The Constitution Unit Blog

Menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • Constitutional Standards and the Health of Democracy
  • Brexit
  • Parliament
  • Elections and referendums
  • Democratic Engagement and Citizens’ Assemblies
  • Government
  • Devolution
  • Events
  • About the Constitution Unit
  • Copyright
  • Judiciary and human rights
  • Parties and politicians
  • Constitutions and constitution making
  • Freedom of information
  • Monarchy, church and state

Tag Archives: Association of Electoral Administrators

Post navigation

 
Newer posts→

Constitutional plans and pledges in the 2019 election manifestos

Posted on December 5, 2019 by The Constitution Unit

stephen.jpgIMG_6487.jpgimage1.000.jpgIMG.20191203.WA0004.jpgWith just two weeks until polling day, the major parties have all published their manifestos: we now know their stated plans for the constitution. Stephen Mitchell, Elspeth Nicholson, Harrison Shaylor and Alex Walker examine what each party has to say about constitutional reform of the UK’s institutions, altering the devolution settlement and developing a written constitution.

This election sees a series of radical proposals for constitutional reform from all the political parties. You would not glean this from the introduction to most of the manifestos, or the table of contents; the parties are keenly aware that most voters are not interested in constitutional reform. So we have had to dig deep to extract the key constitutional pledges from the manifestos. We start with their high level plans for a constitutional convention and a written constitution, before discussing devolution and the Union, electoral reform and parliamentary reform. We have not included their plans for Brexit, because these are well known; but Brexit will obviously be a significant – if not the biggest – constitutional change, with major knock-on effects elsewhere. Nor have we included the parties from Northern Ireland, in the interests of space: this analysis is confined to the parties standing for election in Great Britain.

Democratic innovation

A number of political parties have promised citizen-led democratic initiatives in their manifestos, particularly on constitutional questions. Several parties want to develop a written constitution via this participatory route, and some have also promised citizen involvement on other questions, such as climate change.

Labour have set out their plan for a ‘UK-wide Constitutional Convention, led by a citizens’ assembly’. The scope of the proposed convention is broad – considering the renewal of parliament, how power is distributed and the relationship between the nations and regions of the UK. The convention will also consider the Welsh Government’s 20-point devolution plan, published in October.

The Conservatives agree that ‘proposals to restore trust in our institutions and in how our democracy operates’ are needed. However, they stop short of a citizens’ convention, opting instead for a ‘Constitution, Democracy and Rights Commission’ to be set up in their first year. One of the Commission’s key stated tasks will be to ‘update the Human Rights Act and administrative law to ensure there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government’; and ‘ensure that judicial review… is not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays’.

The Liberal Democrats and the Brexit Party both mention a written constitution and set out measures for greater citizen involvement. The Liberal Democrats promise a written federal constitution that enshrines home rule and makes permanent the Scottish Parliament and National Assembly for Wales. They also plan to introduce a range of citizens’ assemblies at both local and national level on ‘the greatest challenges we face’, including climate change and the state’s use of artificial intelligence. Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Email
  • Print & PDF

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in Brexit, Constitutions and constitution making, Devolution, Elections and referendums, Europe, Government, Monarchy, church and state, Parliament, Parties and politicians, Public Engagement and Policy Making | Tagged 2019 general election, Alex Walker, Association of Electoral Administrators, Brexit party, citizens' assemblies, citizens' assembly, Conservatives, constitution, Cornish Assembly, Cornish Question, courts, crossing the floor, devolved powers, digital campaigning, dissolution, elected House of Lords, election manifestos, Electoral Commission, electoral law, Elspeth Nicholson, England, English devolution, English parliament, english votes for english laws, federalism, first past the post, Fixed-Term Parliaments, franchise, Green Party, Harrison Shaylor, House of Lords, house of lords reform, Human Rights Act, judicial appointments, judicial review, Judiciary and human rights, Labour, Liberal Democrats, Lords reform, National Assembly for Wales, Nicola Sturgeon, Northern Ireland, Options for an English Parliament, PACAC, parliament, Plaid Cymru, political advertising, prime minister, proportional representation, Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, queen, recall of MPs, referendums, Scotland, Scottish government, Scottish Independence, scottish parliament, Second Scottish independence referendum, Single transferable vote, SNP, STV, Supreme Court, Union, voter ID, votes at 16, Wales, Welsh government, Welsh independence

Monitor 73 — On the brink: Brexit, the election and the state of British politics

Posted on November 13, 2019 by The Constitution Unit


meg_russell_2000x2500.jpgalan.jfif (1)The latest issue of Monitor, the Constitution Unit’s regular newsletter, was published today. Since the last issue, a new Prime Minister has been appointed, a new Speaker has been elected, a new Brexit deal has been negotiated, and a new parliament is imminent, as a general election campaign gets into gear this week.
Meg Russell and Alan Renwick review the last four months of constitutional events in what is also the lead article from Monitor 73. The full edition can be found here.

