The latest pronouncement from No10 North is that Britain needs major constitutional reform as part of Burnham’s ‘circuit breaker’ philosophy. Trying to style himself as the new Blair…
Enter former Supreme Court justice Lord Sumption who took no prisoners in the Telegraph over the weekend:
“A written constitution… would have to deal with the whole workings of the state: the role and procedures of Parliament, the recruitment and functions of the second chamber, and the powers and duties of ministers. Not to mention the appointment and functions of judges, the civil service, elections, human rights, international law and all the other hot potatoes which have proved so controversial in the past.
It would be almost impossible to agree on them all, let alone get the result approved in a referendum. The British are notoriously indifferent to radical constitutional experiments for which there is no obvious need. Where is the obvious need for a written constitution?”
Burnham came to office with the broad approval and relief of the legal establishment – Starmer’s failure despite his KC and career as DPP was a tad embarrassing. Picking a fight with the upper echelons of the bench over a written constitution seems like a crazy idea, not to mention the parliamentary time it would absorb. Is Burnham just shooting from the hip or does he actually want to implement any of his more radical ideas?
Lord Khan in the Telegraph: “I hope, and I say this in a non-pompous way, that the public service I do will bring rewards in this world and the hereafter,” he says. “I’m hoping the work I do is earning me Brownie points.”