Seven steps to restore trust in government ethics  

The Constitution Unit today publishes a joint statement with the Institute for Government and UK Governance Project proposing seven steps for the new government to restore trust in the regulation of ethics in public life. This is summarised in a letter to The Times, signed by the leaders of these three groups and numerous others.

Trust in politics in the UK, and in the people and institutions of public life, is at an all-time low. Recent reports from the Institute for Government, Constitution Unit and UK Governance Project have identified important, practical reforms to the current system for setting out, monitoring and enforcing standards in public life.

A new parliament offers the opportunity for a renewal of the standards which protect our democracy. This document sets out key priorities, all of which can be easily implemented straightaway.

As soon as possible after the general election, to demonstrate clearly that a page has been turned, the Prime Minister should make a statement to parliament setting out his priorities for ethics and integrity in public life, including committing to:

  1. Publish, promote and provide independent enforcement of a new Ministerial Code designed to guide the ethical conduct of ministers.
  1. Enable ministers, senior public officials and special advisers to identify, manage and report conflicts of interest, by establishing a fair and robust new system.
  1. Ensure lobbying of ministers, senior public officials and special advisers is transparent, by building a new clear, coherent and consistent system.
  1. Regulate the post-government employment and appointments of ministers, civil servants and special advisers with a more rigorously enforced, fair and transparent system.
  1. Reform the appointments process to ensure that appointments to the House of Lords are made on merit, with the purpose of enhancing the work of parliament.
  1. Ensure public appointments are rigorous, delivered through an independent, transparent and timely process.
  1. Enhance the standing of the honours system by strengthening its independence and ending the practice of prime ministerial personal patronage.
Continue reading

Heatwave risk and election safety: does it make sense to hold elections in July?

The UK is about to hold a July general election for the first time in almost 80 years. Sarah Birch, Erik Asplund, Madeline Harty and Ferran Martinez i Coma discuss why the risk posed by extreme heat could affect the conduct and outcome of the voting process. 

It was a chilly start to the summer, and if this trend continues, a brisk walk to the polling station on 4 July could be a welcome means of warming up. But the mercury is slowing rising and a heatwave could be just around the corner. Many will have vivid recollections of sweltering in the 40-degree temperatures experienced in the UK for the first time in July 2022, resulting in a red alert for ‘extreme heat’ from the Met Office and ‘do not travel’ advice from Network Rail. Late July is historically the hottest time of the year, with the early part of the month not far off. The average high in July was 19 degrees a generation ago; it is now over 20 and rising, as shown in this Met Office graph: 

The above image contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 

So when Prime Minister Rishi Sunak called an election on 22 May, people may have wondered what was in store, especially as news was just coming out of temperatures nudging 50 degrees during polling in India, with dozens of poll workers dying as a result.  

This is not the only recent election that has been hit by scorching weather. Campaigning in the US presidential election has recently been affected by heatwaves in the south-west, and unusually high temperatures shaped the June Mexican elections, the European Parliament election in Romania, the April election in the Maldives, last year’s snap parliamentary election in Spain, and the 2022 legislative elections in France, among others. 

Continue reading

Elections and public participation in the 2024 party manifestos

The main party manifestos have now been published, allowing exploration and comparison of their constitutional proposals. In this third post in a series on the manifestos, Alan Renwick looks at the parties’ policies towards elections and public participation. What are they promising, and what should we make of their proposals?

The rules of elections are far from settled. As a recent post on this blog set out, they have changed in numerous ways – both formal and informal – since the last general election in 2019. In their 2024 general election manifestos, all parties pledge at least some further reforms. Some also advocate additional forms of public participation in policy-making, such as referendums or citizens’ assemblies. But the policies on offer differ widely. This post outlines and assesses the proposals.

Votes at 16

Just one pledge in this area has hit the mainstream headlines in the course of the campaign so far, and that is Labour’s plan to introduce votes at 16. Keir Starmer highlighted this policy within a few days of the election announcement, and it is reiterated in Labour’s manifesto. It is matched by the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, Plaid Cymru, and the SNP. By contrast, the Conservative manifesto says ‘We will not change the voting age from 18’. Indeed, the party has sought to weaponise the issue, claiming that Starmer’s policy is an attempt to ‘entrench his power’ for many years.

That Conservative riposte deserves to be greeted with decidedly raised eyebrows, coming as it does from the party that changed the voting system for mayors and police and crime commissioners in a way that benefited itself while damaging key democratic principles.

Continue reading

Parliamentary reform in the 2024 party manifestos 

The main party manifestos have now been published, allowing exploration and comparison of their constitutional proposals. In this second post in a series on the manifestos, Meg Russell looks at the parties’ commitments on parliamentary reform. What are they promising, and what are the prospects for these proposed changes? 

Yesterday on this blog, Lisa James reviewed the constitutional proposals presented by the political parties in their 2024 general election manifestos. Unsurprisingly, parliamentary reform is a key area that appears in several of them. Most parties include aspirations to reform the House of Lords, and some make other commitments on the House of Commons, or the overall power of parliament. This second post in the Constitution Unit’s manifesto series reviews these proposals, reflecting on their origins, merits, and prospects for implementation. It starts with the power of parliament as a whole, before moving to the Commons, and then the Lords. 

The power of parliament 

It is primarily the Liberal Democrats that give space to parliament’s overall place in the constitution – an area subject to significant recent controversy. The Brexit referendum of 2016 led to fierce clashes in parliament, and unusually high-profile arguments about both parliamentary procedure and the limits of the government’s prerogative power. Brexit also raised new questions about parliament’s powers over policy matters that returned to the UK following its exit from the European Union. 

Continue reading