Gradualism, not a big bang; consultation and citizens’ juries, but not a citizens’ convention or assembly; and representative democracy, not plebiscitary democracy. That is the essence of Jack Straw’s approach to constitutional reform, set out in his interview with The Times, part of which appeared yesterday.
As Justice Secretary, Mr Straw is in charge of taking forward the proposals outlined in last week’s Green Paper. There will be plenty of changes, but the scale and speed are likely to disappoint advocates of wholesale change, such as the Power inquiry and the Unlock Democracy group. The differences are partly about process, and partly about goals.
The Government’s package is in two main parts: the reformist and the aspirational. The former takes forward widely advocated proposals for a Civil Service Bill, and for strengthening parliamentary authority over ministerial prerogatives such as sending troops into action, treaties, appointments, the recall and dissolution of Parliament. There will be debate about the details and implementation but little dispute over the aims.
Mr Straw said in the interview that some goals could be achieved by government action, such as the revised ministerial code and the new security committee. Others, including more topical Commons debates and changes to prerogative powers, can be achieved by parliamentary resolutions.
The promised constitutional reform Bill will, after consultation, include measures to put ratification of treaties and the Civil Service on a statutory footing and implement any changes in the role of the Attorney-General. Ministers seem more inclined towards a new parliamentary convention about approving the deployment of forces abroad than statute. But this issue is still open. Another uncertainty is whether, how and when legislation will be introduced on the future of the Electoral Commission and party funding, following the interparty talks under Sir Hayden Phillips.
Advertisement
Beyond that, it is more a question of debate than commitment, what Gordon Brown has called a “national conversation”. While Mr Straw has talked sympathetically about a written constitution as a goal, there is not even remotely a consensus yet on central elements, such as electoral reform for the Commons, the future of the Lords, the implications of devolution for England and the balance between parliamentary sovereignty and the judiciary. Without further debate, and agreement, a written constitution is premature.
Mr Straw is committed to deliberative methods such as citizens’ juries. He has been influenced by the successful “100 voices” forum to bridge racial divides in his Blackburn constituency. But Mr Straw rejects proposals for a citizens’ convention, insisting on the primacy of representative democracy.
For Mr Straw and Mr Brown, the process is crucial. Increasing public involvement, especially of young people, is about changing the culture of politics, as much as the structures.