Blair and Brown – Constitutional reforms

Blair’s Constitutional Reforms

WHO? – Tony Blair’s Labour government

WHY? – They believed that after 18 years in opposition, constitutional reform would limit the amount of power the Conservatives had, making a Labour government seem more achievable.

WHAT?:

• Devolution to Scotland and Wales (1999).
• Devolution to Northern Ireland as part of the Good Friday Agreement (1998).
• A Greater London Assembly consisting of a London mayor (2000).
• Referendums were held to approve the creation of these bodies.
• PR electoral systems were used in the election process for these bodies.
• The Human Rights Act (HRA) was introduced in 1998.
• Stage 1 of the HoL reform was carried out in 2000, with the removal of all but 92 hereditary peers.

Criticism of Blair’s reforms:

• Labour ministers and MPs quickly lost enthusiasm for the reforms because they didn’t want to throw away more power when they had just won a landslide victory in 1997.
• Blair’s reforms didn’t seem to follow a ‘constitutional blueprint’ in the sense that the reforms were individual solutions to particular problems that didn’t have clear goals or coherence.
• The reforms reshaped existing constitutional arrangements but did not address deeper issues. The reforms lacked substantive parliamentary reform; there was no research into changing the Westminster electoral system or an elected second chamber. There was also no mention of a possible codified constitution or an entrenched Bill of Rights.

Brown’s Constitutional Reforms

WHO? – Gordon Brown’s Labour government

WHY? – Noticing that Labour was suffering from partisan dealignment, Brown wanted to show that having taken over from Blair, there was a change in government, not just a change in Prime Minister

WHAT? – Brown’s biggest criticism was the concentration of power possessed by the Prime Minister through the use of the Royal Prerogative without the need to consult parliament. Brown used new conventions and a Constitution Act that meant in future, certain powers will only be exercised with consultation and the approval of Parliament. These include powers to: declare war, request the dissolution of Parliament, recall Parliament, ratify international treaties, make top public appointments without scrutiny, restrict parliamentary oversight of the intelligence services, choose bishops, appoint senior judges, direct prosecutors in certain cases, set rules governing civil service and set rules for entitlements to passports and pardons.

Criticisms of Brown’s Reforms

• The reforms weren’t seen as being major changes in the relationships between the executive and Parliament. So long as the government of the day controls Parliament through majority control over the HoC, it has little to fear from being forced to consult Parliament or gain parliamentary approval for its actions.