Reminding People Of Britain How Their Constitutional Set Up Works

Hi all just found this and I thought some of you might find it interesting or useful

Thomas Mathew reports from the Palace of Westminster: While members of the unelected coalition grapple with the financial problems they have inherited from the previous Labour government, by placing the burden firmly on the shoulders of the taxpayers, it would be a good time to remind them how the good old British Constitution works. Because most of the coalition members seem to be blissfully unaware of it. I’d like to begin by stating that the constitution of the United Kingdom is a set of laws and principles under which the Kingdom is governed. Unlike many other nations, the UK has no core constitutional document. It is therefore often said that the country has an ‘unwritten constitution’. However, the word ‘unwritten’ is something of a misnomer as much of the British constitution is embodied in the written form, within statutes, court judgments and treaties. The constitution has other unwritten sources, including parliamentary constitutional conventions and royal prerogatives.

www.stirringtroubleinternationally.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

What are your thoughts on this? Should the people of Britain have a written constitution? After all our statues are supposed to ideally statutes must be in harmony with the constitutional law of the land?

A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a state, city, or county.[1] Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy.[1] The word is often used to distinguish law made by legislative bodies from case law, decided by courts, and regulations issued by government agencies.[1] Statutes are sometimes referred to as legislation or "black letter law". As a source of law, statutes are considered primary authority (as opposed to secondary authority). Ideally all Statutes must be in Harmony with the fundamental law of the land (Constitutional).

en.wikipedia.org...

How can that be if we dont have a written constitution? In my opinion, as it stands it looks like parliment can just make up any law they feel like.

Cheers
The people.

They can and do make up laws when they feel like it.. Especially when it suits them and their agenda's

reply to post by ThePeopleParty

Your link is complaining that the true authority of the monarchy and the herditary peerage is being ignored..
I have to ask- do you actually agree with your own link?
Are you asking for these herditary rights to be more respected?

I must add.. There is a procedure to making new laws and it can take some time.. It has to go through parliament and be voted on.. Although the people never get their say..
Also I'm sure once a year the prime minister meets with the queen to discuss new laws for the coming year.. Not sure what her actual input into that is though..

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by ThePeopleParty

 

Your link is complaining that the true authority of the monarchy and the herditary peerage is being ignored..
I have to ask- do you actually agree with your own link?
Are you asking for these herditary rights to be more respected?

Very good point you raised there.. I didn't think of that.. Be interested to here op's reply..

They'll just change it anyway when it suits them..

I really do not see the need for a written constitution, since I do believe we should be flexible enough to change ourselves and grow, while we have enough history in documents like the great charter to be able to drop back and revisit the past any time we choose.

I would however like to see a law that says.. "Common sense shall prevail above all else"

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by ThePeopleParty

 

Your link is complaining that the true authority of the monarchy and the herditary peerage is being ignored..
I have to ask- do you actually agree with your own link?
Are you asking for these herditary rights to be more respected?

No I dont agree that hereditary rights should be more respected. But I dont agree with the fact that the politicians in parliament who are so out of touch with the common man can just do as they please.
I dont think I agree'd with the link, but if it looked I did so in the opening post, then im sorry for not been clear. I just thought it was some interesting info that some of you might like.

We should have electoral and parliamentary processes which assure representation of, and accountability to, the wishes and interests of the electorate free from party dogma and individual ambition.

If we need a constitution to bring this about then so be it.

reply to post by Freeborn


Couldnt of said it better my self.