From: Gene McAloon 

I don't make arguments about the obvious inadequacies of the parliamentary
system except when utterly foolish statements are made about its alleged
nature.

To claim that the parliamentary structure has a built-in system of checks
and balances is complete nonsense, nonsense well known to both Brits and
Canadians of a political persuasion different from yours. The inadequacies
of the parliamentary system are precisely the reason for the ever
increasing movement towards junking it and adopting a republican form of
government more or less on the US model.

Naturally enough, as a conservative you oppose any such movement and no
doubt will be defending your archaic system even as it fades from the
scene. The most immediate issue in your country along these lines involves
your courts and how your top judges are chosen.

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:33:58 -0400, "John Beamish"  wrote:

>Don't you think you've gone on long enough about the (in your perspective)
>merits of the US Constitutional system?  If you had new arguments, I could
>understand.
>
>You've got a system of checks and balances that works for you and gives you
>Bush 2, Patriot I, Homeland Security and the Supreme Court deciding that you
>have to identify yourself when stopped and questioned by the police.
>
>We've got a system of parliamentary democracy that works for us and gives us
>John Turner, Kim Campbell and a Supreme Court deciding that the contents of
>your pockets cannot be searched unless you have actually been arrested by
>the police.
>
>
>"Gene McAloon"  wrote in message
>news:unshh09uclg86k0b7vnf5jaecgpnkaup1d{at}4ax.com...
>>
>> As I say, there are no checks and balances in the Brit parliamentary
>> system. The experience of Thatcher doesn't in any way suggest otherwise.
>> She was thrown out of her leadership position by her own party and for
>> no other reason than that the majority of the party members at the party
>> conference thought she couldn't win another general election.
>>
>> How can there be a system of checks and balances when everything,
>> legislative, executive and judicial functions, are all exercised by
>> parliament? Without separate branches, there can be no checks and
>> balances and the Brit parliamentary system has none.
>>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5