The Constitution Society welcomes the report as an important contribution to the campaign for a general improvement in the quality of legislation.  We especially endorse the fourth of the report’s five key recommendations: that a test for identifying constitutional legislation should be agreed between Parliament and the Government.
In evidence to the Committee in 2012, the Society argued that constitutional legislation should be distinguished from ordinary legislation for three reasons:
- Constitutional legislation is the architecture of the state. The elements of the constitution are unavoidably interconnected, so an alteration in one part of the building can have unforeseen consequences in other parts.
- Most major constitutional legislation has an effective presumption of irreversibility.
- A practice has arisen under the current government of employing ‘manner and form’ restrictions where a piece of legislation passed by an ordinary majority imposes restrictions on future Parliaments regarding how that legislation is to be implemented or repealed.