• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Asses the arguments in favour of and against codification of the British Constitution

Extracts from this document...


Access the arguments in favour of and against codification of the British Constitution In recent years there has been much debate within Parliament over the possible codification of the British Constitution and it is always a topic that people often find very hard to agree on. Though some parts of what may be a codified constitution have been introduced, such as The Human Rights Act which established a codified set of rules and the introduction of devolution, Britain is currently uncodified and so this brings up the arguments of whether we should be codified or uncodified. A main argument against the codification of Britain is that the current system is very flexible and can be easily adapted to changing circumstances. Britain's constitution is said to be 'organic' which means that when society and its needs and values change, so too can the constitution to fit with that without having to wait. In the constitution at the moment government can pass a new Act quite quickly and new conventions can develop to conform with political and social pressures. ...read more.


They feel that 'it has served Britain well for centuries' and that there have been no revolutions or violent protests against it which proves how it has worked. They may also say that to turn Britain into a codified constitution would be very difficult and lengthy and that the end result would not be worth it. For Britain to become codified rules and law would need to be written down, this would be a problem because the UK operates under a large number of unwritten conventions (in particular the monarchy and prerogative powers) and therefore making it very hard to transfer these onto paper. Within Britain there are currently no safeguards which means that the government can be more powerful, this can be seen in both a positive and negative way. Someone against the codification would say that the power that government has is a positive thing because it means that it can deal with issues and problems without anything inhibiting it. ...read more.


They feel that many people at the moment are very confused by the 'British Constitution' that does not technically exist and it is very easy to see why; they say that by creating a real constitution, public awareness of politics will grow, as will support. Liberals and those in favour of a codified constitution would also believe that for Britain to keep up with other countries and not seem backward in a political sense, it should become codified. More pressure has now been added by Britain joining the European Community this is because not having a constitution makes political relations with the EU quite difficult, it is also frustrating for Britain and the European parties when attempting to create coherent relations with Europe. Therefore they believe that becoming a codified constitution will put the UK into line with most other modern democracies. It is unclear if there will ever be a definite answer from Parliament as to whether Britain will become more codified or stay the same, however with Conservative likely to take over in the next general election we can predict that it is extremely unlikely that they will be completely changing the constitution any time soon. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level United Kingdom section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level United Kingdom essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    How effective is the British Constitution in protecting the rights of its citizens?

    3 star(s)

    are voting for that party's promise of change or their promise of stability. Their vote gives that party the power to amend the constitution as they wish; it is a vote of confidence in that party. The majority wins under any electoral system regardless of how they achieve this majority.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Explain the arguments for and against introducing a codified constitution

    3 star(s)

    This increases the difficulty for a government to make major changes. Recently, since the Human Rights Act, people have become more interested and concerned over their rights and the accessibility of their rights. In the US, it is possible to buy a copy of their constitution, including their rights, in almost any bookshop.

  1. What does it take to change the United Kingdoms constitution?

    They believe we need a written constitution in order to rebalance the constitution, empowering the judges to provide checks and balances against a sovereign Parliament. Currently the judges have to enforce the laws set out by Parliament, they cannot ignore them, if government become corrupt there appears to be little to control them.

  2. Political Awareness

    Robin Cook has been Leader of the House of Commons and President of the Council since June 2001. Mr Cook held a number of senior positions in Opposition - Shadow Foreign Secretary from 1994-1997; Shadow Trade and Industry Secretary from 1992 to 1994; and Shadow Health Secretary and Social Services Secretary between 1987 and 1992.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work