A LITTLE bit of history to begin this column. In 2005 we set up the Constitutional Commission, a move inspired by that great Scottish patriot Canon Kenyon Wright, who became its first president.
At that time, few people were interested in the constitution. Frankly, because the UK wears its ignorance of constitutional matters lightly, we expected little else. Still, it was a shock to see the meagre regard paid to such a fundamental matter.
But, my word, how things have changed. Now the constitution is on everyone’s lips.
It is part of the human condition that people can labour on with something that is broken while fooling themselves that they will get around to fixing it some time soon.
READ MORE: Independent Scotland must ditch the Queen – and we've just seen why
But very often that time never comes. Things proceed until a point is reached when the broken item gives up the ghost completely and can no longer carry on, leaving an enormous mess in its wake.
Welcome to the British constitution. Most folks would accept that it is broken, but what many people don’t know is that it has been wretched for a very long time.
Let’s look at how the great reformer Thomas Paine described the English/British constitution back in 1792: “The continual use of the word Constitution in the English Parliament shows there is none; and that the whole is merely a form of government without a Constitution and constituting itself with what powers it pleases.
“If there were a Constitution, it certainly could be referred to; and the debate on any constitutional point would terminate by producing the Constitution.
“One member says this is the Constitution, and another says that is the Constitution. Today it is one thing; and tomorrow something else – while the maintaining of the debate proves there is none.”
Astonishingly, we are now where we were back in 1792. Broken then, broken now.
And reading the above Thomas Paine quote, it is striking how much it reflects the current discussions about the constitution.
The Prime Minister has been accused of “incontinent mendacity”. And we are expected to believe that a man who is reputed to have lied to every other woman in his life made an exception in his dealings with the Queen.
It almost beggars belief that the Supreme Court is seriously considering the notion that it is “constitutional” that the prime minister may lie to the head of state to secure his ends.
According to the Financial Times: “The damage has been done. You will not find a soul in the long corridors of Whitehall who believes that the Prime Minister they are sworn to serve is telling the truth.”
On the other hand, the Supreme Court has been invited to consider that Parliament is sovereign and that the Executive is bound to accept its will.
We will find out shortly if the British Constitution allows the Prime Minister and the Government free rein to be mendacious.
It looks very much like Boris Johnson is slavishly following former president Richard Nixon’s motto, which was reputedly “if two wrongs don’t make a right, try three”.
Adding to the merriment of the nations and to this unholy constitutional mess, we have David Cameron.
He cheerfully admits in his new book to asking the monarch to intervene in the 2014 independence referendum.
The intervention he wished was “a raising of the regal eyebrow by a quarter of an inch”.
Reading this, it is hard to believe he is referring not to Ruritania, but a modern democracy. It is little wonder that growing numbers of folks here and abroad see the UK as little more than a laughing stock.
All of this is pretty shocking. What’s worse is knowing this is your reality. This is the constitution that determines your life.
What it boils down to is that for centuries the UK has blundered along with a constitution based on little else than the hope that all charged with safeguarding its democracy are “good chaps”. It is a mess. But it is not a new mess. It’s been a mess for centuries. The difference is that now Brexit has cracked open the door, let in a bit of daylight and revealed to all just what a constitutional pigsty the United Kingdom has become.
Is it any wonder therefore that it has proved to be wholly wanting when tested to destruction by a mendacious prime minister?
One would hope that after watching this shambles unfold, the Scottish Government would immediately announce plans for a written constitution for Scotland.
Without such, we face the danger of going into independence governed by what remains of the British constitution after Boris Johnson has done his worst. Unthinkable, most would say.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel