I know this is unpopular because we apparently have an "unwritten" constitution, but my opinion remains that we do not have a constitution at all! It's just jumble of loose 'rules' that people usually play by, but which are mostly unenforceable and ultimately mean nothing if they're ignored.
I mean, there is nothing a majority of Parliament can't do, legally speaking, as I understand it.
There is an answer to the question: how is the UK constituted? And that answer is the UK constitution.
Except it seems infinitely mutable and open to very varied interpretations. Even the constitutional lawyers don’t agree.
The overly keen 17 year old politics A Level study version of me would heartily agree. Much to the annoyance of my teacher who was of the opinion that 'your question is stupid' was a high risk exam tactic.
How's that different from the US Constitution, which at the moment seems a written jumble of unenforceable rules people are ignoring?
Sadly, it seems a constitution is only any use if the good chaps in charge agree to use it.
Yes. Every system depends ultimately on "good chaps" and chapesses. The daft thing is not relying on them, but thinking it's an outdated and uniquely British quirk.
spot on!