Conventions have an important role on the functioning of the UK Constitution. As non-legal rules the obligation they impose on those working within the UK Constitution has generated much debate amongst commentators. Not only on the definition of these non-legal rules, rather the formulation, application, and identification, which have had them contributed an exchange of views. Any attempts at codification will be made more successful when the precise nature and existence has not just an influence on those who impose obligation but also certainty of such obligations. Conventions would cease to be conventions if codified and any rationale in the event of a Constitutional crisis will highlight the value and necessary need for codification. This …show more content…
It could be argued that it may force the Constitution to become rigid and any attempts at evolving or growing may be compromised. The political sphere is constantly evolving along with the habits and practices that are involved, this shift may limit the adaptability and capacity to …show more content…
The first rule relates to the Government and confidence of the House of Commons, if confidence is lost they must either resign or advice dissolution. The second rule concerns a fair and free debate to be performed and the issue relates to that on which both political parties were divided. The exercise of the confidentiality rules concerns, discussions in Cabinet, communications between ministers and civil servants and discussions regarding appointment or transfer of senior members, all of which the information could not be disclosed or briefed. When breached the only sanction is political and not legal, the seriousness of failing to follow established conventions may lead for example to unpopularity and loss of office at the next election. The case law later will also explain the limitation the convention