Sun, Sea and British Politics....

While over the summer many Brits focused on their tans and holidays (and waiting for the football season to start again) British politics decided that it was time to cause a stir.We all took to the polling stations to vote on one of the biggest decision in Britain. "Brexit" The idea of leaving The European Union and becoming independent in our own rights as the United Kingdom. The "Brexit" has divided the country in half with the votes, resulting for the leave campaign winning with 51.9% of the vote. Expectedly the Brexit vote left to a weakened pound. Compared to last year Euro rates in the summer of 2015. After the Brexit vote the euro dropped around 12% (just what all the summer travellers wanted...) 

The whole Brexit campaign left Britain in a little bit of a dark cloud, so as Brits do we make things more complicated! The brevet vote left David Cameron, former Prime Minister of the UK to resign as the PM. This left the new race for the new PM with the exciting candidates...

The outcome of the resignations lefts Theresa May as the new PM who promised to lead Britain in the right direction although she disagreed with the vote to leave. The new lady of the house started with new cabinet ministers and roles: Secretary of state for Brexit - David Davis, and an international Trade secretary - Liam Fox. However it could be argues that there will be problems within the cabinet due to the differences in ideologies However she has stated that she has no intrust currently to take article 50 into the commons for a vote, which is extremely controversial baring in mind the UK voted for Brexit...

Many economists prior to the referendum had been predicting an immediate and significant impact on the UK economy which hasn't really shown since the vote itself.  

Corbyn didn't have a great summer himself, his political position was questionable. The idea of reducing MP's from 650 to 600 under government plans has lead the the Labour party to have a harsh blow. More worrying for Corbyn is that he struggled to reach the ballot. Even worse for Corbyn is the scandal he seems to be tangled in with Richard Branson.

Not all clear skies for Britain. 

Leaving the EU and how it would affect sovereignty and therefore the UK constitution

Leaving the EU could lead to a defect on sovereignty and the UK constitution. The referendum for later on this year will determine wether the UK will stay in the EU. The Treaty on European Union provides for a member for a state can leave the EU.

Sovereignty means overall power, The UK follow european laws which means that the EU have sovereignty over us, although can be debated. The power which lies with the EU suggest that leaving the EU would leave Britain to have overall power amongst itself. This can be a downfall because it leaves just the British Bill of rights which is looking to cover the UK constitution. This can be a downfall because rules within the EU and how the different laws linking with other EU members.

Leaving the EU will effect trade within other countries across Europe and the world. Leaving the EU will cause problems with economic factors in bringing money into the UK. Although the British constitutional rules won't be effected much, the laws within the EU will be completely deficient.

What are the core principles of the UK constitution?

The UK has 5 core principles in its constitution. A constitution is a set of rules, The principles are the key features inside. The main core principles are : Parliamentary Sovereignty, The rule of law, Parliamentary government and constitutional monarchy.

Parliamentary sovereignty:
Sovereignty is the overall power, parliamentary sovereignty is the location of constitutional power. If the constitution defines the duties, power and functions of the various institutions of government. It also refers to the overall power in which the government have, meaning they can change or amend laws whenever they wish. Parlimentary Sovereignity is usually seen as the key concept of the constitution however can also been seen as controversial. You could suggest that popular Sovereignity has become uprising to the fact of the wider use of referendums.

The rule of law:
The rule of law is the principles that the law should rule. It should apply to all conducts or behaviour and cover the private citizens and public officials. The rule of law can be seen as the second most important principle and is meant to be an alternative for the constitution. It is a way of saying that government is not above the law!

Parlimentary government:
The structure of a constitution is made by executive and Parlimentary. The government simply run in and out of parliament therefore interlocking constitutions. Many suggest that Parlimentary Sovereignity and Parlimentary government are the same or similar things as people suggest that because the closeness of parliament and goverenment, the Sovereignity does not lie with government, but with Parliment. This could be seen as an elective dictatorship.

Constitutional monarchy:
Although the monarchy do not have overall power, they are central in the UK constitution. The majority of their power goes to ministers in Parliment. In 1867, Walter Bagehot created the difference between the defined parts of the constitution eg: The monarchy and the HOL. Compared to the efficient part eg: the cabinet and the HOC. Referring to Walter, the dignified roles still play a vital role in the constitution although they don't not bring a strong political meaning.

Should the UK adopt a codified constitution?

I personally believe that the UK should adopt a codified constitution. For the reasons I state below, i think a codified constitution would be beneficial in the UK for making it an easier, democratic and overall easier society to live in. 

