header-logo header-logo

24 January 2019 / David Greene
Issue: 7825 / Categories: Opinion , Brexit , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Brexit conundrums

The rejection of the prime minister’s proposals means we are in uncharted territory constitutionally, says David Greene

All the Brexit noise is drowning out the substantial constitutional challenges and changes that the government and Parliament are working through in the Brexit process. One of the main challenges seeks a complete reversal of our constitutional machinery.

Famously (or, for some, infamously), the UK has a largely unwritten constitution, but is probably better described as uncodified since some parts are written. A codified constitution establishes broad principles but, even in its presence, much of the democratic process relies upon unwritten commitments on the part of all stakeholders to the institutions of democracy. In many parts of the world, that commitment is challenged.

The UK democratic process works on the basis that the elected government proposes and Parliament dispenses. The government introduces draft legislation and Parliament decides whether to amend the draft and/or pass the legislation into statute. Amendments can make substantial change to legislation but cannot effectively wreck it. Similarly, the government proposes an annual budget

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll