1. Trang chủ
  2. » Ngoại Ngữ

Tài liệu Part 7- Britain pptx

5 485 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 5
Dung lượng 831,8 KB

Nội dung

76 6 Political life Th e Rushdie affai r Sa lman Rushdie is a British citizen from a Muslim background , and a respected writer. In early [989 , his book The Satanic Ve rses was pu blished. Many Muslims in Britain were extremely angry about the book's publicat ion . They regarded it as a terrible insult to Islam. They there- fore demanded that the book be banned and that its author be taken (Q court for blasphemy (usin g lan - guage to insult God). To do either of these things wou ld have been to go against the long- established tradition of free speech and freedom of religious views. In any case, t here is noth ing in British law to justify doing either. Ther e are censor ship law s, bu t the y relate only (Q obscen ity and natio nal security. There isa law against blas phe my ,but it refers only to the Christian reli- gion . More over, the t end ency f rom the second half of the twent ieth century has been to apply both types oflaw as little as possible and to give priority to the principle of free speech. QUESTIONS is the goo d of being different if 'different' mean s 'w orse" There has been growing concern about increasing cr ime in the country, and this has resulted in much discussion about identity cards. Britain's fellow states in the European Un ion wou ld like to see them intro - duced in the country. At the same t ime, there has been increasing pressure for a Freedom of Information Act. Ano ther possibility is that Britain will finally get a written constitu- tion. An unwritten constitu tion works very well if ever ybody in the co un try shares the same attitudes and principles about what is mo st important in political life and abo ut wha t people' s rights and obliga- tions are. In other word s, it wor ks v ery well in a society where everybody belongs to the same culture. Howe ver, in common with most other European countries today, Britain is no w multicultural. This means that some sections of society can sometimes ho ld radic- ally different ideas abou t these things. The case of Salman Rushdi e is an excellent example of this situation ( C> Th e Ru shdie affa ir). As l ong as everybody in a country feels the same wa y, at the sa me time, abou t a case such as this, there is no real need to worry about incon sistencies in the law. There is no need to question the existence oflaw s or to update t hem. They are just inter preted in changing ways to mat ch the change in prevailing opinion . This is what, up to now, has hap - pened in Britain. But the R ushd ie case is an example of what can happen whe n radically opposing views on a matterprevail in different sections of society at the same time. In these circumstances the tradi- tional laissez-faireattitude to the law can becom e dangero us. I In what sense cou ld the British att itud e to politics be described as 'ha ppily cynical'? Are people equally cynical in your country? Are they as happy about it? 2 In mo st Parliaments in the wes tern world, the place wher e representatives debate is in the form of a semi-circle. But in Britain, there are two sets of rows facing each other. Why is the British Parliament different in this respect? SUGGESTIONS 3 How does the role of po litical parties in Britain differ from their role in y our c ountr y? 4 Why does Britain not have a written constitu- tion? Does it need one ? • Try to watch some of the Yes , Prime Min ister progra mmes (available as a BBC vide o). There is a book of the same name pub lis hed by BBC Books. Please purchase PDF Split-Merge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark. 7 The monarchy The appearance The position of the monarch in Britain is a p erf ect illustration of the contradictory nature of the constitution. Fr om the evidence of written law on ly. the Queen has almost absolute p ow er, and it all seems very un democ ratic. The American co nstitution talks about 'government of the people for the people by the people'. There is no law in Britain which saysanything like that. In fact, there is no legal concept of 'the people' at all. Ever y autumn, at the state opening of Parliament, Eli zabeth II, who became Quee n in 1952 , makes a speech. In it, she says wh at 'my gove rnment' intends to do in the com ing year. And indeed , it is her government, not the peop le's. As far as the law is concerned, she can choose anybody she likes to run the government for her. There are no restrictions on whom she picks as her Prime Minister. It doe s not have to be somebody who has been elected. She could choose me; she could even choose you.The same is true for her choices of people to fill some hundred or so other ministerial