25th November 2022
The nights draw in, as another year comes to an end.
2022 will soon be over.
Yet, it does not look like the constitutional excitements in the United Kingdom will lessen.
The main opposition Labour party has opted to raise the issue of House of Lords reform or replacement; the third-largest party in the House of Commons – the Scottish National Party – are committed to somehow gaining independence for Scotland, despite (or because of) the Supreme Court judgment this week ruling out a unilateral referendum; and in Northern Ireland the shared power arrangements have long broken down, and there is a real prospect of a border poll.
And that is before we even come to the government of United Kingdom, with its various avowed intentions: to break international law by statute with a Northern Irish Protocol Act; to restrict the right to protest; to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with laws to make it more difficult to rely on human rights law; and to suddenly get rid of remaining European Union law without regard to what it does and what impact repeal would have.
This is not a happy polity.
Some of these issues – Northern Ireland and Scotland – are about serious fault-lines in our constitution, and these will need to be addressed, if not resolved.
Others are the sort of self-inflicted, unforced errors that are a feature of our current somewhat frenzied political culture.
But none of these are directly about the social and economic predicament of many of the people in the United Kingdom, or directly about health or education.
Or directly about the war in Europe or the energy crisis.
(Please note the “directly” before you type out comments saying “Actually there is a relationship…”.)
*
As this blog has averred many times, constitutional law should be dull.
This is not because constitutional law is unimportant – it is fundamentally important.
It is because constitutional law sets the parameters of everyday political (and legal) action.
If those parameters themselves become the constant issue then there will be inefficiencies in that everyday political (and legal) action.
Few if any people want to watch a sporting contest where there are continual arguments with the referees and umpires, and eternal confrontations with the governing bodies.
Similarly, constitutional matters – that is, how public bodies get along and resolve tensions, or the boundaries between officials and those who are governed – are not themselves interesting to most normal people.
The opportunity cost of this post-Brexit preoccupation with constitutional matters, and this government’s infantile obsession with stoking culture war issues, is that insufficient thought and effort is going into many other areas of public policy.
These are the sorts of policy topics – the economy, welfare, defence – that should be the priority for public debate and political scrutiny.
Yes, from time to time, serious constitutional matters need to be attended to – and the futures of Scotland and Northern Ireland, and the relationship with the European Union – require careful consideration and realistic arrangements.
But otherwise our body politic seems rather worn out, and it needs a rest.
Our body politic cannot always be in a brace, brace position.
***
Please sponsor this blog, if you can.
Posts like this take time and opportunity cost, and so for more posts like this – both for the benefit of you and for the benefit of others – please support through the Paypal box (above), or become a Patreon subscriber.
***
Please also subscribe for each post to be emailed to you.
(This may be useful as and when Twitter is no more)
***
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome.
RE your list of unhappy UK Government intentions, I would add the (now-enacted) rules on voter ID to suppress voting among the young and among people who often change address. Our current Government has learned a lot from the GOP across the pond. To our shame, I would suggest.
Much as we might want constitution law to be dull, a number of these issues have been in play for many years.
House of Lords reform and the status of Ireland have been on the table for over a century, sometimes quiescent for many years but ultimately unresolved.
The House of Lords is difficult to defend, save for the inconvenient truth that that it usually achieves the job of making a government think again, and we have not identified a reformulation that might retain the good aspects while giving it more legitimacy (but also without challenging the supremacy of the Commons).
Demographics still only point one way in Northern Ireland. One day there will be a border poll and the north will reunify with the south. I suspect there is actually a fair chance of a border poll passing today, if one were called.
The movement advocating an independent Scotland has deep roots but has grown in prominence since the 1960s and in particular since 2011, and as things stand seems to represent something close to a majority in Scotland.
The domestic shenanigans reflects a moment of post-Brexit existential crisis. Lots of cards have been thrown in the air, and it is not clear where they may land. The climate is warming inexorably, Putin has created geopolitical instability in eastern Europe, China is on the rise, authoritarian “managed democracy” is marching across the world, often with unsavoury overtones of populist nationalism, politicians lie and bully with seeming impunity, and we have not yet developed the tools and accepted conventions to deal adequately with the societal changes wrought by the internet and social media …
So what is the UK’s place in the world now? We are a nuclear weapon power, with a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, a leading position in the Commonwealth, and an important economy at the heart of the G7/G20/OECD, but all of that is largely a historic inheritance without the hard power today to justify it. A country of 60-odd million people, on a small island off the coast of Europe.
And where will be in 10, 20, 50 years’ time? Underwater, quite probably.
The unworthy thought that springs to mind when reading “cannot always be in a ‘brace, brace’ position” is that if you are, you’ll come perilously close to pushing your head up your arse.
