1. Assuming that the UK does have a constitution, in some sense of that term: (a) What does it mean to say that the UK constitution is only partly written: which parts are "written' and which not? (b) Why do informed commentators prefer the term "uncodified' to describe the UK constitution? (c) What does it mean to say that the UK constitution is 'flexible'? (To answer this question, consider how the UK constitution may be changed in comparison to the constitutions of most other countries; Also make sure to take into account what Tomkins argues about whether there really is a link between the UK constitution being uncodified and being flexible). (d) is the UK Constitution entirely flexible? What are some of its most stable and long-enduring rules (whether laws or conventions?) Are there some constitutional rules that cannot be changed as easily as the others (or at all)? 2. The various commentators in your reading list adopt different views on the nature of constitutions and the UK constitution specifically. Some (e.g. Ridley discussed in Masterman and Murray) go so far as to say that the UK has no constitution. Be prepared to: (a) summarise Ridley's understanding of the key characteristics of a constitution; (b) discuss whether you agree with his view, and explain why / why not; (c) identify and discuss how Anthony King's and Adam Tomkins' views of the constitution differ