2 Our Inquiry
17. There is little evidence in the material
published to date that the inter-relationships and interaction
between the individual proposed reforms (outlined in the Constitutional
Reform and Governance Bill and Building Britain's Future)
have been thoroughly explored by the Government, or that their
relationship to the major constitutional reforms which have been
introduced since 1997 have been considered in depth. This is not
a new phenomenon. In our recent report, Devolution: a decade
on, we identified the Government's lack of a strategic vision
for the constitution,[23]
and in previous reports, we have noted the Government's seemingly
ad hoc approach to constitutional reform.[24]
Furthermore, the Joint Committee on the Draft Constitutional
Renewal Bill also concluded that it was "difficult to
discern the principles underpinning" the disparate nature
of the proposals included in the draft Bill.[25]
18. In July 2007, we published a special report
welcoming the Governance of Britain Green Paper. While
we acknowledged the legitimate interests of other select committees
in examining specific proposals included in that Green Paper,
we said that we would "take responsibility for scrutiny of
the overall process of constitutional reform".[26]
19. We decided to continue our oversight of this
initiative by launching an inquiry into constitutional reform
and renewal, with a view to:
- assessing the overall purpose
and goals of proposed reforms;
- outlining and commenting on the merits and pitfalls
of specific proposals as they emerge; and
- identifying further proposals for reform which
we find desirable.
We also considered it necessary to look at the overall
picture of constitutional reform in the United Kingdom, focusing
on the relationships between the individual proposals, and the
potential unintended consequences of those proposals and interactions
between them.
20. In this report we are chiefly concerned with
the actual process and mechanisms of how we 'do' constitutional
reform in the United Kingdom: of identifying and achieving the
appropriate balance between Government responsibility, parliamentary
ownership and public engagement in the process of constitutional
reform.[27]
21. This report outlines some of the main features
of the proposals that have emerged from the Government, from the
leaders of the three main political parties and from other sources.[28]
In doing so we identify some fundamental principles for the process
by which constitutional reform should be achieved in the UK. This
is our second report in this inquiry (we have already published
a report on the Parliamentary Standards Bill). We will return
to a more in-depth study of the detail of the specific proposals
for reform as these emerge.
23 Justice Committee, Fifth Report of Session 2008-09,
Devolution: A Decade On, HC 529-I, para 6 Back
24
For example, see the Third Report of Session 2004-05, Constitutional
Reform Bill: the Government's proposals [Lords], HC 275-I Back
25
Joint Committee on the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill, Draft
Constitutional Renewal Bill, HL 166-I and HC 551-I, Session
2007-08, 31 July 2008, para 376 Back
26
Constitutional Affairs Committee, Second Special Report of Session
2006-07, Scrutiny of Constitutional Reform, HC 907. During
this Parliament alone, the Justice Committee has produced several
major reports on constitutional issues, including: the Constitutional
Role of the Attorney General, Party Funding, and Devolution: A
Decade On. For a full list see Appendix A to this report. Back
27
Further questions to be addressed include: How can public engagement
be achieved? Do we require referendums for major constitutional
reform? Should we move towards citizens juries or citizens assemblies? Back
28
For example, see: Meg Russell and Akash Paun, The House Rules?
International lessons for enhancing the autonomy of the House
of Commons, The Constitution Unit, October 2007 Back
| 
