Andy Burnham has said Britain may need to introduce a written constitution as a “different approach” is taken to running the country. Unlike many countries, such as the United States, the UK does not have a formal written constitutional document, but it is understood to have a constitution established through history by a combination of common law, statutes and conventions.
The Prime Minister, who replaced Keir Starmer in Number 10 last month, previously called for a written constitution in the 2024 book Head North: A Rallying Cry For A More Equal Britain, which he co-authored with Liverpool City Region metro mayor Steve Rotheram.
Devolution plans strengthen the case
Mr Burnham revealed plans for increased devolution, a major pillar of his pitch for Britain, and said the proposals increased the case for a formal constitution because they would change Britain.
“In the end, I think it does start to point towards a new constitutional settlement, particularly with what Steve and I were writing about with that commitment to equivalent living standards,” he said.
“I said in the speech I gave in Manchester a couple of weeks ago about good growth in every postcode. It’s not just a soundbite. I actually mean that. We need to have a country where everyone, in the end, can live a comparable life. That should be what we’re working towards.”
A cornerstone of the approach
Mr Burnham, who served Greater Manchester for a decade, said he thought that approach should be the “cornerstone” of a written constitution.
“I think there is a case for a new clear set of principles about how this country should be run and things that should be minimum basics in all parts of the country, related to essentials and connectivity,” he added.
“It’s wrong that people are left arguing for things that are just fundamental, and they’re given in other parts of the country, and the lack of a constitution disempowers places in that situation.”
A different way of running the country
“What’s coming through is we’re starting to say that everywhere will have the right to be a strategic authority, everywhere will have the right to retain more of their income tax, business rates,” he said.
“That does start to take you into the realms of a very different approach to running the country.”
Historic constraint on prime ministerial power
Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London, suggested that it would be an historic moment. Professor Bale told The Guardian that although it would bring Britain into line with other democracies, it would represent a “major constraint” on prime ministerial power, “because it would presumably put the rules of the game beyond the power of parliament to change with a simple majority”.
A benefit, however, would be that the competencies of government on the local, regional and national level could be better defined, but “there is no way he will be able to limit it to that”.
