| Keep the Wigs |
15 March 2004
|
Lords Halts Blair's Hurry to Establish British Supreme Court
Americans are often astonished to discover that the United Kingdom does not have a Supreme Court. The Law Lords, peers who sit in the House of Lords and due to their legal training are qualified to act as such, are the highest court in the land. They are both legislators and judges, and that is messy. The Labour government was derailed last week in the House of Lords in a rash attempt to continue changing the British constitution without due consideration of the new system.
Mr. Blair's government's election manifesto did carry a promise of constitutional reform, and in many ways, it has done just that. Assemblies for Scotland and Wales were long overdue and operate reasonably well thanks to Plaid Cymru and the Scottish Nationalists pitching the idea for years and fine-tuning their proposals. Less well executed was the reform of the House of Lords.
It was an anachronism, at best, for the dukes, earls, marquises, viscounts and barons to occupy the upper chamber. Noble exceptions like the late Lord Shackleton (son of the great explorer) notwithstanding, the nobility of the UK are simply unfit to act as a legislative body. Mr. Blair's solution was to kick most of the hereditary peers out and appoint life-peers to flesh out the Lords. Throughout, there was a sense that Labour lifers replaced the Tory hereditary nobles, and no real reforming happened because no real thought went into the matter. The same seems to be the case in the Supreme Court matter.
Constitutionally, the House of Lords can only hold up legislation, and the House of Commons can by-pass the Lords by invoking the Parliament Acts of 1911 and/or 1949. So why the kerfuffle when the Lords voted to send the Supreme Court Bill to a special committee for further study? Because the Blair government started the bill in the House of Lords -- such bills are immune from the Parliament Acts. Now, a different, yet similar bill, will be introduced in the Commons, and it is doubtful that that house can pass it before the next election.
Mr. Blair needn't rush. It is true that the Law Lords is an out-dated concept, but after a few centuries, waiting another few years, if necessary, to get this right is not unreasonable. While the Tories may have been scoring points against Mr. Blair in the Lords, they did the nation a service if they forced some serious consideration on the matter of the Supreme Court -- not to be confused with the slap-dash approach to constitutional reform in which the Labour government has engaged thus far.
Home