DOCSLIB.ORG

Reviewing the Treasure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reviewing the Treasure E M E H C S S E I T I U Q I T N A E L B A T R O P Reviewing the Treasure Act The consultation closes on The government has launched a review of the Treasure April 30: to comment go to www.gov.uk/government/news/ Act 1996. To help readers respond to caasne i ni mScoptlaondr;t tahant etd upcautibonlail c gTorevaesurrnem. “Wenet -araen anwoauren”,c seasys- tnhee w- outreach to the detecting community prelpaonrst,- “ttoh-atp trhoetree cmt-aytr beea ssoumree -finds consultation, BritAi scohns uAltartciohn oane prooplosaglsy preshsoeuldn btes im cporomvedm to eencnoutraagrei es feeling that defining a find by its from a wide rangeto uopfd aptee thres Tpreeasucrte iAvcet s finds reporting and adherence to the monetary value could overshadow the What d19o96e cso dtehs eof practice, revise detecting code of practice; and that archaeological or historic importance consulthtae dteiofinit iponr ofp Toresaesu?re archaeological excavation of any kind, that it may have.” However, it and commence relevant by professional archaeologists or others, continues, the act seeks to preserve provisions in the Coroners would need a permit, as is currently the objects of national importance for & Justice Act 2009 was case in Northern Ireland. “We are public enjoyment. Research has launched on February 1. aware”, says the report, “that these shown market price to be the best It is hoped proposed suggestions would involve considerable indicator of rare and important changes would preserve changes to the current process.” objects that currently escape the more significant finds for For now Treasure is defined as any Treasure definition. public collections, and metallic object that is at least 300 years Another change would extend the make the Treasure process old and at least 10% gold or silver by prehistoric class of two or more items more efficient and the act weight; for coins at least two must be of any metal found together to Roman easier to understand. found together, and the requirement for artefacts other than coins. In addition The government is also keen to precious metal is dropped if there are at single gold coins minted between ensure the Treasure process has a least ten. Prehistoric items are Treasure ad 43 and 1344 – when Edward iii sustainable future, though this does not if any part is precious metal, or if two or re-introduced English gold coinage – Top: Part of a hoard include providing new funds despite the more of any metal are found together. would become Treasure; typically the of 159 Roman gold acknowledged importance of the finds A new class of Treasure is proposed pas database records ten of these a year. coins from and the work put in by detectorists, and for objects at least 200 years old valued And a new fixed cut-off date of ad 1714 Sandridge, rising costs for the British Museum. It is at over £10,000. This would mean items would be introduced, to avoid the ever- Hertfordshire, late ad 400s proposed that all archaeological objects comparable to the Crosby Garrett accumulating finds quantities brought (Treasure 2012) would become Crown property, as is the helmet would in future be classed as in by a moving date. MP 18 British Archaeolog y May June 2019 | | ) 2 by Coroner’s to hold Inquests) and ( A B updating finders as their discoveries C / E The search for buried treasure has progress through the Treasure process. M E H captivated people’s imagination for Readers of British Archaeology will The act requires this process to be C S S E centuries, and in recent years the know that the Treasure Act has reviewed from time to time, to ensure I T Michael Ellis MP: Michael Lewis: The I U number of finds has continued to been extremely successful in ensuring that it is relevant to current practice. Q I Why are we consulting? Portable Antiquities T N increase. However, some outstanding that many important artefacts have This last happened in 2001, resulting A Scheme supports the act E artefacts of great archaeological and entered museum collections: over in the Treasure Act 1996 Designation L B A T cultural importance have been lost 5,000 new archaeological finds have Order 2002, which ensured that R O to private buyers simply because they been acquired by more than 200 P do not meet the current criteria for museums since the act became law on Treasure. A famous example is the September 24 1997 (feature Jan/Feb Crosby Garrett Roman parade helmet 2018/158). Famous examples include that was found by a metal detectorist the Bronze Age gold cup from in Cumbria (features Jan/Feb 2011/116, Ringlemere in Kent (feature Jan Jan/Feb 2019/164). Although it was 2004/74), the Frome Hoard of recorded by the Portable Antiquities 52,000 Roman coins (News Sep/Oct Scheme, it ended up being sold to a 2010/114), and the Staffordshire Hoard private individual at auction, simply of over 600 pieces of Anglo-Saxon war because it did not meet the legal gear (feature Jan/Feb 2019/164). definition of Treasure – though in Most agree that the act has been so the eyes of most of us it was a treasure successful because of the work of the that should be in a museum. British Museum’s Portable Antiquities This consultation therefore seeks Scheme ( pas ) and its local network of to give the public a say on what finds liaison officers ( flo s). The pas Above: Treasure prehistoric base metal finds and also should be Treasure, but also looks was set up to complement the act, to cases continue those of similar date with any amount more