Indy: Matthew Norman
Why shouldn't we have a written constitution?
Because the harm that Political Scripture does to free debate is plainly evident from the USA. The principles may seem enlightened on paper, but all they actually seem to achieve is to allow great chunks of genuine political discourse to be walled off as 'unconstitutional'.
To presume that our generation has reached some political Rubicon does a pernicious disservice to those to follow. Beyond the tenets of International Law, everything should be open to question, even where the most basic consensus exists. If we codify the mores of early 20th-Century society into a gospel for the future, surely we politically hamstring the generations to come..?