4) The U.K’s constitution has been criticised because like everything it has pro’s and con’s. The good side being its flexibility, “democratic rule”, effective government and history and tradition.
STRENGTHS: In order to change the UK’s constitution all you need to do is pass an act of parliament. This means the UK can adapt to changing circumstances. Is this always a good thing?
Also because the House of Commons is elected (and supreme) we can see a continuous link to democratic principles since the electoral reforms of the 19th Century. This can be linked to a decrease in power of our unelected second chamber. (Parliament act)
Our electoral system and fusion of powers means that government is usually allowed to push through its manifesto promises. Also Conservatives believe that tradition is an important part of our constitution. Our institutions are ‘tested by time’. If it isn’t broke don’t fix it!
WEAKNESSES: With so many sources to our constitution it is sometimes difficult to know what the constitution says. And if the parliament has sovereignty and can change laws what is stopping our country from becoming an “elective dictatorship”? We could vote a party in, they change the laws until the next election and we could have mayhem on our hands. Also even though the Human Rights Act 1998 defends our rights these can still be overturned by parliament-for example, terrorist legislation, which basically if your are deemed to be a terrorist your right fly out of the window.
Our constitution can be accused of being overly central. This is because:
- PM tends to dominate the cabinet
- The HOC dominates the HOL
- The executive controls the parliament (HOC) through the Whips
- Central government controls local government.
5) Sovereignty is legal supremacy, law-making authority that is not subject to a higher authority.
6) Parliamentary sovereignty is the doctrine that parliament is the supreme law-making body in the UK and its decisions cannot be overturned by any higher authority. Although this maybe debated as the EU has sovereignty over the UK and if the UK doesn’t abide by the rules they face getting kicked out.
7) The constraints of parliamentary sovereignty
8) Parliament would be seen as the place that has most sovereignty as it is where the HOC, HOL and the monarch meet.
Parliamentary sovereignty traditional theory in UK – can make or repeal any law
It chooses, not bound by previous Parliaments etc. –Parliament can make any law e.g. could postpone general elections beyond five years; can repeal any law;
Cannot bind its successors; no other body or person can override its decisions.
This challenged by EU law as it is superior, or if there were to be a sovereign EU
Constitution it would be able to override UK law. Also devolution, the transfer of sovereignty to Scotland, or Wales, or Northern Ireland, or English regions.
As Parliament could revoke devolved powers or withdraw from EU, then in theory
Parliament is still sovereign, but in practice these are not practical ideas.
Constitutional reforms like devolution and European Human Rights Act have handed
over powers – could be repealed but practically difficult.
EU: growth of super-national power, policies made at EU level and shaped by
other countries, EU law seen as being superior, e.g trade laws human rights etc.
Devolved Parliaments have power e.g. different laws and policies in Scotland
such as on tuition fees and foundation hospitals.
Also Some even say that Parliament has lost sovereignty to the
executive e.g.Prime Ministerial government, almost all laws proposed by
government.
9) The U.K could be seen as a unitary state because.
Unitary state means power concentrated in central government.
Local government authorities are granted or allowed power by central
government, which can take it away when it pleases e.g. Thatcher govt abolished Greater London Council on 1 April 1986 – and Labour created the GLA and London mayor in 2000. Central govt can reorganize local.
Also devolution to regions can be taken away e.g. N Ireland parliament and exec suspended by Tony Blair’s govt 2002.
The U.K could also be seen as union or federal state because.
Federal state/ system means power is separated regionally among local
authorities e.g. in Germany or USA where the states/colonies actually created the
US in the 1780s. Local areas have sovereign rights in some areas which cannot be taken away by central executive. They are protected in Constitution. E.g. could not take away Local Executive or Legislature (as in UK with NI or local government). Some laws are made locally (legal sovereignty) e.g. in some US states death
penalty others not, but in the UK examples of this would be different laws and policies in Scotland such as on tuition fees and foundation hospitals and different electoral systems Etc.
10) The first area to consider is the issue of parliamentary or legal sovereignty. As parliament can be regarded as sovereign as it has ultimate decision making authority, and is able to act without undue external constraint. However, since the UK’s membership of the EU, it can be said that the UK has sacrificed some of this legal sovereignty to the EU. For example, it has been sacrificed to supranational bodies such as the European Court of Justice. Laws made by the EU are binding on the UK and cannot be overruled or contradicted by UK law. Therefore the constitutional feature of obeying the rule of law is undermined. For example, the Factortame Case in 1990 where parts of the UK Merchant Shipping Act contravened EU law, and was therefore overruled. Regulations take immediate effect and do not require parliamentary approval. With directives, the results are binding but how these are achieved is left to the discretion of national governments, which preserves UK sovereignty, and therefore the Constitution to an extent. On the other hand the parties of the HOC could still be seen to have some sort of power since UK representatives are involved in the EU legislative process on an equal basis to all other member states and take policy decisions which affect other states. However, the UK still retains ultimate sovereignty in the way that Parliament can choose to withdraw from the EU in a strictly legal sense at any time. It also can be argued that the primacy of EU law has curbed the dangers of an elective dictatorship.
However there are also other issues to consider. UK judges can act on behalf of the European Court of Justice and suspend UK laws until a ruling is made. This in a way does undermine the flexibility of the Constitution, and reduces the influence of convention. But, it does promote a separation of powers which is generally lacking in the UK Constitutional system. It must be noted however that the UK accepted this with the Treaty of Accession.
Another issue to consider is the loss of national veto with the extension of Qualified Majority Voting. Ministers have to share political power with other EU members, for example over agriculture, fisheries and the single market. This again has affected UK Parliamentary power and has made the UK Constitution in a way, more entrenched. The way in which the EU has extended its policy competency areas also highlights this, with areas that were originally the preserve of national governments, for example, home affairs, foreign policy etc, now falling under EU control. This jeopardises Parliament as the sole sovereign body and challenges the UK rule of law. And the UK uncodified Constitution remains in a delicate situation.
RICHARD TALABI -