positions. And if she gets fed up with her mini sters, she can just dismiss them. Officially speaking,they are all'servants of the C rown' (not servants ofanything like 'th e country' or 'th e people').She also appears to have great po we r over Parliament. It is she who sum mo ns a Parliament, and she who dissolves it before a general election (see chapter to ). Nothing that Parliament has decided can become law until she has agreed to it. Similarly, it is the Queen, and not any other figure of authority, who embodies the law in the courts. In the USA, when the police take someone to cou rt to accuse them of a crime, the co urt records s how that 'the peo ple ' have accused that person . In other countries it might be 'the state' that makes the accusation . But in Britain it is 'the Crown'. This is because of the legal authority of the monarch. And when an accused person is found guilty of a crime, he or she might be sent to one of 'Her Majesty's' prisons. Other countries have 'citizens'. But in Britain people are legally described as 'subjects' - subjects of Her Majesty the Queen. More- over, there is a principle of English law that the monarch can do nothing that is legally wrong. In other wo rds, Queen Elizabeth is above the law. The house of W indsor Windsor is the family name of the royal family. The press somet imes refers to its me mbers as 'the Wind- sors'. Queen Eliza beth is only the fourth monarch w ith this name. This is not because a 'new' royal family took over the throne of Brirain four reigns ago. It is because George V, Elizabeth's grandfather, changed the family name . Itwas Saxe-Coburg- Gotha, but during the First World War it w as thoug ht better for the king not to have a German- sounding name. 77 Please purchase PDF Split-Merge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark. second son. He is divorced from his wif e,Sarah Ferguson (who is known to the popu lar press as 'Fergie'}. They have two daughters. • Prin ce Edwa rd , the Qu e en' s youngest SO il , was born in 1964. He is involved in theatrical production. He married Sophie Rhys-]ones in 1999. He and his wif e are the Duke and Duchess ofWessex. • Prin ce William (born 1982) and Prin ce Henr y (bo rn 1984) are the sons of Charles and Diana.William is next in line to the thron e after his father. • Prin cess Diana married Prince Charles in 1981.The coup le separated in 1992 and later divorced. Princess Diana died as the result of a car accident in [997.She was a gla moro us and p opu lar figure d uring her lifetime. • Princess Anne, the Queen's daughter (also known as the Princess Royal), was horn in 1%,0. She separated from her husband after they had aile son and one daughter.She married again in 1992. She is widely respected for her charity work, whichshe does in a spirit of realism. • Prin ce An dre w , the Duke ofYork, was born in 1960 and is the Queen's 78 7 The monarchy The royal family • Queen Elizabeth the Qu een Moth er died at the age of 101 in 2002, the year of the present Que en' s Golden Jubilee. Her tour s of bombed areas of London during the Second WorldWar with her husband. King Georgc Vl. made her popular with the British people. She remained the most consistently popular member of the royal family until her death. • Queen Elizabeth II was born in 1926 and became Quee n in 1952 on the death of her father, George VI, who had reigned since 1936 (when his elder br other , Edward VIII, gave up the throne). She is one of the l ong est-reigning mona rchs in British history.She is widely respected for the way in whi ch she performs her duties and is generally popular. • Prin ce Philip M ountb atten, the Duke of Edinburgh, married the present Que en in 19+7. In the 1960s and 1970s, his outspoken opi nions on cont roversial matters were some- times embarrassing to the royal family. • Princess Margaret. the Queen's you nger sister, died in 2002 . • Princ e Charles, the Prince of Wales, was born in 1948. As the eldest son of Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, he is heir to the throne. He is concerned about the environment and about living conditions in Britain's cities. He sometimes makes speeches which are critical of aspects of modern life. Princ ess Margar et TheQu ee n Mother TheQu ee n Prince Philip P rince Cho rles The reality In practice, of course, the reality is very dif ferent. In fact, the Queen cannot c ho ose anyon e she likes to be Prime Minister. She has to c ho ose someone who has the su pport of the majority of MPs in the House of Co mm on s (the elected cha mber of the two Hou ses of Parliam ent ). This is because the law says that 'her' govern me nt can on ly collect taxes with the agreement of the Commo ns , so if she did not choose such a person. the gove rnm ent would