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: public engagement

Post navigation

← Older posts

The Brown commission’s proposals on reform of the House of Lords

Posted on March 1, 2023 by The Constitution Unit

In December, the commission chaired by Gordon Brown for the Labour Party proposed ambitious reform of the House of Lords, to create an elected ‘Assembly of the Nations and Regions’. In this first of two posts considering Labour’s options for Lords reform, Meg Russell dissects the proposals, in the light of previous UK and international experience. She suggests that the Brown report leaves much detail unspecified, making ambitious Lords reform unlikely before the second or third year of a Labour government.

The commission chaired for Labour by Gordon Brown, reported in December, proposing that the House of Lords should be replaced by an elected ‘Assembly of the Nations and Regions’. This post explores the merits of its proposals, and how feasible they are, as the first of two posts considering Labour’s options for Lords reform. The two posts summarise arguments in a report to be jointly published on Friday by the Constitution Unit, the Institute for Government and the Bennett Institute at the University of Cambridge.

The Brown commission wanted a reformed House of Lords to underpin and strengthen the UK’s territorial settlement. Much of its report was focused on economic inequalities and the benefits of decentralising power, plus a desire to strengthen the Union and discourage separatism. The proposals for the second chamber appeared late in the report, after various proposed reforms to devolution, and were intended to tie the whole system together.

Whether such an Assembly of the Nations and Regions could successfully meet these goals would depend on three things: its functions, its composition, and the practicalities of implementation. Each of these is considered briefly below, in the light of previous Lords reform proposals, and overseas experience.

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in Devolution, Parliament, Parties and politicians | Tagged 2015 Labour manifesto, 2019 Labour manifesto, Assembly of the Nations and Regions, Australia, Australian Senate, Brown Commission, Bundesrat, Canada, Chamber of the nations and regions, citizens' assemblies, England, Germany, Gordon Brown, House of Lords, Labour, Lords reform, meg russell, Northern Ireland, parliamentary boundaries, public engagement, Scotland, Second chambers, South Africa, Spain, The Commission on the UK's Future, Union, US Senate, USA, Wakeham Royal Commission, Wales | 7 Comments

The Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales: putting Wales on the front foot

Posted on January 20, 2022 by The Constitution Unit

The fallout from Brexit, a global pandemic and the continuing possibility of Scottish independence has made for a political landscape in the UK that is under acute pressure. Against this backdrop, and in her role as co-chair, Laura McAllister of Cardiff University’s Wales Governance Centre explains why Wales has made a conscious decision to take hold of its own destiny with the formation of a new independent Commission to review its constitutional future.

We are in the middle of some of the biggest political changes of a generation. As the UK deals with new post-Brexit realities, copes with rising challenges around the Northern Ireland border and anticipates a second Scottish independence referendum, the union of the four nations is under threat as never before.

Wales’s political history has often seen us standing on the sidelines, reacting to events seemingly beyond our control. The newly formed Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales offers an opportunity to change this dynamic.

We intend to lead a national conversation about how Wales should be governed, enabling the people of Wales to take decisions into their own hands, guided by their ambitions for the kind of country they want to live in.

My co-chair Dr Rowan Williams, a former Archbishop of Canterbury, and I have been given a hugely exciting opportunity to press for meaningful change to the constitutional future of Wales – to help develop fit-for-purpose, sustainable and popular models of governance for our nation.

What are the Commission’s objectives?

Our two main objectives are broad and far-reaching, rightly so in order to be able to explore the whole suite of potential options for constitutional reform.

The first is to develop options for fundamental reform of the constitutional structures of the United Kingdom, in which Wales remains a part. The second is to consider and develop all progressive principal options to strengthen Welsh democracy and deliver improvements for the people of Wales.