broadly at how the act works. encourage the reporting of the great to grow (inset of precious metal are protected by law, Staffordshire Hoard Importantly, the new proposals will majority of archaeological finds helmet, Treasure as well as those of purer gold or silver. help our museums across England, discovered by the public that are 2009) Treasure finds (following declaration Wales and Northern Ireland acquire not covered under the definition by a Coroner) belong to the Crown, nationally important finds and make of Treasure. Nonetheless, flo s and can be acquired by local and it harder for them to be sold for also contribute significant time to national museums. A reward – equal to personal profit. supporting the act – liaising with the market value of the find – is paid to More items than ever are being finders (metal-detector users in the landowner and finder, and normally discovered by metal detectorists and particular), advising them about Below: Treasure shared 50/50. This enables important other finders, with the number of artefacts and their obligations under cases in England and archaeological remains to end up in Treasure finds increased by some 50 the act, and taking on much of the Wales (inset museums for the public to see and Ringlemere Bronze times since the act was implemented in administration relating to these finds, Age gold cup, enjoy. It is important to note that this 1997. The latest figures show that 2017 such as writing Treasure reports (used Treasure 2001) reward is paid ex gratia (a favour not was a record-breaking year with a total backed by law) – and is tax-free! – of 1,267 Treasure items unearthed, though professional archaeologists including Roman statues, Bronze Age are unable to claim any reward. The rings and a Stuart pocket watch. In acquiring museum is responsible for addition to this a further 79,000 or so raising the money to pay the reward, other archaeological finds – that do not and if they are unable or unwilling to fit the definition of Treasure – were do so, the find is returned to the finder recorded on a voluntary basis with the and landowner. Portable Antiquities Scheme. In the last 20 years, 13,000 finds Michael Lewis is head of portable have gone through the Treasure antiquities & treasure at the Portable process. Of these, over 30% are now Antiquities Scheme, the British Museum in museums and can be enjoyed by millions of people each year. I look forward to gaining the public’s view on whether it should be the case that Museums have benefitted enormously more of these archaeological finds from provisions made under the are saved for our museums and public Gteramils oBf tohye lTere:a Psuureb Alcitc a nadc icts ess enjoyment – the consultation is open tasoso fciinatdeds c oisde b oef pirnacgt ilcoe. sPtublic until the end of April. and press interest in treasure is almost guaranteed, and museum audiences Michael Ellis is under secretary of state for seemingly never tire of being thrilled by arts, heritage & tourism stories of chance finds made by ordinary British Archaeolog y May June 2019 19 | | S ’ E I T S I R H C , E M E H C S S E I T I U Q I T N A E L B A T R O P people, as well as the opportunity to see Above: A Roman are nevertheless important aspects of however, is that the consultation rare and precious objects on show. parade helmet found the local archaeological record. provides an opportunity for museums The clarity the act brought to by a detectorist in It is with particular regard to the to ensure that the successes of the Cumbria in 2010 the definition of Treasure and the famously fell outside latter that museums will seize the current system are enhanced and institution of a systematic process for the definition of opportunity to comment on proposed not diminished.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Treasure Act 1996 Code of Practice (2Nd Revision)
    The Treasure Act 1996 Code of Practice (2nd Revision) ENGLAND & WALES improving the quality of life for all Our aim is to improve the quality of life for all through cultural and sporting activities, support the pursuit of excellence, and champion the tourism, creative and leisure industries. The Treasure Act Code of Practice (Revised) 3 Introduction Notes: This Code has effect in England and Wales; a separate code has been prepared for Northern Ireland. A Welsh language version of the Code is available on request from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. When the term ‘national museum’ is used in this document it is intended to refer to the British Museum in the case of finds from England and the National Museums & Galleries of Wales in the case of finds from Wales. References to the ‘Secretary of State’ are to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. If finders or others need further advice about any matters relating to the Treasure Act or this Code, then they are recommended to contact the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the British Museum or (for Wales) the National Museums & Galleries of Wales or their local finds liaison officer. Addresses and telephone numbers are given in Appendix 2. In many places this Code gives examples of what may or may not constitute treasure and provides advice as to how coroners may approach an inquest. It is intended to provide guidance for all those concerned with treasure. It is emphasised, however, that questions of whether or not any object constitutes treasure and how a coroner should conduct an inquiry into treasure are for the coroner to decide on the facts and circumstances of each case.
    [Show full text]
  • Treasure Act 1996 Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 03 August 2021
    Status: This version of this Act contains provisions that are prospective. Changes to legislation: Treasure Act 1996 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 03 August 2021. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) View outstanding changes Treasure Act 1996 1996 CHAPTER 24 An Act to abolish treasure trove and to make fresh provision in relation to treasure. [4th July 1996] Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 Act: transfer of functions (N.I.) (8.5.2016) by The Departments (Transfer of Functions) Order (Northern Ireland) 2016 (S.R. 2016/76), art. 1(2), Sch. 5 Pt. 1 (with art. 9(2)) Meaning of “treasure” 1 Meaning of “treasure”. (1) Treasure is— (a) any object at least 300 years old when found which— (i) is not a coin but has metallic content of which at least 10 per cent by weight is precious metal; (ii) when found, is one of at least two coins in the same find which are at least 300 years old at that time and have that percentage of precious metal; or (iii) when found, is one of at least ten coins in the same find which are at least 300 years old at that time; (b) any object at least 200 years old when found which belongs to a class designated under section 2(1); (c) any object which would have been treasure trove if found before the commencement of section 4; (d) any object which, when found, is part of the same find as— 2 Treasure Act 1996 (c.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical Evaluation of the Rights, Status and Capacity of Distinct Categories of Individuals in Underdeveloped and Emerging Areas of Law
    A Critical Evaluation of the Rights, Status and Capacity of Distinct Categories of Individuals in Underdeveloped and Emerging Areas of Law Lesley-Anne Barnes Macfarlane LLB (Hons), Dip LP, PGCE, LLM A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Edinburgh Napier University, for the award of Doctor of Philosophy May 2014 1 Acknowledgements I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors, Dr Richard Whitecross and Dr Sandra Watson, for giving me their time, guidance and assistance in the writing up of my PhD Critical Appraisal of published works. I am indebted to my parents, Irene and Dennis, for a lifetime of love and support. Many thanks are also due to my family and friends for their ongoing care and companionship. In particular, I am very grateful to Professors Elaine E Sutherland and John P Grant for reading through and commenting on my section on Traditional Legal Research Methods. My deepest thanks are owed to my husband, Ross, who never fails in his love, encouragement and practical kindness. I confirm that the published work submitted has not been submitted for another award. ………………………………………… Lesley-Anne Barnes Macfarlane Citations and references have been drafted with reference to the University’s Research Degree Reference Guide 2 CONTENTS VOLUME I Abstract: PhD by Published Works Page 8 List of Evidence in Support of Thesis Page 9 Thesis Introduction Page 10 (I) An Era of Change in the Individual’s Rights, Status and Capacity in Scots Law (II) Conceptual Framework of Critical Analysis: Rights,
    [Show full text]
  • Nighthawks & Nighthawking
    Strategic Study Nighthawks & Nighthawking: Damage to Archaeological Sites in the UK & Crown Dependencies caused by Illegal Searching & Removal of Antiquities Strategic Study Final Report o a April 2009 Client: English Heritage Issue No: 3 OA Job No: 3336 Report NIGHTHAWKS AND NIGHTHAWKING: DAMAGE TO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND CROWN DEPENDENCIES CAUSED BY THE ILLEGAL SEARCH FOR AND REMOVAL OF ANTIQUITIES Final Report 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................1 1.1 THE NIGHTHAWKING SURVEY .....................................................................................................................1 1.2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE..................................................................................................................2 2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE SURVEY............................................................................................3 2.1 AIMS .........................................................................................................................................................3 2.2 OBJECTIVES ..............................................................................................................................................3 3 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................4 3.1 LEGISLATION..............................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Queen's Or Prince's Consent
    QUEEN’S OR PRINCE’S CONSENT This pamphlet is intended for members of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. Unless otherwise stated: • references to Erskine May are to the 24th edition (2011), • references to the Companion to the Standing Orders are to the Companion to the Standing Orders and Guide to Proceedings of the House of Lords (25th edition, 2017), • references to the Cabinet Office Guide to Making Legislation are to the version of July 2017. Office of the Parliamentary Counsel September 2018 CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 2 QUEEN’S CONSENT Introduction. 2 The prerogative. 2 Hereditary revenues, the Duchies and personal property and interests . 4 Exceptions and examples . 6 CHAPTER 3 PRINCE’S CONSENT Introduction. 7 The Duchy of Cornwall . 7 The Prince and Steward of Scotland . 8 Prince’s consent in other circumstances . 8 Exceptions and examples . 8 CHAPTER 4 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS The remoteness/de minimis tests . 10 Original consent sufficient for later provisions . 10 No adverse effect on the Crown. 11 CHAPTER 5 THE SIGNIFICATION OF CONSENT Signification following amendments to a bill. 13 Re-signification for identical bill . 14 The manner of signification . 14 The form of signification . 15 CHAPTER 6 PRACTICAL STEPS Obtaining consent. 17 Informing the Whips . 17 Writing to the House authorities . 17 Private Members’ Bills. 17 Informing the Palace of further developments . 18 Other. 18 CHAPTER 7 MISCELLANEOUS Draft bills . 19 Consent not obtained . 19 Inadvertent failure to signify consent . 19 Consent in the absence of the Queen. 20 Consent before introduction of a bill . 20 Queen’s speech . 20 Royal Assent .
    [Show full text]
  • Investigative Files the Secrets of Oak Island Joe Nickell
    Investigative Files The Secrets of Oak Island Joe Nickell It has been the focus of "the world's longest and most expensive treasure hunt" and "one of the world's deepest and most costly archaeological digs" (O'Connor 1988, 1, 4), as well as being "Canada's best-known mystery" (Colombo 1988, 33) and indeed one of "the great mysteries of the world." It may even "represent an ancient artifact created by a past civilization of advanced capability" (Crooker 1978, 7, 190). The subject of these superlatives is a mysterious shaft on Oak Island in Nova Scotia's Mahone Bay. For some two centuries, greed, folly, and even death have attended the supposed "Money Pit" enigma. The Saga Briefly, the story is that in 1795 a young man named Daniel McInnis (or McGinnis) was roaming Oak Island when he came upon a shallow depression in the ground. Above it, hanging from the limb of a large oak was an old tackle block. McInnis returned the next day with two friends who-steeped in the local lore of pirates and treasure troves-set to work to excavate the site. They soon uncovered a layer of flagstones and, ten feet further, a tier of rotten oak logs. They proceeded another fifteen feet into what they were sure was a man-made shaft but, tired from their efforts, they decided to cease work until they could obtain assistance. However, between the skepticism and superstition of the people who lived on the mainland, they were unsuccessful. The imagined cache continued to lie dormant until early in the next century, when the trio joined with a businessman named Simeon Lynds from the town of Onslow to form a treasure-hunting consortium called the Onslow Company.
    [Show full text]
  • 1661-1700 (Pdf)
    1 Scottish Books 1661-1700 (Aldis updated) 1661 1682 Academiæ Edinburgenæ gratulatio, ob serenissimi, augustissimiq; monarchæ Caroli II . Britanniarum, Galliæ & Hiberniæ regis, fidei defensoris, in solium paternum restitutionem, oblate illustrissimo dynastæ, D. Johanni Middiltonio, Middiltonii comiti, clarimontis… 4to. Edinburgh: G. Lithgow, 1661. Wing E165; ESTC R11311 [Voyager 3150808] NLS holdings: Gray.1033(1); UMI 315:01; UMI 428:14 (identified as Wing M1972) Other locations: E U Leighton(fragment) *1682.3 [Act of Committee of Estates, 13 Aug. 1650] West-kirk the 13. day of August, 1650. The Commission of the Generall Assembly considering that there may be just ground of stumbling from the Kings Majesties refusing to subscribe & emit the Declaration offered unto him by the Committee of Estates, and Commissioners of the Generall Assembly concerning his former carriage and resolutions for the future, in reference to the cause of God … . s.sh. Edinburgh: E. Tyler, 1661. Reprint of 1650 edition, Aldis 1395.6 and 1395.7; not recorded by ESTC [Voyager 3771044] NLS holdings: MS.14493, fol.1 Other locations: 1682.5 Act for raising ... 480,000 pound. fol. Edinburgh: E. Tyler, 1661. NLS holdings: Other locations: Private Owner 1683 [Act of Parliament, 1 Feb. 1661] Act of Parliament, against saying of mess [sic], Jesuits, Seminary and Mess [sic] priests, and trafficking papists. At Edinburgh, the first day of February, 1661. s.sh. Edinburgh: E. Tyler, 1661. Wing S1119; Steele 2200; ESTC R183918 [Voyager 2231141] NLS holdings: Ry.1.1.33(13); Mf.SP.133(21); UMI 2710:22 Other locations: Signet Library 1684 [Act of Parliament, 20 Feb.
    [Show full text]
  • Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (C.15) Which Received Royal Assent on 19Th July 2007 TRIBUNALS, COURTS and ENFORCEMENT ACT 2007
    These notes refer to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (c.15) which received Royal Assent on 19th July 2007 TRIBUNALS, COURTS AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2007 —————————— EXPLANATORY NOTES INTRODUCTION 1. These explanatory notes relate to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 which received Royal Assent on 19th July 2007. They have been prepared by the Ministry of Justice in order to assist the reader of the Act. The explanatory notes have not been endorsed by Parliament. 2. The notes need to be read in conjunction with the Act. They are not, and are not meant to be, a comprehensive description of the Act. So where a section or part of a section does not seem to require any explanation or comment, none is given. Where a section makes a change to the system currently in place, an overview is given of that system followed by an explanation of the change that the Act makes. OVERVIEW 3. The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act implements the main recommendations contained in the following reports and papers: x the White Paper, Transforming Public Services: Complaints, Redress and Tribunals,1 published in July 2004 (“Transforming Public Services”); x the consultation paper Increasing Diversity in the Judiciary, published in October 2004; x the Law Commission Report, Landlord and Tenant – Distress for Rent,2 published in February 1991 (“the Law Commission’s Report”); x a Report to the Lord Chancellor, Independent Review of Bailiff Law, by Professor J. Beatson QC published in July 2000; x a White Paper, Effective Enforcement, published in March 2003 (“Effective Enforcement”); x a consultation paper, A Choice of Paths: better options to manage over- indebtedness and multiple debt, published on 20 July 2004 (“the Choice of Paths Consultation”); x a consultation paper, Relief for the Indebted, an alternative to bankruptcy, published in March 2005; and x a consultation on providing immunity from seizure for international works of art on loan in the UK (March 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Response to Consultation on Revising the Definition of Treasure in The
    Revising the definition of treasure in the Treasure Act 1996 and revising the related codes of practice Response Form You can reply to the consultation by downloading and completing this response form and sending it to [email protected]. You do not have to reply to all parts of the consultation, you can reply only to the parts that interest you. The Response Form contains a Disclosure of Responses statement which you must read, understand and agree. If you do not your response may be considered invalid and would not be considered as part of the consultation. Instructions Open and save the form, including your name or organisation in the title. Please click on the grey area in each box in order to type in your answer. There is a 1250 character limit (including spaces) for responses on the form. Please email [email protected] if you have any difficulties with the form. Disclosure of responses and Data Protection The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), 100 Parliament St Westminster, London SW1A 2BQ, is the data controller in respect of any information you provide in your answers. Your personal data is being collected and processed by DCMS, which processes your personal data on the basis of informed consent. We will hold the data you provide for a maximum of 2 years. You can find out more here: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-digital- culture-media-sport/about/personal-information-charter We will process the names and addresses and email addresses provided by respondents, and information about which organisations respondents belong to, where this is provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Treasure Act 1996
    Finders keepers? Treasure Act 1996 22 MARCH 2010 CATEGORY: ARTICLE The discovery of the Staffordshire Hoard in July 2009 brought the law relating to the ownership of treasure back into the headlines. Currently in storage at the British Museum, the largest Anglo-Saxon hoard of gold ever found has now been valued at £3.25 million. Treasure belongs to the Crown and a key concern for landowners is whether they own or have any rights over items found on their land. ‘Treasure’ is dened in the Treasure Act 1996 (the ‘Act’) as any object that is at least three hundred years old at the date it is found and which has at least a 10 per cent gold or silver content. Coins must be found as a group to be classed as treasure. Anything found with treasure is also included, as is anything at least two hundred years old, but designated by the Secretary of State as being of ‘outstanding historical, archaeological or cultural importance’. This currently includes pre-historic base-metal assemblages. There is a legal obligation for treasure nders to notify the local coroner within fourteen days of making a nd, or realising a nd was treasure. To fail to do so is a criminal offence, punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of three months or a ne of £5,000. The Act introduced a Treasure Valuation Committee which values the nd and determines the reward. The standard recommendation is for the reward to be divided equally between the landowner and the nder, as happened with the Staffordshire Hoard.
    [Show full text]
  • Prehistoric Britain
    Prehistoric Britain Plated disc brooch Kent, England Late 6th or early 7th century AD Bronze boars from the Hounslow Hoard 1st century BC-1st century AD Hounslow, Middlesex, England Visit resource for teachers Key Stage 2 Prehistoric Britain Contents Before your visit Background information Resources Gallery information Preliminary activities During your visit Gallery activities: introduction for teachers Gallery activities: briefings for adult helpers Gallery activity: Neolithic mystery objects Gallery activity: Looking good in the Neolithic Gallery activity: Neolithic farmers Gallery activity: Bronze Age pot Gallery activity: Iron Age design Gallery activity: An Iron Age hoard After your visit Follow-up activities Prehistoric Britain Before your visit Prehistoric Britain Before your visit Background information Prehistoric Britain Archaeologists and historians use the term ‘Prehistory’ to refer to a time in a people’s history before they used a written language. In Britain the term Prehistory refers to the period before Britain became part of the Roman empire in AD 43. The prehistoric period in Britain lasted for hundreds of thousands of years and this long period of time is usually divided into: Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic (sometimes these three periods are combined and called the Stone Age), Bronze Age and Iron Age. Each of these periods might also be sub-divided into early, middle and late. The Palaeolithic is often divided into lower, middle and upper. Early Britain British Isles: Humans probably first arrived in Britain around 800,000 BC. These early inhabitants had to cope with extreme environmental changes and they left Britain at least seven times when conditions became too bad.
    [Show full text]
  • Centre for Political & Constitutional Studies King's College London
    CODIFYING – OR NOT CODIFYING – THE UNITED KINGDOM CONSTITUTION: THE EXISTING CONSTITUTION Centre for Political & Constitutional Studies King’s College London Series paper 2 2 May 2012 1 Centre for Political and Constitutional Studies The Centre for Political and Constitutional Studies is a politically non-aligned body at King’s College London, engaged in and promoting interdisciplinary studies and research into contemporary political and constitutional issues. The Centre’s staff is led by Professor Robert Blackburn, Director and Professor of Constitutional Law, and Professor Vernon Bogdanor, Research Professor, supported by a team of funded research fellows and academic staff at King’s College London specialising in constitutional law, contemporary history, political science, comparative government, public policy, and political philosophy. www.kcl.ac.uk/innovation/groups/ich/cpcs/index. Authorship This report of the Centre for Political and Constitutional Studies was written by Dr Andrew Blick, Senior Research Fellow, in consultation with Professor Robert Blackburn, Director, and others at the Centre, as part of its impartial programme of research for the House of Commons Political and Constitutional Reform Committee into Mapping the Path towards Codifying – or Not Codifying – the United Kingdom Constitution, funded by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust and the Nuffield Foundation. Previous publications in this series Codifying – or Not Codifying – the United Kingdom Constitution: A Literature Review, Series Paper 1, February 2011 ©
    [Show full text]