The Labour government 1997 to 2001 will go down in history as one of the great constitutional reform administrations. After a good start, however, the pace of reform slowed down and finally stopped. Labour is no longer leading change but rather being driven by circumstances. The irony is that a government that started as reformers have come to be seen by many as the defenders of the status quo.
The new prime minister will have an opportunity to change this perception and to make real progress prior to the next election. He will inherit two constitutional hot potatoes from his predecessor. These will become a test of his reforming instincts.
Lords reform
At the beginning of March, the House of Commons voted by a majority of 113 in a free vote to have a fully elected second chamber. This was a historic vote that for the first time gives a clear decision on Lords reform. All three parties agree with the present powers and now agree that the second chamber should either be wholly or predominately elected. However, hostility to reform remains deeply ingrained in the House of Lords itself which will put every obstacle it can in the government’s path.
While superficially attractive, putting reform off yet again would be a mistake. The momentum created in March will be lost while the House of Lords will be no less obstructive and the new parliamentary session will have its own challenges. It would send a terrible message if one of the first acts of the new prime minister was to announce putting off Lords reform effectively until after the centenary of the 1911 Parliament Act, which formally started the reform process.
Party funding
The key question Labour will have to address following Sir Hayden Phillips’ Review of the Funding of Political Parties is how to cap donations, removing the damaging perception that party politics is in hock to large donors, while maintaining the link with thousands of ordinary trade union levy payers. This is not an issue that can be ducked: it would be a scandal if Labour ended up defending the status quo and was perceived by the public to put short-term party interest before the long-term health of UK party politics.
If this issue is left to fester, then eventually a future government will end up being forced to sort it out: if it is a Conservative one, the trade union-Labour link could be put under real threat.
Strengthening Parliament and the future
The new prime minister should indicate the direction of future travel by agreeing to strengthen parliament and put royal prerogative powers under parliamentary control. Over the last three years there has been a cross party campaign to give parliament the final say in sending British troops into conflict situations. Enacting this would signal a wish to strengthen parliament to better hold the executive to account.
Finally, a new constitutional settlement should be at the core of the next Labour party manifesto. Ultimately we need a constitutional convention involving ordinary citizens to sort out where power should lie in our country and how to protect the rights of all inhabitants of the UK. This isn’t merely an exercise in constitutional tidiness: a country’s constitution lies at the heart of its identity. For too long the British have valued tolerance and fair play yet declined to write down its core values in a way that citizens of other countries take for granted.
The new prime minister should remember a saying from his predecessor. Labour is at its best at its boldest and in no area is this more true than in the area of constitutional and democratic reform.