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in Devolution | Tagged Albert Owen, Anwen Elias, Independent Commission on the Constitutional Future of Wales, Kirsty Williams, Laura McAllister, Lauren McEvatt, Leanne Wood, Michael Marmot, Miguela Gonzalez, Philip Rycroft, public engagement, Rowan Williams, Shavanah Taj, Union, Wales, Welsh Devolution, Welsh government, Welsh independence | 1 Comment

Placing the public at the heart of the Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster

Posted on September 11, 2019 by The Constitution Unit

download.001images.001MFlinders.new.small.jpgProgress on the Restoration and Renewal (R&R) project has been slow, but despite the time taken, there has been limited engagement with the public on the issue. Alexandra Anderson, Alexandra Meakin and Matt Flinders express optimism that amendments to the legislation responsible for R&R indicate a promising change of direction, creating an opportunity not to simply restore and protect the past but to embrace a positive vision of the future.

It is now three years since a Joint Select Committee warned that ‘The Palace of Westminster, a masterpiece of Victorian and medieval architecture and engineering, faces an impending crisis which we cannot responsibly ignore’. This crisis, the Committee continued, was likely to be a catastrophe, such as a major fire or flood, or a succession of failures of the infrastructure, leaving the building unusable. There can now be no doubt about the validity of this warning: since the Committee reported we have seen the House of Commons flood during a debate, a ‘football-sized lump’ fall off the Victoria Tower, and wardens are currently patrolling the building twenty-four hours a day to address the regular outbreaks of fire (now totalling 66 in the last decade). As the then Leader of the Commons, Andrea Leadsom, told MPs in May — referring only to the instances of crumbling masonry — ‘It is only through luck that none of them has led to any serious injuries or even fatalities’. If any further warning was necessary, the tragedy of Notre Dame in April demonstrated the potential devastation of fire.

This week has marked a significant step forward in plans for a major renovation, aimed at keeping the building—and the visitors, parliamentarians, and staff within it—safe from disaster or tragedy. The Parliamentary Buildings (Restoration and Renewal) Act 2019, which has now received Royal Assent, will establish the necessary governance bodies so that the planning work for what will be a multi-billion, multi-decade project can begin in earnest.

Not only will the Act offer the best opportunity for preventing a crisis hitting the Palace, it also offers the opportunity to place the public at the heart of this renovation: the Restoration and Renewal (R&R) Programme. This is hugely significant. The original text of the legislation (and the projects associated with the wider programme) were designed to address only the crisis of the building, and not the broader crisis of UK democracy. Amendments tabled in the House of Lords and approved by the Commons on Monday have ensured that public engagement will be an integral part of fixing the Palace. Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in Parliament | Tagged Alex Meakin, Alexandra Anderson, Alexandra Meakin, andrea leadsom, Audit of Political Engagement, Baroness Andrews, Baroness Stowell, Baroness Stowell of Beeston, Crick Centre, decant, Feminising Politics, Hansard Society, House of Commons, House of Commons Commission, House of Lords, Institute for Government, John Bercow, Joni Lovenduski, Leader of the Commons, Lord Bethell, Matt Flinders, Northern Estate Programme, Palace of Westminster, parliament, Parliamentary Buildings (Restoration and Renewal Bill), public engagement, restoration and renewal, Sarah Childs, Sir Bernard Crick Centre for the Public Understanding of Politics, Speaker, Speaker of the House of Commons, The Good Parliament

Investigating the mechanics of unification referendums in Ireland, North and South 

Posted on September 6, 2019 by The Constitution Unit

alan.jfif (1)Alan_Rialto2 (1)The Constitution Unit has today announced the creation of a new Working Group on Unification Referendums on the Island of Ireland. In this post, Alan Renwick and Alan Whysall explain why the group is needed, what issues it will examine and how it will work.

The Constitution Unit has today announced that, with generous funding from the British Academy’s Humanities and Social Sciences Tackling the UK’s International Challenges programme, it is creating a new Working Group on Unification Referendums on the Island of Ireland. Comprising 13 political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, and historians based in Belfast, Dublin and London, this group will work over the coming year to examine the processes before, during and after any future referendums on the question of Irish unity – beginning with what is often known as a ‘border poll’ in Northern Ireland. It is an expert group: it will take no view on the desirability in principle of referendums, nor on any of the outcomes that may follow. In this post, we set out why such an exercise is needed, what questions the group is likely to explore, and what form the project will take.

