I was listening to the Briefing Room on Radio 4 last night talking about constitutional reform and the experts on the panel (who were all very good although I couldn't tell you who they were) decided unanimously that constitutional reform and a written constitution was a bad thing and was not needed with our current system. Indeed, our current system was far better than written constitutions precisely because it could get amended and parliaments can challenge all laws.
There was a good segment on referendum and the procedure of the one held for the Brexit question and they thought it was botched from the start. The panel were of the opinion that the referendum should have been in two parts and were at a loss as to why this was not done. The first part was to ask Parliament the question and get Parliament to vote on leaving the EU (not invoking Article 50 but actually leaving) and the second part was to then get this result ratified by the people. This would've mitigated the no deal/ deal scenario as the people would've known what leaving meant before voting on it. The panel was split on the percentage of the vote needed to win with one suggesting it should be 2/3rds (66.6%) to leave the EU.
There was condemnation of Cameron and his procedure for doing it arse about face and it is largely his fault, in their opinion, the whole thing has come to the point where we are now.
