CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES

Hokitika Guardian, 29 November 1927, Page 3

CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES

v i i i -i v *i*i*>»««*Ol' all the Second Chambers the English House of Lords is to-day at once the most distinguished in personnel and in constitutional powers one of the weakest. Yet of all the Constitutions in the world that of England would seem to stand most in need of an effective Second Chamber. The reasons are not lar to seek, and may be summarily stated. In no other country can fundamental changes in the Constitution be so easily effected England, as is well known, we have no “organic” or “constitutional” laws or does there exist any special machinery for constitutional revision. Whether it *bc proposed to disestablish a church, to double the electorate, to abolish the House of Lords, or to pass a Town Planning Act, the same machinery is employed. Some of our most important “constitutional” changes have come about without legislation at all. No legislation, for

instance, was required to bring into being an Imperial War Cabinet, nor would any have been required had that Cabinet, ns was in fact intended and announced, become a permanent part of the Constitution. This is what the lawyers mean when they speak of the “flexibility” of the English Constitution—a flexibility which depends mainly upon the legal sovereignty of Parliament—the complete absence of all legal restraints upon the action of the King-in-Pnrliament.—Sir John Marriott in “The Fortnightly Review.”