Today the Unit published Monitor 88, providing an analysis of constitutional events over the last four months. This post by Alan Renwick and Meg Russell, which also serves as the issue’s lead article, reviews the new government’s early months, highlighting positive first steps, but also many opportunities for quick wins not taken. It highlights some positive action by the new government, like the publication of a revised Ministerial Code, a speech by the new Attorney General on the rule of law and small steps on parliamentary and electoral reform, as well as some less positive behaviour and inaction, such as failing to further strengthen of standards in public life, rushing legislation and not making further progress with parliamentary and electoral reform.
Labour entered office in the summer pledging to do politics differently. It would, it had said, strengthen the system for upholding ethical standards, restore parliament’s role in scrutinising legislation, uphold the rule of law, revive democratic participation, and move towards more cooperative relations with the devolved administrations. There have been some notable steps forward since. But much remains to be done, and many opportunities for quick wins have not yet been taken.
Keir Starmer said on his first day as Prime Minister that he would ‘restore service and respect to politics’. Yet his early months in office were plagued by revelations about gifts and hospitality that he and other senior Labour figures had received that, though within the rules, did not match public expectations. Action to improve the standards system was slow in coming: only in November, four months after the election, was a revised Ministerial Code published. This included several positive changes: notably, the Prime Minister’s adviser (renamed the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards) can now initiate investigations without Number 10’s approval. But much in the area of standards remains to be done. In June, the Constitution Unit, the Institute for Government, and the UK Governance Project issued a joint statement setting out seven steps for restoring trust in government ethics. Immediate action was possible on all of them. The somewhat delayed Ministerial Code is the only area of significant progress so far.
The government also came to power committed to restoring parliamentary scrutiny. Lucy Powell, the Leader of the House of Commons, had pledged in opposition not to use delegated legislation excessively and to improve scrutiny of primary legislation. These ideas were powerfully reaffirmed by the new Attorney General, Lord (Richard) Hermer, in a speech in October. Yet the government’s actions have not yet lived up to these fine sentiments. Three important bills have been fast-tracked through the House of Commons with very limited scope for detailed scrutiny. And two bills have been widely criticised for providing only a broad framework of rules while empowering ministers to fill in the detail later. A Modernisation Committee has been established to examine reforms to Commons rules; but there are concerns that it may be subject to excessive top-down control – as explored in a Constitution Unit seminar in September.
Hermer’s speech highlighted parliamentary scrutiny as among the practices that can help to maintain a healthy rule of law culture. He also emphasised the importance of international law and the need to build public trust in the law and the institutions that protect it. Such interventions mark a decisive shift from the previous government’s rhetoric and may in themselves help to shift the tone of debate. There have been some concrete actions too, notably in the Attorney General’s revised guidance on legal risk, which emphasises the need for the government to prioritise compliance with domestic and international law. Yet how these warm sentiments will fare when placed under day-to-day political stress is yet to be seen.
As regards democratic participation, Labour in opposition strongly criticised several of the previous government’s innovations, including the introduction of voter ID requirements, the curtailment of Electoral Commission independence, and the replacement of the preferential voting system for mayoral elections with First Past the Post. Some steps have been taken. The list of valid forms of ID has been slightly extended, and a wider review begun. Ministers are working towards lowering the voting age to 16 and improving the system of voter registration. But several steps that could have been taken by now have not been. Notably, though a minister said in July that the existence of a ‘strategy and policy statement’ written by government for the Electoral Commission is ‘inconsistent with the commission’s role as an independent regulator’, the statement issued by the previous government remains in place.
Labour has indicated that it intends to replace the House of Lords with a democratic second chamber. Wholesale reform is unlikely during the current parliament, but ministers have pledged interim measures to address the most problematic features of the status quo. Some progress has been made: a bill to remove the remaining hereditary peers from the House of Lords has already passed the House of Commons and awaits scrutiny from peers next year. Yet there has been no movement on other matters that could have been addressed by now. The Prime Minister could immediately have strengthened the role of the House of Lords Appointments Commission and announced that he would follow its recommendations. These changes are also nervously awaited.
The intention of ministers in London to build more constructive relations with the devolved governments and with mayors and local leaders has been symbolised by the creation of a new Council of the Nations and Regions, which met for the first time in October. Within England, a new Mayoral Council and a council for dialogue with local authority leaders have also convened. Whether such innovations represent real change will, however, take longer to become clear. There are already concerns that parts of the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill impinge upon devolved competences; and the implementation of the Internal Market Act continues to cause tensions.
Westminster and Whitehall do not, of course, operate in a vacuum. New administrations are also bedding down in Cardiff Bay, led by Eluned Morgan, and in Holyrood, under John Swinney. The Welsh government surprised many in September by withdrawing its predecessor’s plans to make Wales the first part of the UK to enforce electoral gender quotas in law. The Scottish government has shifted its focus away from mobilisation for independence towards concentrating on delivering better public services. It is too early, however, to say whether this shift – which has coincided with the sudden death of former First Minister and leading independence champion Alex Salmond – represents a decisive change in the dynamics of Scottish politics, or merely a pause in the ongoing struggle between competing constitutional visions.
Meanwhile, the devolved institutions continue to function in Northern Ireland, though they remain fragile. They will be further tested in the coming weeks, when Stormont votes on whether to maintain the Northern Ireland Protocol, under which the open border on the island of Ireland is maintained.
Back at Westminster, Keir Starmer faces a new Leader of the Opposition, in Kemi Badenoch. Unlike Robert Jenrick, her main rival in the Conservative leadership election, Badenoch resisted the temptation to turn the UK’s membership of the European Convention on Human Rights into a lever for winning party members’ votes – apparently recognising the significant difficulties that departure would bring, not least in Northern Ireland. Yet it remains far from clear whether the party under her leadership will return to traditional conservative values such as the rule of law and protection of strong institutions, or adopt the more populist course that became prominent under Boris Johnson and Liz Truss. The challenges and opportunities of opposition were explored in a Constitution Unit seminar held in early November.
Whatever the intentions of politicians in the UK, the volatile international environment continues to pose significant constraints. Not least, the impending second presidency of Donald Trump in the United States will fundamentally change the context. The international rule of law is likely to face increasing challenges. Maintaining a respectful political discourse in which truth, careful deliberation, and pursuit of the long-term public good are valued can be expected to become harder. Elon Musk’s X – formerly Twitter – has increasingly become a channel for misinformation – in response, the Constitution Unit is one of many organisations to have shifted much of its social media activity to Bluesky. The alliance (for so long as it lasts) of the world’s most powerful elected officeholder and its wealthiest person raises grave concerns about the growth of plutocracy and the weakening of democratic equality.
These pressures remind us that upholding strong constitutional and democratic standards is difficult. A new Constitution Unit guide highlights that, within the UK’s governing system, MPs have especially large responsibilities in achieving that. For both ministers and backbenchers, the desire to achieve immediate gains will have to be balanced against the need to ensure that options are carefully considered, a wide diversity of voices are heard, and core standards are maintained.
About the authors
Alan Renwick is Professor of Democratic Politics at UCL and Deputy Director of the Constitution Unit.
Meg Russell FBA is Professor of British and Comparative Politics at UCL and Director of the Constitution Unit.
Featured image: Sir Keir Starmer MP, The Prime Minister (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) by UK Parliament.