Civilisation des îles britanniques

...

The evolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries secured a progressive transfer of the Sovereign's powers and prerogatives in the hands of the Cabinet, initially a body composed of the most prominent members of Parliament which from an advisory role became the actual government of the Kingdom. Hence when the Queen delivers her speech at the opening of each year parliamentary session which state the objectives of her Government, she is in fact reading a document which was written by the Prime Minister and approved of by the Cabinet.

This explains why Walter Bagehot, the editor of the Economist and one of the most famous political journalists of the second half of the 19th century, concluded that “The King reigns but does not rule”.

I. Government and Parliament

The uncodified nature of the constitution and accidents of History have been conducive to an absence of the traditional separation of powers as defined by philosophers such as Montesquieu and Tocqueville, inspired by the Athenian example of ancient Greece, and which is characteristic of all modern democratic States. The "government" (i.e. the executive) is drawn from Parliament. The doctrine of "limited government", central in all written constitutions, is not prominent in the UK constitution. Since the government is said to be “a committee drawn from Parliament” to quote Bagehot's analysis, and virtually every government has a majority, governments have no formal restraint on their legislative power. This can only broken if a majority of Members of Parliament -which implies that an important section of M.Ps who belong to the party in power vote against a government bill. But this seldom occurs because party discipline is strong in the House of Commons, and is maintained through Party stewards called whips. It must be said, however, that discipline is not so strong in the House of Lords and in a recent past the Lords, even though they belong in their majority to the party in government, proved far more reluctant than the Commons to give in to the Prime Minister and the Government. This was the case in the 1980s, when Mrs Thatcher was inflicted a number of defeats when the Lords rejected government Bills, under the influence of former conservative leaders such as the late Harold Macmillan who sided with the opposition on a number of occasions. The power of the House of Lords being limited however, such defeats were only temporary. The phrase “elective dictatorship” was coined in 1976 to highlight the enormous potential power given to the Cabinet and to the Prime Minister by the constitution. In practice, some principles and elements of the constitution, such as the rule of Law, individual rights and liberties, conventions and traditions, are so ancient and enshrined in the political culture of the British people that they would be extremely difficult to abolish. Parliamentary sovereignty and of the rule of law, be it Statutory Law or Common Law, have been widely considered as the fundamental principles of the UK's unwritten constitution since the nineteenth century, and attempts to substantially circumvent them would likely be met with backlash by the electorate or Sovereign. Part of Tony Blair's recent loss of popularity can be attributed to his will to put an end to the long established tradition of fox-hunting for example. Though his long term in office and opposition to the war in Iraq have obviously played a part, one must bear in mind the hundred of thousands of Britons who took to the streets in London to protest against the government's decision to push through Parliament a Bill to abolish the practice of fox hunting. Even Prince Charles, as a member of the Royal family and the heir to the throne -who as such must not interfere in politics- went out of his way to criticize the bill.

- Flexibility

Since there is neither a written constitution on the model of the US nor a formal separation of powers, Parliament has the ability to change any aspect of the constitution at will. In theory, the flexibility of the system makes it responsive to political and social changes, especially since many political principles are simply conventions. Yet the absence of watchdogs or checks and balances also implies that in theory far-reaching alterations could be made without significant popular support. For instance until recently ( that is to say the incorporation of the ECHR in the British legal system in 1998) there was no comprehensive document that attempted to codify the rights of citizens in the UK.

I must be noted that Constitutional reform has been particularly rapid in the past decades, and include a complete review of the social and economic structure of the country with the waves of privatizations that occurred in the 1980s under the Thatcher and Major governments and tipped the scale in favour of a much more individualistic, liberal-minded society, and also the deep and far-reaching transformations initiated by the successive Blair governments, with Human Rights Act 1998, the devolution of powers of government to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Freedom of Information Act and, cherry on top of the cake a significant reform of the House of Lords. The United Kingdom of the early 21st century, though it retains the main characteristics of its long established culture and traditions, has undeniably undergone changes that make it a different country from what it was from the aftermath of the second world war to the late 1970s.

- Royal Prerogative

Royal prerogative is the name for powers originally exercised by the Monarch. In practice, by convention, most prerogatives are now directly exercised by ministers, such as the power to regulate the civil service, or the power to issue passports. Some absolute prerogatives (also known as the monarch's personal- or reserve prerogatives) still exist, but these are by convention exercised only on the advice of the Prime Minister (PM) and cabinet. These powers include summoning, proroguing and dissolving Parliament, granting royal assent o bills and formally appointing office holders. The most important reserve prerogative - also the most automatic under the current constitutional settlement - is considered to be the appointment and dismissal of Prime Ministers. The last time this reserve prerogative was exercised by the monarch without reference to the Cabinet was with the appointment of Labour leader Harold Wilson in 1974, though his party did not have a majority in Parliament. This was a time of both economic and political crisis which resulted in a series of hung parliaments (parliaments without a majority party). The current Monarch, Queen Elisabeth II, exercised

...