There’s neither the need nor the desire for a written constitution in the UK. Especially not one that couldn’t be changed when necessary.
Why on earth would you want to override the supremacy of Parliament, anyway? Do you really hate democracy that much?
Example please. Consider it could just be a difference of opinion. Remember that more than one opinion is allowed.
No, I imagine we want the same thing for exactly the same reasons. I believe life in an independent England would be better for the English than life in the Union currently is. Public spending would increase, there’d be more jobs as we claw back public sector jobs and bureaucracies that mostly serve England from the other Home Nations, and we’d be free to govern ourselves as we see fit without interference from the other Home Nations.
You’ve been told to shut up with the “narrow minded English” insults. It’s an outright lie that the English conflate England and Britain.
So, because you’re too fucking lazy to do your research, and because you are ignorant enough to not understand the regional differences in the UK every English person is the same? Outright nonsense. Stop assigning your own bias and stupidity to everyone else. You’re not some super evolved form of English person who knows better than any other because you lived a few miles away for a few years.
A Scottish Nationalist finding apologia for increased public spending in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales over that in England, due to the undefined “benefits” of the Union accrued to the people of England, an excellent sentiment? Colour me shocked! The mind boggles as to why this sentiment is so often found missing in arguments set forth by the English.
Different opinions are allowed. Different facts are not. You claim, repeatedly and without any justification, that the English do not understand the difference between Britain and England, despite every single English poster in this thread, and indeed every single English person I’ve ever met, knowing the difference, and knowing that the UK is made up of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
So, cite your claim or retract it.
There are very good reasons for the extra spending in Northern Ireland, mainly that it’s historically the British’s fault that the province (as well as the ROI) are relatively deprived. Completely different situation to Scotland, where the Union has contributed mightily to, if not entirely created, its prosperity.
Lol.
The supremacy of Parliament was described by Quinton Hogg as an elective dictatorship. It is certainly not a model of modern Democracy. It retains all the drawbacks of the Divine Right of Kings without the certainty that that obtained.
If you think that the British system is a perfect democracy, you do not understand political science.
Tony Benn asked an important aeries of questions that are appropriate to consider
he said:
In the course of my life I have developed five little democratic questions. If one meets a powerful person–Adolf Hitler, Joe Stalin or Bill Gates–ask them five questions: “What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?” If you cannot get rid of the people who govern you, you do not live in a democratic system.
Our system allows in extremis, the absolute power of a single person who retains the support of parliament however elected to create any law they wish.
A determined Prime Minister legally could depose the monarch, appoint a new one, restrict the franchise to their interests and remain in power under that system. The judiciary would have no standing at all. It is not likely to happen, but is entirely possible and legal. A written constitution makes that impossible without admitting that the previous settlement had been overturned by revolution.
I was asked not to use a particular phrase. I am not aware that saying someone is narrow minded is banned.
What I do have is the experience and ability to understand the complexity of different national mindless because of my experience of being educated in one country and living in others. Something denied to you.
It’s more the sentiment of “that’s how the Union works and I’m happy with the Union so lets stop arguing about who gets what money”.
People chastise those that want to leave the Union for wanting to leave it while at the same time moaning about the benefits we get from being in it.
If you honestly think there are no benefits for England from Scotland being in the Union why did the main parties all fight so hard to keep us in?
The examples are legion. Certainly the English have cognitive ability to separate the various nationalities, but often refer to British things when meaning English ones.
One example above- the BBC History of Britain
“British juries have twelve people”
It is easy to exchange the British pound Sterling abroad
The Highest Criminal Court in Britain used to be the House of Lords and is now the Supreme Court.
In Britain we have an established church
English is the only National language on Britain
I hope all British people will be supporting our team in the 2018 world cup
English philosopher David Hume…
In Britain for decades you have had the right to a solicitor before being questioned by the police and your interview must be recorded.
No, they couldn’t. No-one can legally depose the Monarch, and the PM (or Parliament as a whole) is not sufficient to create a regency. Even then, unless said PM had the confidence of Parliament - which, if he was acting against the will of the electorate, he wouldn’t - it would dissolve itself, and he would no longer be PM. You have a profound misunderstanding of the nature of the UK government.
As for the idea that the judiciary would have no standing, that’s absurd. They would simply declare that they had standing, and it would be done. This isn’t the US, fortunately. Most likely, they would declare that whatever regency had been created didn’t follow proper procedure, and then their choice of Monarch (presumably the one that was claimed unfit by the PM and whoever assisted him) would dissolve Parliament.
Whilst the UK may not be a perfect democracy, there’s certainly none better out there. Plenty that are equal, created in several different ways, though.
You are certainly helping me understand a certain national mindless…
Aside from that, the arrogance of your statement is only matched by its incorrectness.
True, for the vast majority of Britain.
Entirely true.
Entirely true.
Entirely true.
False. Wow, you got one. There’s only one National Language in Scotland (English), though, so your point doesn’t relate to your pet issue at all.
What’s wrong with hoping that? I mean yeah, it’s unrealistic due to certain anti-English attitudes, but it’s a nice thought. Most English people would support Scotland rather than any other team but England.
False, someone didn’t do their research.
I’d hope this is fucking true, and if it’s not the case in any part of the UK it needs to be rectified quickly.
It increases their power and would have caused personal embarrassment if the party leadership had overseen the break up of the United Kingdom.
Unlike the leadership, the Tory rank and file were hardly that enthusiastic about keeping Scotland in, by the way, and certainly weren’t enthralled by the “vow” and other promises made in haste to ensure Scotland was kept in.
None better?
None?
According to some sources we are not even top ten
http://democracyranking.org/wordpress/ranking/2014/data/Scores_of_the_Democracy_Ranking_2014_a4.pdf
At least we are more free than anyone else…:rolleyes:
So you think that all major political parties in the UK wanted to keep a drain (which is essentially how you describe us) on the UK’s larger economy to avoid embarrassment?
Ok - I’m probably done here.
You make me laugh.
The judiciary is appointed by Parliament and Judges can be removed at the Executive’s will.
The monarch currently cannot dissolve parliament even under advice from the PM?
Parliamentary supremacy means what it says.
How do you think James II was replaced by William of Orange. The Glorious Revolution confirmed that the monarch reigned only with the support of Parliament.
You obviously did not concentrate in history at school and aeem unaware of constitutional history.
Hoist by your own ignorant petard.