Thanks for the response. Some replies:
(1) I do think it is fair for the Constitution Society to say that “nothing” has been done, because in their view, the charge from the 2012 referendum was to enact a new constitution based on the council’s draft. Talking about how to amend the old constitution is not responsive to that charge.
(2) What Iceland ratified in 1944 by “95% of voters” was a “temporary” constitution that simply changed the monarch parts of a Danish constitution to incorporate a president. I’m sure there would be many who voted to ratify it who would be surprised to see their “temporary” constitution still being defended 70 years later. And yes, the net vote from the referendum was 30-something percent of voters. But it was more than 2/3ds of those who actually voted. Is there data to suggest those who didn’t vote had a different view — and an argument about why that should matter (given the civic duty of voters in a democracy is to vote?)
(3) I do give money and endless time to “democracy.” imho, it precedes constitutions — and constitutions should follow it.