The UK Constitution Quiz

Magna Carta established the principle that the monarch was not above the law, limiting royal power and protecting barons’ rights. Though limited in scope, it is seen as the foundation of constitutional government in the UK, introducing ideas of due process and the rule of law.

Bill of Rights (1689) and Act of Settlement (1701)

The Bill of Rights confirmed parliamentary sovereignty by limiting the monarch’s powers and establishing regular parliaments, free elections, and parliamentary privilege. The Act of Settlement secured Protestant succession and further reduced monarchical power, strengthening parliamentary control.

The Acts of Union created the United Kingdom, uniting England and Scotland under one Parliament. The Parliament Acts limited the House of Lords’ ability to block legislation, asserting the supremacy of the Commons. These reforms entrenched parliamentary sovereignty.

The UK constitution is uncodified, unentrenched, and unitary. This allows flexibility but creates uncertainty. Power is concentrated at Westminster, although devolution has modified this. Its flexibility comes from reliance on statute law, conventions, and evolving political practice.

Parliamentary sovereignty means Parliament can make or unmake any law. The rule of law ensures all are subject to the law, including government. Together, they form the “twin pillars” of the constitution, balancing parliamentary supremacy with legal accountability.

The five sources are:

• Statute law (e.g. Human Rights Act 1998)
• Common law (judge-made law, such as prerogative powers)
• Conventions (unwritten rules, e.g. collective ministerial responsibility)
• Authoritative works (e.g. Dicey’s Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution)
• Treaties (e.g. Maastricht Treaty before Brexit).
  Together, they provide flexibility but lack clarity compared to codified constitutions.

Reforms included House of Lords reform (removing most hereditary peers), devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Human Rights Act 1998, creation of the Supreme Court (2009), and limited electoral reform. These modernised the constitution but left many issues unresolved.

Key reforms included the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011, further devolution to Wales, and some unsuccessful attempts at reform (e.g. AV referendum on electoral reform and proposals for House of Lords reform). These reflected compromises between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.

Further devolution to Scotland followed the 2014 independence referendum, with the Scotland Act 2016 giving powers over taxation and welfare. Brexit also represented a major constitutional shift, raising questions about sovereignty and the territorial integrity of the UK.

Scotland has powers over health, education, justice, and significant tax-raising powers. Devolution has given Scotland a distinct political identity, with the SNP dominating since 2007. Tensions with Westminster remain, particularly over independence.

Initially limited, devolution in Wales has expanded through successive referendums and legislation. The Senedd now controls areas such as health, education, and transport. However, Welsh devolution is less extensive than Scotland’s and public support for independence remains lower.

Created by the Good Friday Agreement (1998), the Assembly has powers over education, health, and justice. Its power-sharing arrangements between unionists and nationalists are fragile, with suspensions occurring at various points, most recently in 2017–20.

England lacks its own parliament. Devolution has taken the form of elected mayors and combined authorities in cities like London and Manchester. This has decentralised some powers but remains limited compared to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

For: reforms since 1997 remain incomplete, the House of Lords is unelected, devolution is asymmetrical, and electoral reform could improve representation.

Against: incremental reform has worked, the system is flexible, and sweeping reforms risk destabilising political stability.

For: clarity, entrenchment of rights, limits on government power, and stronger democratic legitimacy.

Against: loss of flexibility, excessive judicial power, difficulty achieving consensus, and risks of rigidity in times of crisis. The UK tradition of gradual, pragmatic reform remains a strong argument against codification.