To what extent does Great Britain need a codified constitution?

Another factor is that prerogative powers exercised by the government on behalf of the Crown are ill-defined and uncontrolled. Prerogative-based actions can only be limited if the courts judge them to be excessive. Decisions such as the declaration of war, the committal of British troops to battle, the signing of foreign treaties and general foreign policy initiatives are all taken under discretionary prerogative powers.

Also the rights of citizens are under threat and require greater protection. The police have been given increasing powers as crime and the threat of terrorism have increased. The state holds a huge amount of information about individuals. Rights in the workplace need firmer guarantees as trade unions have become weaker.

On the other hand people argue against a codified constitution. They say that a constitution would weaken government. The British government is admired for its ability to control the legislature, to carry out electoral mandate without delay and to deal with unforeseen circumstances without encountering the hindrance of too many constitutional restraints.

Another factor is that the judiciary would have to become more involved in resolving constitutional disputes. Many of these concern the power of government, so are political. Should judges be involved, given that they are neither elected nor responsible?

Also a codified constitution or Bill of Rights would remove the sovereignty of Parliament, which is very important. It would challenge the institutions of the monarch and Parliament, two things that are very highly regarded in GB and hence should remain sovereign.

In conclusion I believe that the GB constitution should remain uncodified, this is because   Britain has survived very well until now with an unwritten constitution. The public is not clamouring for a written constitution because it understands the conventions which govern political procedure. Written constitutions are ruled upon by judges. In Britain our judges are unelected and it is therefore undemocratic to take power away from our elected representatives and give it to judges who tend to be quite reactionary. And finally one of the benefits of the current system is its flexibility. If they have a political mandate from the people, the government can reform the constitution, which is a major advantage for GB compared to the USA etc.