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

Explain the arguments for and against introducing a codified constitution

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Explain the arguments for and against introducing a codified constitution. Discuss. Ursula Oliver 12RJ At present, the UK's constitution is uncodified or de facto; there is no single document though the majority of Britain's constitution lies in written form of acts, court judgments and treaties. The foundation of British constitution is the doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty where acts passed by Parliament are the UK's supreme and final source of law. Therefore, simply by passing an Act, Parliament has power to change the constitution. This has caused debate over whether this uncodified constitution is seen as flexible or a liability to the UK. Some people wish to recover the constitution by introducing a codified constitution which is entrenched, whereas others such as Conservative leader David Cameron believe a British Bill of Rights alongside or instead of the Human Rights Act is best whilst maintaining an uncodified constitution. Arguments for introducing a codified constitution usually suggest that the introduction would help to correct imbalances in the current political system. This refers mainly to the second chamber and considering the constitutional status the House of Lords holds, whilst also allowing a discussion over the relation between the executive and legislature. ...read more.

Middle

With an entrenched constitution, like in the US, our rights would be more accessible. At present, where it is unwritten, it isn't known so people are reliant on the government to remain playing by unwritten rules. If we were to become more aware of our rights, we would be more likely to claim them, too. Some feel it would be safer and more democratic for a definitive on constitutional arrangements and procedures and law to be limited. Therefore, it seems there is a demand for our constitution to become codified in order to protect our rights and strengthen the constitution in case of constitutional crisis. However, it is argued that these demands for a codified constitution come from academics rather than the people, without real need. Britain has not undergone a constitutional crisis of any sort like Germany and Japan after the Second World War, and the only time there would be a need for a written document would be if Scotland became independent. At present, the people seem broadly satisfied that the nature of government is legitimate and creating a codified constitution could easily widen divisions instead of healing them. ...read more.

Conclusion

Taking everything into consideration, I refer back to the proposal of introducing a British Bill of Rights. This can create a common bond, a unifying force, unlike a codified constitution which would only create greater divisions. Building on the Human Rights Act, a Bill of Rights gives further effect to principles like the Magna Carta which is still relevant to modern situations where social mobility and diversity is increasing. Those concerned with the lack of knowledge over rights would be at rest as a Bill of Rights also ensures individuals are given a clearer idea of what to expect from public authorities and each other. This increases citizenship and gives room for educational improvement as well covering economic and social rights which are not recognised under the Human Rights Act. Linking peoples rights and responsibilities and highlighting the differences, a Bill of Rights ensures a flexible and adaptable constitution remains and can often be seen as "Human Rights Act plus". Therefore it does not create unnecessary debate over a codified constitution and its funding issues nor does it conceal people's rights. ...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

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

3 star(s)

Overall this essay shows evidence of knowledge and understanding. There are some good ideas put forward in this essay but the limited evaluation of the points made hinders the development of a good argument. It would be better to have argument followed by counter argument, rather than listing all the arguments for and then all the arguments against.

***

Marked by teacher Jessica Jung 07/04/2012

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. To what extent have constitutional reforms since 1997 reduced the powers of the UK ...

    However the reason it can be seen to not limit government power is the fact that the UK government have the right to veto the decision of the information commissioner, it has done this on two occasions since the act was passed.

  2. The UK constitution is no longer fit for purpose. Discuss.

    A counter argument would be that the constitution is legitimate as it states that parliament is supreme, so it represents the key political centre, i.e. a democratically elected parliament and so it cannot ignore the political process if it says that parliament is supreme.

  1. Government & Politics Revision Notes

    Representative democracy therefore has the advantage that, in distancing ordinary citizens from politics, it encourages them to accept compromise. > Voter Apathy- Direct democracy places a heavy burden on all ordinary citizens, who have to participate continuously in the processes of government.

  2. Taoiseach VS Primer Minister

    David Cameron has more control over his cabinet than Taoiseach Enda Kenny as over three quarters of his cabinet are from his own political party. However, Labour ministers in the current Irish cabinet have higher positions than the Liberal Democrats in the British cabinet.

  1. "Parliament carries out none of it's function adequately". Discuss

    I think that Parliament has not carried out this process well in the past, but now, with a coalition in power, there is a larger degree of debate around Bills ? two parties are in control, not two. Another function of Parliament is representation ? linking the people to the government.

  2. How far was New Labor influenced by Thatcher?

    which aimed to provide work, education and training programmes for the unemployed by providing government funding to companies who were prepared to create jobs for the unemployed. Hay discusses the main programme implement to achieve this, the ?New Deal,? [11] which was based on a ?sanctions regime? for under twenty-fives that refused to take part in the programme.

  1. The strengths of the UK constitution outweigh the weaknesses. Do you agree?

    Changes to the constitution therefore come about due to democratic pressure. For example, the powers of the House of Lords were reduced through both Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 beacauseofa growing belief that an unelected second chamber should no longer have the right to block policies of the elected government.

  2. How successfully does Parliament perform its representative functions in Modern Britain?

    The role of an MP is to vote for legislations in the best interests of the nations, but also their constituency and they are also expected to support their party manifesto. A third hindrance to Parliament successfully performing its representative functions is the use of 2 chambers.

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