Why the Working Group is needed

A deep investigation into unification referendums on the island of Ireland is needed for three interlinked reasons. First, such referendum might actually happen, potentially very soon. The Northern Ireland Act 1998 – which enshrines the key elements of the Good Friday Agreement in UK law – says that the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland ‘shall’ call such a poll ‘if at any time it appears likely to him that a majority of those voting would express a wish that Northern Ireland should cease to be part of the United Kingdom and form part of a united Ireland’. While opinion polls continue to indicate that there is no majority for a united Ireland at present, the trend is towards greater support for that proposition, and some recent polls have suggested that a hard Brexit would shift opinion further. It is thus possible that the condition for triggering a referendum will be met in the near future. Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in Devolution, Elections and referendums, Europe | Tagged Alan Renwick, Alan Whysall, ballot papers, border poll, British Academy, British-Irish relations, citizens' assemblies, citizens' assembly, Good Friday Agreement, Hard Brexit, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Northern Ireland Act 1998, Options for an English Parliament, Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act, PPERA, public engagement, referendums, Seamus Mallon, secretary of state for Northern Ireland, The Mechanics of a Further Referendum on Brexit, united Ireland, Working Group on Unification Referendums on the Island of Ireland

Citizens’ Assemblies: what are they good for?

Posted on July 19, 2019 by The Constitution Unit

0.000.jpg (1)Citizens’ assemblies are suddenly in vogue. National, devolved and local bodies (including several Commons committees) have held or are intending to make use of citizens’ assemblies to seek guidance on topics such as climate change and social care. At the same time, senior politicians are now advocating for an assembly on Brexit. However, citizens’ assemblies are not a miracle cure: like any method of determining the public will, they have limitations. In order to explore the benefits of citizens’ assemblies, the Unit organised a seminar to discuss how they work, best practice and when they should be used. Lucie Davidson summarises the main contributions. 

On 1 July, the Constitution Unit held an event entitled ‘Citizens’ Assemblies: What are they good for?’. Speaking were Joanna Cherry QC MP, SNP Justice and Home Affairs Spokesperson at Westminster; Sarah Allan, Head of Engagement at Involve; Lilian Greenwood MP, Chair of the Commons Transport Select Committee; and Professor Graham Smith, Director of the Centre for the Study of Democracy at the University of Westminster. Chaired by the Unit’s Deputy Director, Alan Renwick, the event discussed past use of assemblies, what they can be best used for in the future, and what constitutes a ‘good’ citizens’ assembly. 

Joanna Cherry

Joanna Cherry offered an overview of the Citizens’ Assembly of Scotland,  which was announced by Nicola Sturgeon in April. Just as Ireland’s Citizens’ Assembly and Constitutional Convention were born out of a time of crisis following the financial crash in 2008, the constitutional crisis caused by Brexit stimulated the political interest necessary for the creation of Scotland’s own assembly. The Brexit process has reignited debate about the relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK; Scotland voted to remain in the EU but has had ‘no say’ in the Brexit negotiations. In addition, if Brexit happens, Scots will lose their EU citizenship, despite the argument that independence was a threat to Scotland’s place in the EU being a prominent part of the 2014 ‘No’ campaign. A recent poll by the Sunday Times has indicated a majority of Scots would vote for independence if faced with a ‘no deal’ Brexit or a Boris Johnson premiership.  Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted in Events, Public Engagement and Policy Making | Tagged Brexit, citizens jury, citizens' assemblies, citizens' assembly, Citizens' Assembly on Brexit, Citizens' Assembly on Social Care, citizens' initiatives, climate change, deliberative democracy, Events, Extinction Rebellion, Graham Smith, Irish Citizens Assembly, Joanna Cherry, Lillian Greenwood, Lucie Davies, parliament, public engagement, Sarah Allan, Scottish government, Scottish Independence, scottish parliament, select committees

Post navigation

← Older posts

The Constitution Unit Website

Monitor 83: Sunak’s constitutional dilemmas

New Report: Public Preferences for Integrity and Accountability in Politics

New Report: Reforming the Prerogative


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

Join 2,515 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.
The Constitution Unit Blog
Blog at WordPress.com.
  • Follow Following
    • The Constitution Unit Blog
    • Join 1,683 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: