Burnham says lack of written constitution 'disempowers' Britons

The Prime Minister has argued that Britain's lack of a written constitution "disempowers" the public, according to GB News and The Independent. The comment came as part of his push for devolution.

The word choice is notable. A written constitution does not distribute power downward - it locks power into text. What cannot be changed by a simple majority becomes what the public cannot reach through the ballot box. The American Constitution, the usual template, places vast questions beyond democratic revision: the structure of the Senate, the electoral college, the Bill of Rights. These are goods, but they are not delegation - they are insulation.

Devolution is a separate question. Scotland, Wales and the English regions already operate under statute law that Parliament can amend or revoke. A written constitution would not make those powers more democratic - it would make them harder to reverse. The word "empower" suggests delegation; the mechanism does the opposite. It moves decisions from the legislature, where the voter can still reach them, to the text and the judges who interpret it.

The tension is real. Written constitutions protect rights and restrain majorities - both genuine goods. But if the public feels disempowered now, handing more questions to constitutional lawyers will not solve it. What to watch: whether the proposal includes which decisions would be constitutionally locked, and which would remain subject to the ballot box.