Or rather, it’s the thought processes, such as they are, of the current government that are unworthy.
Maybe those of us who are over a certain age, 40 plus, were luck enough to come of age in a constitutional quiet period. Bar votes at 18, joining the EU and the collapse of Northern Irish home rule, the period post 2nd World War period was relatively benign from a constitutional perspective.
Maybe we are just reverting to the mean, of the period 1830 to 1930, when constitutional issues in terms of the franchise, parliamentary representation, the Irish question, colonial relations and the powers of the House of Lords and the Monarchy were often at the forefront of political life.
Unfortunately we need our politicians to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time by delivering a constitutional settlement suitable to the majority and deliver upon the other pressing issues that you mention such as the economy, welfare and climate change.
If Brexit has taught us anything it is that you cannot divorce the ramifications of constitutional change from the impact it has on the rest of public policy.
Betteridge’s law says No.
What is a constitution, I thought back to a small club with a constitution – the rules. Those boring things no one reads.
An innocent might think running a club was simple – with clear rules. But old hands will know different, a constitution has history and baggage. Old rivalries and enmities and old friendships too. Not written down but existing in the hearts of influential members and contacts.
Add in the expertise of politicians at power grouping and grabbing and backstabbing and one wonders how anyone might tackle ‘constitutional reform’ and live to tell the tale. Back in the drawer and slam shut quick.
Or write a constitution. But how to build in political expediency – for without that no text will pass. So we require pure wind to have the appearance of solidity, lies the appearance of truth, scandals kept under lock and key and murder sound respectable. A constitution not to be revealed.
A constitution for a club of normal well intentioned people is one thing. A constitution acceptable to politicians something rather different.
Ideally a political constitution should be written while the politicians are still young, fresh and idealistic. To try when they are old and bitter and well versed in the ways of the world seems a forlorn hope.
Looking back at Suez, one might wonder how any government could have thought it might work.
Then one looks at BREXIT.
It seems that at the moment our entire polity is like a half deflated balloon: however you squeeze it another little bubble comes out somewhere else: NI, Scotland, prorogation, honours lists, Brexit, illegality and unaccountability at Ministerial level, the list goes on. The polity is being stretched everywhere. It seems very much an ancien regime And we know what that preceded. The centre has not held. It has been eviscerated by the Right whilst the Left has looked on helpless from its own internecine struggles.
They’ve never really stopped. What generally happened in the last century is that Conservatives don’t support reform. And they tended to be in government most of the time.
It’s only when a different party/coalition runs parliament that reform is achieved. The Liberals-IPP in 1911 and 1918 did a lot. Labour did a bit in ’49, attempted to do some in ’79 and finally saw most of the hereditary peers off in ’99.
What makes the past twelve years seem more of a non-stop constitutional boil is that this time it was a Conservative government that embraced constitutional tinkering, albeit initially forced to do so by a coalition agreement. AV, fixed terms, Scottish independence, post-referendum devolution, Europe.
It should not escape our notice that most of that recent tinkering has resulted in an entrenched status quo. Those issues have not been resolved in any way, only kicked into the long grass repeatedly.
Well the year has come to a close. Yesterday was the end, and today is the beginning, of the liturgical year (it’s still Sunday where I am). What is interesting to read today is Starmer’s interview:
“Ripping up the Brexit deal would lead to years more wrangling and arguing, when we should be facing the future. I’m worried that there are senior members of Rishi Sunak’s government who don’t seem to understand that.”
“I will always seek a close relationship with our neighbours. We’ve seen through the Ukraine crisis that a strong, united Europe is important. But I’ve been very clear – that better relationship won’t be about the single market, customs union or freedom of movement.”
So, Sir Keir rules out a customs union. Teaching the Tories a thing or two about Brexit… Who’d have thought it…
I think it is quite clear that the constitutional morass is a direct consequence of Brexit.
Issues that were safely settled (Northern Ireland) have been reopened. The single appealing aspect of Brexit – that it would make the fragmentation of the UK into a number of smaller states within the EU less likely – runs diametrically counter to those Brexiteers who favour Irish reunification.
Which isn’t to blame Brexit for our constitutional (or economic) woes. They have been there the whole time.
I personally think that we are experiencing a hollowing out of the middle class and skilled working class – and our decision to offshore manufacturing and deindustrialize the economy has hammered the Midlands and North.
Of course – signing FTAs with the US, India and East Asia – CPTPP – effectively stymies any reindustrialisation / onshoring strategy, and condemns us to a services led approach that is leading to ever greater social polarisation.
None of this is discussed openly. We simply have the mantra of Brexit Opportunities.