I like this article by Pierre de Vos. I have two suggestions. In the sixth paragraph he speaks of those irritated by aspects of the constitution being driven by ‘traditional values’. I know and he makes clear that he is referring to the TCB, which in some cases entrenches dubious versions of tradition. My problem is of a different nature. Surely our belief in democracy is itself a traditional value, part of a long tradition? So my suggestion is that we should not allow that word to be appropriated by reactionaries. My second point is that in paragraph 3 de Vos provides a valuable basis for assessing when a constitutional amendment may be illegitimate. But I think it is time for concerned citizens to elaborate on what type of amendments should or could be entertained as enhancing and deepening our democracy. If we say, correctly, that there is nothing wrong with changing the constitution, it may assist debate to indicate what type of directions could be entertained in the future.

Changing the Constitution? Probably not.