With a general election scheduled for 12 December, the UK could be at a crucial turning point. Or, of course, not: with the polls uncertain, another hung parliament is a real possibility. The UK appeared closer to agreeing terms for leaving the EU in late October than previously, after Prime Minister Boris Johnson negotiated a revised deal and the House of Commons backed his Withdrawal Agreement Bill at second reading. But when MPs refused to accept Johnson’s demand that they rush the legislation through in three days, he refused to accord them more time, and demanded – as he had twice in September – a general election. A further extension of the Article 50 period – which Johnson had previously suggested he would rather ‘die in a ditch’ than allow – was agreed on 28 October – just three days before the 31 October deadline. That being in place, Labour reluctantly agreed to an election, which it is fighting on a pledge to hold another Brexit referendum. The Liberal Democrats want to revoke Article 50 in the unlikely event that they secure a majority, or otherwise hold a referendum.

In recent months much in British politics has already felt close to breaking point. While Theresa May fared badly in navigating parliament as the leader of a minority government (only in the final stages seeking agreement with other parties), Johnson seems actively to have sought confrontation with parliament. This is, to say the least, an unorthodox strategy in a system where the government depends on the Commons’ confidence to survive. It is the very reverse of what would normally be expected under a minority government. Such an approach lasted, at least briefly, due to MPs’ fears of triggering a vote of no-confidence – which might have delivered Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn to Downing Street, or indeed allowed Johnson to ‘crash’ the UK out of the EU on a ‘no deal’ basis. There were even suggestions that he would refuse to resign, and ‘dare’ the Queen to sack him (see page 15), if parliament sought to put an alternative prime minister in his place.

In his short time in office, Johnson has faced very limited parliamentary scrutiny, including just three sessions of Prime Minister’s Questions. He made and cancelled no fewer than three arrangements to appear before the Commons Liaison Committee, much to the frustration of its chair. Most controversially, of course, he sought to prorogue parliament for five weeks – an action ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court (see page 14). Despite the ruling, scrutiny was curtailed by the summer recess, the time lost due to this ‘prorogation that wasn’t’, plus a further short prorogation to facilitate a Queen’s Speech (described as a ‘sham’ by the Unit’s Robert Hazell, given Johnson’s evident desire for an election). The attempted prorogation, and loose talk about refusing to resign, have left many people alarmed that a constitution heavily dependent on convention has suddenly appeared fragile, when faced with players who show little regard for unwritten rules. Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Email
  • Print & PDF

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in Brexit, Devolution, Elections and referendums, Europe, Government, International, Judiciary and human rights, Monarchy, church and state, Parliament, Parties and politicians, Public Engagement and Policy Making | Tagged 2019 general election, Alan Renwick, Article 50, Association of Electoral Administrators, Benn Act, boris johnson, Brexit, Conservative Party, digital campaigning, digital democracy, dominic cummings, Dominic Grieve, Electoral Commission, electoral law, Electoral reform, Facebook, Further referendum on Brexit, general election, Jeremy Corbyn, Jo Swinson, Labour party, liaison committee, Liberal Democrats, meg russell, Monarchy, church and state, Monitor, MPs, Nicola Sturgeon, Northern Ireland, PACAC, parliament, PMQs, proroguing parliament, Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, queen, referendums, robert hazell, Rory Stewart, Sam Gyimah, Scotland, Scottish Independence, Second Scottish independence referendum, social media, Speaker, Speaker of the House of Commons, Supreme Court, Twitter, UK Supreme Court, Vote Leave, withdrawal agreement, withdrawal and implementation bill., women MPs, Working Group on Unification Referendums on the Island of Ireland

Post navigation

 
Newer posts→

The Constitution Unit Website

Monitor 82: Achieving a new normal for the constitution?

Parliament’s Watchdogs: Independence and Accountability of Five Constitutional Regulators

Northern Ireland’s Political Future

Report of the Citizens’ Assembly on Democracy in the UK


Enter your e-mail address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by e-mail.

Join 2,509 other subscribers

Unit Mailing List: Sign up to receive notifications of of our events, newsletter and publications

Link to Join the Unit's Mailing list
Blog at WordPress.com.
  • Follow Following
    • The Constitution Unit Blog
    • Join 1,677 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Constitution Unit Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: