This is a past event
Research Seminar
To ask whether ‘the political constitution’ is deliberative might seem odd. After all, every conceivable constitutional model with normative appeal will envisage a large measure of debate aimed at securing wide-ranging, reasoned and well-evidenced opinions, where participants are willing to reflect on their own viewsafter hearing those of others. People might disagree about the extent to which deliberation can or should occur in different institutional settings, as illustrated in enduring debates about the comparative strengths and appropriate roles of legislatures and courts. But most agree that deliberation should form a centralpart of a constitution’s arrangements. All of this might seem to hold special relevance for the model of the political constitution, which seeks to enlarge theopportunities in political arenas for discussion and debate. But in this paper I want to argue that, at least as commonly conceived, the model of the political constitution is insufficiently deliberative, which in turn compromises its ability to supply a compelling vision of a good constitution. If correct, this argument poses a considerable challenge for the political constitution. It suggests that the political constitution needs reimagining in ways that might realize more fully the degree and type of deliberation necessary for political equality. With this in mind, I offer some initial thoughts on possible ways of securing the deliberationnecessary for political equality.
- Speaker
- Professor Graham Gee (University of Sheffield)
- Venue
- Old Senate Room