s top functi onin g. In practice the person she chooses is the leader of the strongest party in the House of Commons. Si mil arly, it is really the Prime Minister who decides who the other govern m ent ministers are going to be (alt ho ugh officially the Prime Minister Simply 'advises' the monarch wh o to choose) . Please purchase PDF Split-Merge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark. It is the same story with Parliament. Again, the Prime Minister will talk abou t 'r equ esting ' a disso lutio n of Parliam en t w hen he or she wants to hold an electio n, but it woul d n orm ally be im possible for the monarch to refuse this 'request'. Similarly , while, in the ory , the Queen could refuse the royal assent to a bill passed by Parliament - and so stop it be comi ng law (see chapt er 9) - no mon arch has actually d on e so since the year 1 70 8. Ind eed, the royal assent is so automatic that the Qu een doesn 't even bo ther to give it in pers on . Somebody else si gns the do cument s for her. In reality the Qu e en has al mo st no p ow er at all. Wh en she opens Parliament each year the speech she mak es has been written f or her. She makes no secret of this fact. She ver y obv iou sly reads out the script that has been prepared for her, word for wor d. If she strongly disagrees with one of the policies of the gove rnment, she might ask the gove rnm ent ministers to change the wording in the speech a little beforeh and, but that is all. She canno t a ctua lly Sla p the g overn - ment going ahead with any of its policies. The role of the monarch What, then, is the mon arch's role?Man y opinions are off ered by politi cal and legal exp ert s. Three roles are often mentioned. First, the m ona rch is the personal em bodi ment of the gove rnm ent of the country. This means that pe op le can be as critical as the y like abou t the real gov ernm ent, and can argue that it should be thrown out, with ou t b ein g accused of b ein g u npat riotic. Because of the clear separation be twee n the symbol of gov ernm ent (the Queen) and the actual gov ernm ent (th e mini sters, who are also MPs) , changing the g overnm ent does not threaten the stability of the countr y as a wh ole. Other countries with out a m onar ch have to use some thing else as the symbol of the country. In the USA, f or examp le, one of these is its flag, and to dam age th e flag in any way is actually a criminal offence. Second, it is a rgu ed that the monar ch c ou ld act as a final check on a govern me nt that wa s beco ming dictatorial. If the gove rnment ever managed to pass a bill through Parliament w hich was obviously terribly bad and very unp opu lar, the m onar ch could refuse the royal assent and the bill wou ld not become law. Similarly, it is possible that if a Prime Min ister who had been d ef eated at a general elec tion (and so no l ong er commanded a majo rity in the H ou se of C om m on s) wer e to ask imm ediately for anoth er dissol ution of Parliam ent (so that a nothe r electi on could take place), the mo nar ch could refuse the request and dism iss t he P rim e Minister. Third, the m ona rch has a very practical role 10 play. By being a figurehead and representing the country , Queen Elizabeth II can p erf orm the cere mo nial duti es which heads of state often have to spend the ir time on. This wa y, the real government has more time to get on wi th the actual job of running the cou ntr y. The role of the monarch 79 H onours Twice a year, an Honours list is pub - lished. The pe op le whose names appear on the list are then sum- moned to Buckingham Palace where the Queen present s them \ ith a token wh ich ent itles them to write (and be forma lly addressed With) KG, or KCB, or (BE , or many other possible combinations of lcuers. after their names. The leuers stand for tides such as 'Knight of the Order of the Garter', 'Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath', 'Corn - mandcr of the British Em pire', and so on . Life pee rages arc also awarded, wh ich entitle the rccipi - cnts to a seat in the House of Lords. Traditiona lly, it was by giving people titles such as these that the monarch 'honoured' them in return for their services. These days , the decision ahem who gets which honour is usually taken by the Prime Minister (see chapter 8). And, as ) ·ou can see, the names of the titles don 't seem to make much sense in mo dern time s. But that docs no t stop people finding it a real ' honour' to be given a title b)' the monarch herself! A high propo rtion of honours are given [0 politicians and civil ser- vants, but they are also given [0 busi- ness people, sports stars, rock musicians and other entertainers. TheB eall " with their MBE s Please purchase PDF Split-Merge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark. 