Revision reading: constitutional reform

There is lots of good writing about at the minute on this topic and reading these articles makes a welcome break from the revision process. Many of these articles will be plundered for future editions of tutor2u’s exambuster and one of them will become a staple feature of future lessons.

Few seem to favour no reforms to the political process at the minute, and therefore most fall into one of two broad camps. There are those who see the current expenses scandal debate as a platform for deep and wide reaching changes to the UK’s governing architecture. There are others, however, who caution against haste, suggesting that radical reforms to the constitution need to be considered by cool and wise heads - a point made forcefully by Professor Brazier in a letter to the Times.

The Economist’s Bagehot appears to fall in the latter category rather than the former, suggesting reforms to parliamentary procedure that do not call for a radical overhaul of the constitution. Bagehot does, however, advocate fixed term parliaments.

Helena Kennedy QC is far more radical and calls for a citizens convention on reform of the constitution. She spells out her plans here in the Sunday Times.

Andrew Rawnsley writes (gracefully as always) on how only the Lib Dems have been long term supporters of many of the changes party heavyweights are currently advocating.

The Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond, points out the advantages of some of the features of the Scottish Parliament.

My favourite article on this topic so far is by an Irish writer on the differences he will experience when voting in his elections compared with those in the UK. Lots of good examples and a nice illustration of the electoral politics of a different country written in a way that is more readable then the rather cold and overly factual accounts found on the pages of the websites of pro-PR organisations. Cut out and keep!