Hands up those of you disappointed with new Labour. Feel that they have lost their way? Worried that they pander to the illiberal prejudices of Middle England? All over Britain, newly unfashionable liberals are wringing their hands and asking: “Why can’t they just do something we can be proud of for a change?”
In one area, however, we cannot criticise the government for lack of radical zeal. On the contrary, when it comes to the constitution, new Labour has gone further, more quickly and with greater enthusiasm than any of us would have dared to believe.
When Charter 88 was born in the pages of the New Statesman 12 years ago, constitutional reform was a fringe issue for the chattering classes. The right dismissed us as irrelevant; Neil Kinnock, the Labour leader, called us “wankers”. Yet a few years later, Kinnock himself publicly signed the Charter at a party conference. What he came grudgingly to accept – and what his successor, John Smith, argued openly and persuasively – was that the constitution did matter, after all. Or, as the present Labour leader put it, constitutional reform, far from being irrelevant to ordinary people, “makes possible the attainment of other vital goals – a stronger economy, better transport, good schools and crime prevention”.
So why do we find it so hard to enthuse about what new Labour has done? Partly because we don’t feel any better. We know that the government has brought in an amazing 20 pieces of constitutional legislation in just over three years. We know that there is a parliament in Scotland, an assembly in Wales and both are elected by proportional representation. We know that human rights legislation has been enacted. Yet we don’t feel more empowered. Democracy does not feel more real. More power is not in the hands of more people. If anything, the public is more, not less, cynical about politics and politicians.
Some would argue that this proves our initial detractors were right: constitutional reform is just an issue for the chattering classes, and the time new Labour has spent on tinkering with the constitution would have been better spent on bread-and-butter issues.
In Unlocking Democracy, Charter 88’s new analysis of the challenges facing democracy in Britain, we provide an alternative view. We argue that this constitutionally radical government has systematically broken the pillars of the old constitution but not replaced them. The absolute sovereignty of parliament is fatally undermined by the Human Rights Act, but nobody mentions it. Likewise, the independence of the civil servant is eroded and we are supposed not to notice.
The trouble is not that new Labour’s reforms have been weak, but that they have been more powerful than even ministers themselves are prepared to recognise. The left has long been less concerned with what the state is than what the state does. The unparalleled concentration of power offered by the Westminster model has always been attractive to incoming governments with radical ambitions. And yet this government came in with a whole raft of constitutional changes that would significantly alter the nature of the state.
Crucially, the reforms do not hang together. These are not piecemeal reforms that might bed down in time; they are far too thoroughgoing for that. But nor have we been allowed to develop a new framework for governance. At the heart of new Labour’s programme of constitutional change, there is a yawning void. New Labour shied away from the one reform that was the key to unlocking democracy – reform of the constitution itself.
So Charter 88 is putting the call for a Citizen’s Constitution at the heart of its programme for the next ten years. We think it should set out the rules for the way we make and change the rules. It should provide the basic law and fundamental rights that together provide the framework for our society.
This Citizen’s Constitution should be a written document. But our vision is broader, more radical and more ambitious than simply writing down words. We want citizens to participate in government in the widest sense.
This is where new Labour has gone badly wrong. There is no public praise for the government’s programme of constitutional reform precisely because it is seen as the government’s programme. The people of Britain do not feel that they own their democracy. It is still the preserve of distant men and women who make decisions on their behalf.
A Citizen’s Constitution would guarantee equality; protect democratic representation in and authority over government and public affairs; ensure individuals can claim their rights; and give people the power to hold authority of all kinds to account. We want parents to participate in improving their children’s education; we want families living in poverty to rebuild their communities without top-down regeneration projects.
Without a Citizen’s Constitution, the door is wide open for other people to get into power and redesign the constitution in their own image. More importantly, the failure to reform the constitution has left many questions, not least the English question, dangerously unanswered. Muddling on and pretending that nothing has really changed will not make the questions go away.
On the contrary, all these questions will be asked with increasing urgency and, as is already starting to happen, the most convincing answers will come from a narrow, nationalist, inward-looking minority.
The writer is director of Charter 88
Content from our partners
Related
