The Liberal Democrat Dilemma in Historical Perspective

This article examines Liberal and later Liberal Democrat relationships with other parties, whether through pacts (either electoral or parliamentary) or pursuing realignment. It shows how dilemmas that the Liberal Democrats may face in the future over what to do in a hung parliament have been a constant theme in Liberal politics since the electoral cooperation with Labour in 1906 and the parliamentary arrangement with Irish nationalists in 1910. It then argues that since 1918 the Liberals have been divided between those who were sympathetic to pacts and arrangements with other parties and those who feared compromising their independence. However, it is argued that Liberals fearful of a loss of independence were never able to offer a really effective answer as to how they could succeed in exerting political influence without cooperation. This remains a live debate for the Liberal Democrats.     

The Awakening of the Afro-Asian Nations

The address that follows was given by Mr. Vernon Bartlett, C.B.E.,at a joint meeting of the Royal African Society and the RoyalCommonwealth Society on January 7, 1960. Sir Robert Scott, G.C.M.G.,C.B.E., former Commissioner for the United Kingdom in South-EastAsia (1956–59), was in the chair.     

Should Britain Have a Written Constitution?

The question - ought Britain to have a written, more properly, a codified constitution - is perhaps wrongly put. The real question ought to be - why should Britain not have such a constitution… She is, after all, one of just three democracies without one.
There are two reasons why Britain has lacked a constitution. The first is that, historically, Britain never had a constitutional moment; the second is the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. Today, however, Britain finds herself engaged in the process of gradually converting an uncodified constitution into a codified one. There is undoubtedly a case in principle for enacting a constitution, but perhaps it ought to wait until the process is completed.
There is, moreover, a tension between two types of codified constitution - a lawyer's constitution which would be long and highly detailed, and a people's constitution which would be short, but, inevitably, broadly-worded, and therefore open to interpretation by the courts.     

THE SCOTT REPORT

The Scott report shows that the two most serious allegations made against ministers - that they conspired to sell lethal arms to Iraq in violation of government guidelines, and that they conspired to send innocent men to prison - are unfounded.
The inquiry violated the Salmon guidelines for the conduct of tribunals and is further evidence that an informal tribunal of this type is less well-equipped to examine a matter causing nation-wide public concern and to secure justice to individuals, than a statutory tribunal appointed under the Act of 1921.
Nevertheless, the Scott report raises three issues of fundamental constitutional importance - ministerial accountability to which the final section of the report is devoted, freedom of information which Sir Richard regards as a corollary of ministerial accountability, and the proper relationships between ministers and civil servants.
Sir Richard believes that constitutionally improper things occurred during the period which his inquiry covers. The fact that no minister or civil servant paid any penalty casts doubt as to whether ministerial accountability is a genuine convention of the constitution or a convenient fiction enabling both ministers and officials to evade responsibility.