The Constitution Society: Working to promote informed debate about constitutional reform

The Constitution Society’s latest paper – Parliamentary Privilege: Evolution or codification - will be formally launched tonight at a dinner for select guests. However the PDF is now available to download here. The authors are Richard Gordon QC, and Sir Malcolm Jack, former Clerk of the House of Commons.

Parliamentary privilege is vital to the effective running of a modern, democratic Parliament and free speech in Parliament is still a crucial component. Today an over-powerful judiciary could be considered Parliament’s main ‘adversary’. In modern times the context, within which parliamentary privilege works, has changed greatly.

This paper examines how best to convince the public that parliamentary privilege remains essential to a twenty-first century parliament. It considers options such as principles legislation on the issue or leaving things alone. It considers the Government’s Green Paper on Parliamentary privilege and asks how real is the danger of judicial activism in the affairs of Parliament and whether that danger is increased or diminished by a new statute.

For any queries on the paper or the launch please email James Hallwood via james@constitutionsoc.org.uk

The Constitution Society is delighted to announce that  Eleanor Laing MP has joined us as a key member of our Advisory Board. Eleanor has been the Conservative Member of Parliament for Epping Forest since 1997 and, before the 2010 General Election, Eleanor was the Shadow Minister for Justice.

Eleanor has a long been at the forefront of constitutional discussions in Parliament, serving as Frontbench spokesman on Constitutional Affairs in 2000, a key member of the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee since 2010 and an important voice on the Joint Committee on House of Lords Reform. Eleanor is also the Chairman of the 1922′s Sub-Committee on Home and Constitutional Affairs and the government’s Special Representative to Gibraltar.

Eleanor joins Labour Peer, Lord Howarth of Newport and former Liberal Democrat MP, David Howarth, bringing political balance to our Advisory Board and key expertise. 

We very much look forward to working with Eleanor in the future.

To see the rest of our Advisory Board, our Trustees, and staff click here. 

It’s been a furiously busy two years of constitutional news: from the AV referendum and failed Lords reform to elected Police Commissioners and fixed-term parliaments. But now with the Coalition reaching mid-point in this parliament what constitutional issues will be raised in the run-up to 2015?

The downgrading of Chloe Smith’s role from that of her predecessor’s indicates that the Coalition will be placing less priority on parliamentary and constitutional reform, but there still remain huge constitutional matters that will be addressed before the end of this parliament.

Read more ›

The latest Coaltion fall-out over Lord’s reform has highlighted the way in which constitutional issues can easily turn into a game of political football. Booted between the Coalition partners, a decision of crucial importance on how we run our democracy has descended into short-term politicking.

A turnaround from a principled stand in favour of boundary changes to opposition marks a new low in how constitutional issues are addressed. The debate on whether AV or Lord’s reform was the price of reducing the size of the Commons misses the point entirely – constitutional changes require scrutiny and well-thought out legislation, not horse-trading and tit-for-tat.

While there are principled reasons for and against specific changes on either side of constitutional debates it is frankly depressing how these have often been quieter than discussion of partisan advantage. From arguments within Labour as to whether AV would benefit them or not to the quid pro quo agreement in the Coalition that AV would benefit the Liberal Democrats and boundary changes would benefit the Tories. 

Read more ›

The Constitution Society provides organisational and secretarial support for the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on the British Constitution, chaired by Lord Norton of Louth. The Group works to broaden legislators’ knowledge base and improve the quality of debate on proposals for constitutional change and the way in which they are introduced.

We are excited to announce that the APPG meetings will now be available to listen to as podcasts. The most recent meeting of the APPG on the Constitution was on on the subject of Party Funding

The speakers, in order of appearance, were:

• Sir Christopher Kelly, Chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life
• Matthew Elliott, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance and Campaign Director of NOtoAV
• Professor Keith Ewing, King’s College London and Unions Together

You can listen to the podcast on our website here. If you would like to download the podcast simply right click the link above and select ‘save as’.

When Michael Moore stood at the Dispatch Box at Westminster on the 10th of January he had a simple message; Scotland’s constitutional settlement rests with Westminster and Scottish independence would require the consent of London.

It could be argued that this view is somewhat at odds with international law and it might not be compatible with the constitutional doctrine of referendums in the United Kingdom.

Leaving aside the issue of whether Scotland should become independent or not, it is important that things are done in accordance with accepted principles of constitutional and international law.

Read more ›

UCL Public Seminar Summary – Parliamentary Boundaries Review

This seminar was conducted by Prof Ron Johnston, Prof Charles Pattie and David Rossiter who presented the findings of their audit of the public consultation phase of the boundary review. All commissions must present their Final Report to the Secretary of State by 1 October 2013.

What fundamental changes were made?

The criteria for determining the boundaries changed from an organic one to an arithmetic one and this fact dominates the kind of transformation that will be seen. In the past the drawing up of constituency boundaries took into account a sense of community and historical connections between places, the new system laid out in The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 is defined by mathematical rules. These rules require that all UK Constituencies (with the exception of four) have electorates within -/+5% of the national quota of 76,641. The effects of this mean that it has often been impossible for the Boundary Commissions to keep historically and socially connected areas together.

Read more ›

Nick Clegg will signal that Lords reform will be the key parliamentary battleground of next year by promising the next Queen’s speech will include plans for an elected upper house that will be forced past peers if necessary.

In a speech on Monday to the Demos thinktank, the deputy prime minister will make the changes central to what he says is a drive to create an open society free of vested interests.

Read it at The Guardian ›

[First Published on Thursday 17th February 2011]

The following post was first published on ConSoc’s previous site. It is recorded here as a window onto issues as they were at the time. For more up to date news on the Constitution and Constitutional reform, make sure to follow the ConSoc blog.

A binding referendum will be held on May 5^th to decide whether to change the voting system to the Alternative Vote.

The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill received royal assent last night, in time for the programmed referendum date.

While the Lords voted twice to require a minimum 40% turnout in order for the referendum result to be binding, the amendment was overturned by a Commons majority of 68.

Also removed from the final Bill was Lord Pannick’s amendment increasing the amount by which constituencies will be permitted to vary from the national quota.

The most significant government concessions are the special consideration given to the Isle of Wight and the provision for public hearings on boundary review proposals, both of which made it onto the statute book.

[First Published on Friday 30th July 2010]

The following post was first published on ConSoc’s previous site. It is recorded here as a window onto issues as they were at the time. For more up to date news on the Constitution and Constitutional reform, make sure to follow the ConSoc blog.

On 22nd July 2010 a bill was introduced in Parliament providing for a referendum on the voting system used to elect MPs to the House of Commons and a reduction in the number of MPs, together with an equalisation of the sizes of constituencies.  The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill provides for an asymmetrical linkage between these two sets of proposals:

• Assuming the Bill is passed, the boundary changes take effect at the time of the next general election whatever the result of the referendum
• Even if there is a ‘yes’ vote in the referendum, Alternative Voting will not be introduced unless the boundary changes have been made. Alternative Voting is explained in more detail here.

Is a referendum even necessary?

There is no constitutional precedent which suggests that a referendum is required to change the voting system for the House of Commons. In the first half of the 20th century there were two separate attempts (in 1917-18 and 1929-30) at legislation to introduce a form of AV. Both attempts ultimately failed, but neither the supporters nor the opponents of these measures believed that a referendum was required.

Read more ›