A codified constitution makes it easier it shows a clear set of rules, meaning less confusion over the rules written and stops the breaching of previous rules. I think this is beneficial to the UK as clear set rules create a less demand in breaching pre existing rules. This also links with the fact that a codified constitution is entrenched. Entrenchment is an inherent feature in most written constitutions which supports the constitution in a stoppage to short term amendments. This can also been beneficial in the UK because it means that changes to the rules of the constitution will not change and well need to be processed through law. 

Another reason why I believe that the uk should adopt a codified constitution is because it limits government power. I believe this is important. The form of direct democracy for citizens in the UK is very limited in what we can do. Although we have the freedom of speech and the free vote. All together the for of direct democracy and the say we have in the government is limited. A recent example for this is the Tax credits. Although many people have voiced their opinions such as UK Uncut an outsider pressure group, the current government are still continuing with the push. A codified constitution limits government power, leaving more room for citizens rights. We have very little say when it comes to law making process as it goes through the HOC, HOL and so on. 

An against argument for this would be that the codified constitution can be politically biased. They enforce the set of values or principles in preference to others. The codified constitution written by the government can become biased in a sense that they have wrote it, linking with their ideologies. This can show that the codified constitution can become a biased ruling. 

Overall, I suggest a codified constitution would be a good idea for the UK as it overall benefits British citizens and society. 

:) 

Constitutions and the importance

A constitution is a set of fundamental principles and rules in which the state or the country is governed. In simple terms, A constitution is a set or rules and obligations in which a way a place or organisation is run, to protect the people from others and the government. The constitution is a way to which people go by to stop others who are being governed to be protect from ideals such as taxing, housing and healthcare. The rules can be coded or written in separate documents which show the obligations in which should be followed. (If not can produce people such as Donald Trump)!!!

Constitutions can be really beneficial to the people, it protects them from the government who fundamentally take all the power they have to their head, meaning higher taxation and poorer people
:( !! The constitution originates centuries back, when King John took power to his head and decided to try and tax the poor and feed the rich! The Barron's didn't agree which lead to the constitution being signed!

One main reason to why the constitution is very beneficial is because it brings the constituency together as a unit. This means that less unfairness is spread across the governed area (or so they say) which produces fairness and a sense or equality to the minority. The minorities find the the constitution very beneficial as it means they feel overall, more equal. This protects them in a sense to be discrimited and be eligible for the same as everyone else.

Power can really effect people. It's important for the governed place to be fair and and equal. An example of a known, controversial constitution is the US constitiuoton. Created in 1787. The US constitution is a US national document which covers all states, yet they have individual rules which just fit for that state. The right to own armed weapons is a legal rule in which every state can oblige, where cannabis legalisation is only a rule in some states such as Washington DC or California. This type of constitution is useful in countries such as America as it has certain sets of rules for reasonable for certain states.

What are the most undemocratic pressure groups and why?

The UK is fundamentally a free society, is tolerant and made up of different cultures. Pressure groups are free to be active in this free society. In some ways, you can suggest that pressure groups can be undemocratic.

A pressure groups is a group that want to influence the government on a certain idea or policy. Pressure groups can be undemocratic because when influencing the cause or policy, it's only a minority that agree which means the majority are not involved or agree. This is undemocratic because  it's important that the idea of changed or considered has everyone envolved not just the pressure group. An example would this would more likely be a insider pressure group such as the BMA ( British medical association)

Another reason to why pressure groups could be undemocratic is that it is politically unequal. The argument against the pluralist image against pressure groups is that they are far from dispersing power more wider to normal people. Instead the power goes to the people already with it, giving them a greater amount of power. This reduces democracy and is a form of political inequality. An example of this is a trade union or charity.

why are some pressure groups more successful then others?

The reasons for why some pressure groups are more successful than others is due to their relationship with the government.  insider pressure groups have a large influence and understanding in policies related to their pressure group campaign. Being an insider pressure group such as the British medical association (BMA). The government may ask them fore their expertise on the ideology which can help the pressure group be influential. 

Insider groups may be more successful than outsider  groups in some ways because outsider groups do not have a strong relationship with the government. The reason outsider groups do not have a relationship with the government is because they normally campaign against something the government are discussing or have cut. An example of an outsider pressure group who do not have a relationship with the government is UK UNCUT.

Another reason to my why some pressure groups are more successful is because of there financial situation and organisation.  Pressure groups can receive money from membership fees and donations. Pressure groups that gain membership fees or donations are usually known to have  a higher success rate as they can spend more money on advertisng, research, campaigning or employing professionals. This can influence public opinion and the government, making the pressure group more successful.

This shows that  certain groups are more successful than others, for example, it shows that good relationships or money help a pressure group in being successful.