Tài liệu Part 7- Britain pptx

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.