To What Extent Have Constitutional Reforms Introduced Since 1997 Made the Uk More Democratic? (01/13)

...

check and balance on the House of Commons as it would if the chamber was elected as then both the chambers would hold the same views because they are both representing the same people. Therefore, the House of Lords reform could also be considered ineffective and not a major constitutional reform as it is still present and is undemocratic since it is not accountable. Also most people believe that the House of Lords Reform has not gone far enough, as there are arguments that they are being unfairly represented despite reform as most of the lords is still made up of elderly white males. It can be argued that to make the lords more representative then there should be more diversity amongst the lords to represent the people better, such has having someone from their own community to represent them. Therefore, it can be argued that reforms mad to the House of Lords have been of limited impact.

The Devolution Reform is said to have limited impact and still criticises the level of democracy in the UK. Some people such as Plaid Cymru and the Scottish national party believe that further reforms should take place to give the two countries more power and move it away from the UK parliament completely. These parties want a bigger impact by being given more powers to do things such as create their own laws and control their own finances. However, an opinion poll into whether Scotland should leave the UK and gain its own government proved that the people of Scotland would rather keep the limited powers it had and remain part of the UK. Therefore, it’s quite controversial to how much the Devolution Reform has created a more democratic UK.

However, the Human Rights Act was also met with criticism, as some people argued that the human rights act was protecting people who didn’t deserve it such as terrorists or illegal immigrants. These people argued that rights such as the right to freedom should not apply to certain individuals as they act unconstitutional by breaking the law and therefore give up their rights. Therefore, it can be argued that the Human Rights Act had limited impact on the democracy of the UK as it did create a fair and just country but this can also be used unfairly by some people. The British Constitution is uncodified and pursuant to the convention that no government can bind to its predecessor, so this reform can be removed at any point, being unentrenched.

Also the constitutional reform act still does not give the supreme court any rights to declare any act passed by Parliament unconstitutional and get rid of the act, which shows the sovereignty of Parliament as nothing is considered above Parliament in the UK. So even though the Supreme Court has been established since 2005, it still does not hold a significant amount of power compared to the US Supreme Court and cannot declare any act of Parliament unconstitutional and get rid of the Act.

To conclude, there have been many reforms made to the British constitution since the year 1997, it can be argued for some of these such as the devolution of powers reform that there has been significant impact, as it increased democracy in the UK because they have decentralized power from Government preventing an overnight executive. However, in other areas of constitutional reform such as the House of Lords reform there has been limited impact, as it still remains an unelected chamber.