80 7 The monarchy The Queen, attracting foreign touris ts The eco nomic arg ume nt Everytourist brochure for Britain in every country in the worl d gives great prominence to the mon archy. It is impo ssible to estimate exactly h ow much the British royal family and the events and buildings associ- ated wit h the mon archy help the tourist industry, or exactly h ow much money they help to bring into the country. But most peop le working in tourism think it is an awful lot! Edward and MrsSim pso n For the last t wo centuries the public have wanted their monarch to have high moral standards. In 1936 Edward VIII, the uncle of the present Queen, was forced to abdic- ate (give up the throne) . This happened because he wanted to marry a woman who had divorced two husbands. (On top of that, she was not even a British aristocrat- she was an Americanf) The govern- ment and the major churches in the country insisted that Edward cou ld not marryher and remain king. He chose to marry her. The couple then went to live abroad. In spite of the constitutional crisis that he caused, the Duke of Windsor (as Edward later became ) and his wife were popular celebrities in Britainall their lives, and the ktng 's abdication has gone down in popular history as an example of the p owe r o flo ve. The value of the mo narchy However, all these advantages are hyp oth etical. It cannot be proved that only a monarch can provide them. Other modern d emocra cies manage pe rf ectly well wit hout on e. The British mona rchy is probably more important to the eco nomy of the country ( I> The economic a rg u ment) than it is to the system of government. Apart from this, the mona rchy is very popular with the majority of the British peop le. The monarchy gives British people a sym bol of continui ty, and a harm less ou tlet for the expression of national pride. Even in very hard times it has never seemed likely that Britain would turn to a dictator to get it out of its t rou bles. The grandeur of its monarchy may have been one of the reasons for this. Occasions such as the state ope ning of Parliament, the Queen's official birth day, royal weddings , and ce remon ial events such as the changing of the guard make up for the lack of colour and cere mony in most peop le's daily lives. (There is no tradition ofl ocal parades as there is in the USA, and very few traditional local festivals survive as they do in other European countries.) In addition the glamorous lives of 'the royals' provide a source of entertainment that often takes on the characteristics of a television soap opera. When , in 1992, it became kno wn that Prince Charles and his wife Princess Diana were separating, even the mo re 'serious' newspapers discussed a lot more t han the possible po litical implications. The Sunday Tim es pu blislied a 'five-page royal separat ion special'. The future of the monarchy For the last 250 years, the British monarchy as an institution has only rare ly been a burni ng political issue. Onl y occasionally has there been debate about the existence of the monarch y itself. Few pe op le in Britain could be described as either 'm onarch ists' or 'anti-monarchists', in the sense in which these terms are of ten used in other countries. Most people are either vaguely in favour or they just don't care one way or the other. There is, however, a great deal of debate abou t what ki nd of monarchy Britain should have. D uri ng the last two decades of the twent ieth century, there has been a general cooling of enthu siasm . The Qu een her self rem ains popular. But the various marital problems in her family have lowered the prestige of royalty in man y peo ple's eyes. The problem is that, since Quee n Victoria's reign, the public Iiave been encouraged to look up to the roya l fam ily as a model of Cliristian family life. The change in att itude can be seen by compar ing Queen Eliz abeth' s 25th anniversaryas Queen wi th her 40 th anniversary. In 1977, there were neighbourhood street parties throughout the country , most of them spontaneously and volu ntarily organized. But in 1992, noth ing like this took place. On 20 Novem ber 199 2, a fire damaged one of the Queen's favourite hom es to the value of £6 0 million. There wer e Please purchase PDF Split-Merge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark. . respect? SUGGESTIONS 3 How does the role of po litical parties in Britain differ from their role in y our c ountr y? 4 Why does Britain not have a written constitu- tion?. the country, and this has resulted in much discussion about identity cards. Britain& apos;s fellow states in the European Un ion wou ld like to see them intro - duced

Ngày đăng: 17/01/2014, 09:20

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN