Hacker News Reader

Comment by intunderflow | Hacker News Reader

While the UK does have a sort-of constitution as a mashup of laws and conventions it can be amended by the government of the day by simply convincing their majority in the commons to vote for it in the form of a new bill, so it's considerably weaker than constitutions in other states that require significantly more consensus to amend (such as the USA).

View on HN

Can you show me a situation where a UK government has done this? When have they enacted constitutional changes simply because it restricted their ability to enact policies?

EDIT: Lloyd George comes to mind. That was over 100 years ago.

One that comes to mind recently is the Irish-sea border as part of Northern Ireland Protocol spanning from Brexit.

This was challenged as being in violation of the Acts of Union 1800 (particularly Article 6, which establishes an all-UK Customs Union) but the High Court ruled that the relevant parts of the Acts of Union are "impliedly repealed" by the Withdrawal Agreement Act.

There's a BBC article covering this here: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-57666255

I don’t see that as being distinct from Brexit - which was absolutely a constitutional change.

With Brexit, the UK deeply and seriously considered constitutional change and decided to go through with it.

It wasn’t like they had some nefarious end in mind, realized the EU was getting in the way, and decided to withdraw to pursue this nefarious end.

They left the EU because they wanted to leave the EU.

Edit: I suppose it’s not really about Brexit, but about making trade agreements with the EU.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com