through statute laws and antidiscrimination laws, more and more rights have been explicitly defended, such as the right to access information from public bodies. 2. Codification would not enhance awareness of individual or collective rights in a substantial or meaningful way. 3. Large numbers of people and pressure groups use the courts to assert their rights and demand access to information held about them by public bodies. 4. A constitution should be judged by how it works, not by how it looks. Although possible in theory, in practice this is extremely unlikely to happen. It would take a very extremist government to enact such legislation. 5. The electorate is unlikely to vote for MPs who will take away their fundamental rights. Even if Britain were to withdraw from the ECHR (itself very unlikely), it is inconceivable that the main and universally agreed rights would not be protected by a British Bill of Rights. Also, EU law had little impact on human rights — it was more concerned with issues such as trade.

Question 40

Define and explain, individual rights and collective rights:

Answer 40

Individual rights: - Individual rights are the rights held by an individual citizen, such as the right to a fair trial or the right not to face discrimination. Collective rights: - Collective rights are those that belong to groups ranging from formally organised groups such as trade unions to those that are faith based, or those that reflect a certain characteristic such as gender, disability or sexuality. - Collective rights can also be applied to the population as a whole, such as the right to protection from acts of terrorism and the safeguarding of national security. These two rights are often seen to conflict with each other. An obvious example is that all individuals have the right to practise any (or no) religious faith, which often involves following a particular moral code such as refraining from drinking alcohol or a disapproval of homosexuality. Yet, such a stance could be at odds with the collective rights of wider groups such as drinkers or the LGBTQ+ community.

Question 41

CASE STUDY: Can religious faith be used to justify refusing to serve members of the LGBTQ+ community?

Answer 41

- Owners of Ashers Baking Company Ltd in Northern Ireland, were prosecuted for refusing to bake a cake for a gay rights activist who had asked them to incorporate the slogan ‘Support gay marriage’ along with a picture of Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street and the logo of the Queerspace organisation in the decoration. - In October 2018, the Supreme Court overturned the judgements of lower courts that the bakery was guilty of discrimination. The argument was that the bakery did not discriminate against the customer who happened to be gay, but against the message on the cake, which they would have objected to regardless of the customer’s sexual orientation. - Therefore, the issue was not about sexuality but what is termed ‘forced speech’. For example, can a Labour-supporting printer refuse to produce Conservative Party publicity or vice versa? The answer is probably yes. - This case is an example of how the individual right to free speech or expression can prevail over the collective rights of a particular group. A similar case but with a different outcome occurred in 2013 when the Christian owners of a Cornish guest house lost a court case over refusing to allow a same-sex couple to share a double bedroom.

Question 42

CASE STUDY: Female circumcision

Answer 42

- Concerns traditional cultural practices illegally practised by some minority groups in the UK. - Although illegal in most countries, female circumcision (FGM) is a common practice among certain (but by no means all) communities in parts of Africa and the Middle East. It is, however, a practice clearly at odds with most countries’ cultural norms and values. - Under UK child safeguarding rules, schools and social services are required by law to report immediately to the police any suspected cases of FGM, which is illegal under the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. This results in a potential clash between the individual rights of a citizen to follow cultural practices, and the collective rights of wider UK society, who rightly see the practice as a form of child abuse. - There are also, of course, the important individual rights of the child to consider. In this instance, the solution is clear in UK law. The individual rights of the child are uppermost, and the lack of informed consent makes it straightforward to ban the practice, despite it being a collective tradition in certain communities.

Question 43

CASE STUDY: Uber drivers

Answer 43

- In 2016, two Uber drivers sued the firm claiming that they were employees and not, as Uber claimed, self-employed. - By claiming to be employees, the drivers would gain entitlement to benefits such as holiday pay and the minimum wage. They were therefore fighting for the collective rights of all Uber drivers, and were supported in their court case by the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain. - However, they were opposed not only by Uber, but also by some of their fellow Uber drivers who enjoyed the freedom of being self-employed and asserted their individual rights regarding employment status. - Ultimately, Uber lost its case and the collective rights of all its workers were protected at the expense of some individual drivers.

Question 44

Context about individual rights and collective rights clashing.

Answer 44

There’s no particular pattern in terms of which set of rights usually prevails — these contrasting case studies resulted in a victory for both collective over individual rights and vice versa. In addition, several clauses of anti-terror legislation designed to protect the collective right of public safety have been successfully challenged in the courts. For example, in 2004 the courts ruled that indefinite detention of suspected terrorists broke human rights laws, seemingly favouring individual rights to a fair trial over collective rights to protection from terrorist outrages. - Much depends on the individual context, the interpretation of the judges and public opinion. - The latter can often persuade the government to pass legislation to tilt the balance of rights in one or other direction. - Yet, there are times when the conflict can also be between competing sets of either individual or collective rights within each category, such as in the case of the Uber drivers. The issue of citizens’ rights is, therefore, a dynamic rather than fixed aspect of the British Constitution.

Question 45

Examples of how individual and collective rights might clash:

Answer 45

a) Collective rights The individual right to privacy. b) People suspected of involvement in terrorism or other serious crimes might have their phone calls monitored to protect the collective right to security. a) The individual right not to be discriminated against, for example on the grounds of sexuality. b) The collective right of religious groups to express and live out their beliefs. a) The individual right to free speech and opinion. b) The collective right of a particular group such as Muslims and racial minorities not to be subjected to hate speech. a) The individual right of employees not to be coerced or intimidated by others into taking industrial action. b) The collective right of workers to be treated fairly and to go on strike if necessary. a) The individual right, even for a celebrity or public figure, to keep their private life private. b) The collective right of a free press to investigate and run stories about individuals who they believe to be in the public interest. a) The individual choice whether or not to be vaccinated against Covid-19. b) The collective right of those classed as clinically vulnerable to be protected from Covid-19.

Question 46

Extension. How do we evaluate a constitution?

Answer 46

1. A guarantee of free, fair and democratic elections. 2. Respect for individual human rights, individual conscience, and promotion of tolerance. 3. Balance of individual rights (rights that belong to each citizen, i.e freedom of speech), with broader collective rights (rights that lie with groups of people, i.e members of the trade union and disabled people). 4. Lays out clearly we’re power and decision-making lies, and addresses the notion of sovereignty, i.e where final power and authority lies. 5. Has mechanisms for resolving problems and conflicts when conventional decision making proves problematic, i.e with Brexit in 2016 and 2019. 6. Is easy to understand and encourage citizens to participate in the political process. 7. Can be adapted and is flexible to changing circumstances while retaining core values and a sense of national identity. 8. Upholds the rule of law through an independent judiciary, which ensures that everyone is treated equally irrespective of position, privilege and wealth.