• 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. Marked by a teacher

    Impact of government policies

    3 star(s)

    from the Territorial Army plus around 52,000 regular reserves (former full-time army personnel who can be called up to serve). As the commitments of the armed services has grown over the last 10 years with operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, reserve forces have had to be used as an important factor of the UK fighting force.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    How successful has constitutional reform been since 1997 ?

    3 star(s)

    In terms of Decentralisation, Labour party was concerned about how the conservatives had centralised government at westminster - Part of their constitutional reform was to decentralise this power .They did this by electing a mayor and assembly for greater london, and with the introduction of cabinet system in local government

  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. Government & Politics Revision Notes

    This is sometimes viewed as "mob rule." Direct democracy can be seen to undermine > political instability -Direct democracy may also result in political instability, as increased levels of popular participation makes citizens more passionate and committed to their own beliefs and causes, leading to conflict and perhaps civil strife.

  1. The reform of the British Constitution remains an unfinished business. Explain & Discuss

    Another significant limitation to devolution is the controversial West-Lothian Question. This is a democratic problem because whilst Scottish MPs can vote on issues concerning only England and Wales in Westminster Parliament, English and Welsh MPs cannot sit and vote in issues in the Scottish Parliament.

  2. 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.

  1. How far was New Labor influenced by Thatcher?

    Therefore, the obvious ideological difference between Old Labour and Thatcherism left Blair split between two possible directions. Eventually a compromise of both left and right ideas was established. A major example of this new path was the ?welfare to work?[10] policy (introduced in 1997)

  2. Make out a case against the adoption of a codified constitution for the UK

    This supports a more democratic country as it give citizens the right to question the government and act on it by taking them to court. Rights would be more clearly stated and easier to enforce. Where as in the human Rights act it is not clear in to who is

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