There is quite a bit of confusion about the UK constitution. The last revolution was in 1688. It was a popular revolution and the new constitutional document (the Bill of Rights) was created as a document outside parliament.
Hence there was not really any legal continuity between the previous parliaments and that parliament. It was key because it created a constitutional monarchy.
Other constitutional statutes such as Magna Carta 1297 and other statutes were adopted, but the Bill of Rights underpins all of that. That all comprised the constitutional settlement of 1688.
That is why it is my view that referenda are not alien to the UK constitution and that there is a role for referenda particularly in dealing with constitutional issues. We do not have a parliamentary system which has direct continuity from 1251 not least because of the revolution of 1688, but also previously.
Where, therefore, there is a poplar demand for a referendum on a constitutional matter then logically parliament should have the option of providing such a process essentially at the request of the people as a whole.
Hence there was not really any legal continuity between the previous parliaments and that parliament. It was key because it created a constitutional monarchy.
Other constitutional statutes such as Magna Carta 1297 and other statutes were adopted, but the Bill of Rights underpins all of that. That all comprised the constitutional settlement of 1688.
That is why it is my view that referenda are not alien to the UK constitution and that there is a role for referenda particularly in dealing with constitutional issues. We do not have a parliamentary system which has direct continuity from 1251 not least because of the revolution of 1688, but also previously.
Where, therefore, there is a poplar demand for a referendum on a constitutional matter then logically parliament should have the option of providing such a process essentially at the request of the people as a whole.
Comments