h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Kids have been taught the metric system in schools here in NZ since probably the 1970s. But as we get more Americanised, it's like a big step backwards, and we have things measured in Imperial all over again - weight for instance - everyone expects weight to be given in pounds - and guess what, I haven't a clue!

You should try watching Japanese science fiction on a regular basis. The whole sale denial of history contained therein is kind of scary, and frankly far outweighs anybody trying to take credit for others achievements for work in WWII.

And we weren't alone inthe slave trade, and we eneded our end of it a damn sight quicker than some others as well...

Is that a lot of them think that everyone else owes them a favour ie: benefits scrounging, when the true needy and or disabled don't have a look in, for being honest.

The fact that 'benefits scrounging' is excoriated, wheras wholesale tax evasion is passed off as 'entrepeneurship'

>> that is not a constitution, just a collection of laws passed over the centuries

pretending the 2 are the same is another annoying trait of the British <<

Well actually they are. Take a look at The Parliament Act, the Representation of the People Act and The Act of Settlement to name of few and see how much they read like a constitution.

If we dont have a constitution, how can we have a Constitutional Monarch?

The fact that they are not all written down in a single document is irrelevant. In fact it's an advantage. It makes it easier to amend the constitution in the light of changing circumstances.

Donald

Maybe it's a 'Bill of Rights' that we need then - and one which we're not allowed to opt out of.

No one can opt out of Acts passed by Parliment, not even the Queen, so whats the problem.

Donald

The problem is that we can (and have!) opted out from a clause of the Human Rights Act and accordingly passed legislation which would otherwise have contravened it.

You are getting confused with Act passed by Parliament which is sovereign and the European Parliament which isn't.

Donald

I most assuredly am not! The Human Rights Act (1988) was enacted by the UK Parliament and incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights into British law. When we feel like it.

>> European Convention on Human Rights into British law. When we feel like it. <<

The same attitude to European law adopted by the rest of the EU, then.

RF

There is no obligation on the UK Parliament to accept European Conventions in there entirety. Once a convention is passed into UK Law by Parliament, in whatever form, with or without opt outs, then there is no opt out from the Act. Thats what is meant by sovereignty.


Donald

Donald
they may read like a constitution but they have no special status and can be repealed like any other law
thats all they are, normal laws
compare that to the US Constitution which can only be amended with great difficulty

>> compare that to the US Constitution which can only be amended with great difficulty <<

As I said previously, I consider that an disadvantage, not an advantage. Something written down over 200 hundred years ago is bound to have anomalies and irrelevances in the modern age. There is bound to be a need to amend things from time to time and the ease in which it can be done ensures that it is done in a timely fashion.

The special status laws have is that everyone, without exception,is bound by them. They can only be amended or repealed by Parliament, just as a single document constitution would be.

Donald

>> Something written down over 200 hundred years ago is bound to have anomalies and irrelevances in the modern age <<

Yes, but, no, but...

One of the great advantages of the American Constitution is its simplicity. Compare this with the propsed EU Constitution, which runs to several hundred pages. Give me the simplicity of the AMerican Constitution every time.

RF

I'd say the difficulty of amending the constitution is a strength
It means that careful consideration is required before taking far-reaching measures and not just panic measures or party advantage
Of course it isn't a failsafe, but it is IMO an improvement on what we have in the UK

It strikes me that we need people elected by a majority or at least intelligent people in the European Parliament before we give it a constitution.

Ok, so the former is improbable and the latter is overly demeaning, but I'm referring to that particular form of intelligence that can spot a pattern and make a good approximation. I agree with Reddyfreddy that simplicity is a good thing.

On the other hand, it appears that the rulings of the majority, or at least the majority of voters, in the US can be overruled by being declared unconstitutional. This apparant reverence of something written by not very many people a long time ago for no particular reason confuses me greatly, and I wouldn't like to see it replicated in British society. Better to have many crap laws that everyone ignores.

marking

>> This apparent reverence of something written by not very many people a long time ago for no particular reason confuses me greatly <<

Seems to be a common trait among Americans. They do the same with The Bible.

Donald

try ignoring Blunketts ID cards and see if you are allowed to after they are introduced
the biggest problem I can see with a constitution is the power it gives judges
however given the record of the Thatcher and Blair governments I'd rather trust judges nowadays