The constitution is the foundation upon which law and government are built. Yet the United Kingdom has no agreed process for constitutional change. The Committee does not accept that the government should be able to pick and choose which processes to apply when proposing significant constitutional change. It therefore recommends in this report the adoption of a clear and consistent process. These recommendations are not intended to restrict the government's right to initiate constitutional change, but to hold ministers to account for their decisions. The Committee regard it as essential that, prior to the introduction of a bill which provides for significant constitutional change, the government considers the impact of the proposals upon the existing constitutional arrangements, subject the proposals to detailed scrutiny in the Cabinet and its committees, consult widely, publish green and white papers, and subject the bill to pre-legislative scrutiny.The Committee looks at these processes in this report, as well as considering the desirability of public engagement and building consensus. Also the importance of not rushing parliamentary scrutiny of legislation once introduced into Parliament and of conducting comprehensive post-legislative scrutiny of significant constitutional legislation once passed. Also recommended is the minister responsible for a significant constitutional bill in each House set out the processes to which a bill has been subjected in a written ministerial statement. This comprehensive package from which the government should depart only in exceptional circumstances and where there are clearly justifiable reasons for so doing. The Committee believes this approach is pragmatic and achievable, enabling the flexibility of the United Kingdom's current constitutional arrangements to be retained whilst enhancing and underpinning those arrangements