The government's attempts at constitutional reform have been "ad hoc and piecemeal" and risk further undermining public confidence, according to a Commons justice committee report today.
Although the report says the government's parliamentary standards bill, which has received cross-party backing, is a laudable attempt to restore confidence, it accuses the government of not carrying out adequate consultation or a full investigation into the implication of proposed constitutional changes.
Sir Alan Beith, chair of the committee, says: "While we welcome the government's interest in constitutional reform and renewal, and its desire to restore public trust in Parliament and the political process, we cannot have rushed and piecemeal changes which will affect the way our country is governed for generations to come, and we need a process in which the public is genuinely involved.
"Issues like a written constitution, reform of the electoral system, how England should be governed following devolution, and the relationship of parliament and the executive require wide consultation and careful consideration. Instead we are seeing a rush to legislate."
The speed of the bill, published last month following revelations of the abuse of MPs' expenses, has come under some criticism. In June Jack Straw was forced to drop a key clause after Malcolm Jack, the clerk of the Commons, warned that it could undermine the independence of the commons.
Leith, who says a more systematic and established process is required for changes of "such magnitude and significance," also highlights the number of life peers appointed as government ministers, saying it runs counter to the direction of agreed reforms. He says individual reforms would need a coherent plan and could not be treated in isolation. Other issues raised by the committee report include the role of the judiciary, the rights of the citizen and the role of the monarchy.
The committee calls for a "constitutional convention" to deal with more complex issues thrown up by constitutional reform and suggests a referendum for fundamental changes.
