UK CONSTITUTION
1.2 How the constitution has changed since 1997. (not on advanced info but key content)
Pressure for reform in the 1990s stemmed from:
• Demands for modernisation: Tony Blair’s New Labour Party was sympathetic to the idea of
constitutional reform as part of its plan to modernise British institutions. Old Labour had
adopted some political reforms, such as extending the vote to 18 year olds in 1969 and
attempting to pass devolution for Scotland and Wales in 1979. However, it had been
primarily concerned with economic and social issues. New Labour was more open to
demands from pressure groups such as Charter 88 (later renamed Unlock Democracy), who
wanted more open democracy and stronger guarantees of citizens’ rights. Before winning a
large independent majority in the 1997 election, Blair expected that he might need support
from the Liberal Democrats, who were also committed to constitutional change –
particularly reform of the FPTP electoral system.
• The experience of Conservative rule, 1979–97: The Conservative governments had refused
to undertake constitutional reforms. This had helped to build up pressure for change,
especially in Scotland, where the population felt ignored by a distant government in London.
Scottish opinion rejected a number of Conservative policies. For example, the unpopular poll
tax had been trialled there in 1989 before its introduction in England and Wales. Accusations
of corruption or ‘sleaze’ against many parliamentarians in the 1990s also helped to create a
climate of opinion where the health and integrity of traditional institutions were questioned.
• Under Labour 1997–2010: House of Lords reforms, electoral reform; devolution; Human Rights
Act 1998; and the Supreme Court.
Rights protection: Human Rights Act 1998
Incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law. The freedoms contained into
ECHR include the freedoms to life, to a fair trial, of expression and from discrimination among
others. The ECHR requires states to hold free and fair elections, abolish the death penalty, preserve
family life, and give foreigners the same rights as all citizens in state. The HRA means that any public
body cannot act in a way that would break with the convention and that the judiciary must make
rulings that are compatible with it. The Supreme Court can strike down secondary legislation that is
incompatible with the HRA but for primary legislation they can only issue a 'Doctrine of
Incompatibility' urging parliament to change the statute, due to the principle of parliamentary
sovereignty.
The fundamental rights of all British citizens are very clearly laid out in one easily accessible piece of
legislation. There also was an 8 fold increase in the number of human right cases and claims brought
to the high court after the Human Rights Act was passed.
More reform needed? Some Conservatives resent the link to the European Court of Human Rights at
Strasbourg and want to replace the HRA with a British Bill of Human Rights that defines certain rights
more narrowly. Despite the HRA, it is possible for the government to restrict human rights of
individuals for the collective good of the nation.
The limitations of the Human Rights Act were demonstrated by the government’s decision to
‘derogate from’ (declare an exemption from) Article 5, which gave individuals the right to liberty and
security, in cases of suspected terrorism. The introduction in 2005 of control orders, which allowed
, UK CONSTITUTION
the authorities to limit the freedom of movement of such individuals, highlighted the unentrenched
nature of the act.
Devolution: Scotland Act 1998, Government of Wales Act 1998. Good Friday Agreement 1998
The Scotland Act 1998, Northern Ireland Act 1998, and Government of Wales Act 1998 established
the Scottish Parliament, Northern Ireland Assembly and the Welsh Assembly (now Welsh
Parliament). There has been growing demand for Scottish independence and a need to unite the
unionist and nationalist parties in Northern Ireland. Labour’s devolution reforms were a pragmatic
package, designed to damp down support for the pro-independence Scottish National Party (SNP)
and to bring together the conflicting unionist and nationalist factions in Northern Ireland. Demand
for devolution in Wales was always weaker and the Welsh Assembly did not gain comparable powers
to those of the Scottish Parliament.
• Northern Ireland: The Good Friday Agreement and devolution to the Northern Ireland
Assembly transformed the situation in Northern Ireland. Until the collapse of the power
sharing agreement in January 2017, the two main parties had been working together. Since
the 2016 EU referendum there have been ongoing discussions over how Brexit will work for
Northern Ireland as it shares a border with the Republic of Ireland (an EU member). The
Northern Ireland Act 1998 will need to be amended as part of the Brexit process, which may
cause possible conflicts in Ireland
• England: Although there are calls for more devolution to England, when a referendum was
held on the idea of an elected regional assembly for the north east of England, the idea was
rejected. The West Lothian question is the problem of Scottish MPs being able to vote in the
House of Commons on matters that only affect England while English MPs have no say in
devolved Scottish matters.
• Wales: There have been multiple pieces of legislation devolving further powers to Wales
since 1998, in 2006, 2014, 2017 and 2020. One reason for this increased demand is the
imbalance of powers given in 1998 when Wales gained fewer powers than Scotland. The
Welsh nationalist movement has been growing and demand for further devolution
continues.
• Scotland: Devolution did not stem the demand for Scottish independence. In 2014, there
was a Scottish independence referendum which was only narrowly won by the unionists.
The Scottish National Party are now much more popular and electorally successful than in
1998. There has also been further devolution to Scotland in 2016.
More reform needed? The government had no answer to the so-called ‘West Lothian question’: the
anomaly that Scottish MPs at Westminster were able to vote on purely English matters, yet English
MPs had no influence over issues devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Another source of grievance
for England was the persistence of the Barnett formula, devised by Labour minister Joel Barnett in
1978, long before devolution. This determines relative levels of public spending for the component
parts of the UK on the basis of population. It means that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
receive more spending per head of population than England. Also, an attempt to set up elected
regional assemblies in England was abandoned after the only area in which a referendum was held
to test public opinion, the North-East, decisively rejected the idea in 2004.
Electoral reform: Scotland Act 1998, Government of Wales Act 1998. Good Friday Agreement 1998
