Suchergebnisse

"The story of the (now restored) Regent Street Cinema is the fourth volume exploring the University of Westminster's long and diverse history. This multi-authored volume tells its history from architectural, educational, legal and cinematic perspectives and is richly illustrated throughout with images from the University of Westminster archive.
A print paperback can be purchased direct from the University of Westminster for £20 following this link: www.westminster.ac.uk/historybooks
Staff, students and alumni can claim a 20% discount on this price."

Abstract
While the Palace of Westminster, the home of the UK Parliament requires an extensive programme of repairs and action to implement (or even agree) this programme—known as Restoration and Renewal—has been hampered. This article explores the concept of custodianship and poses a question: who are the custodians of the Palace and for whom do they preserve the Palace? Drawing on two research projects, this article explores differing interpretations of custodianship in this context, and whether decisions made about the parliamentary building are made to preserve the history of the Palace, improve working conditions in the present, or with the future of the building (and institution) in mind.

Ascribed by Halkett and Laing to A. Ruddle. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Ascribed by Halkett and Laing to A. Ruddle. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The UK Parliament is in a state of flux, reflecting radical changes in British society and its political life, as well as rising demands to be more effective and accountable to public opinion. The rules and procedures by which Parliament operates, and political conflicts and pressures are resolved, are a vital element in the study and understanding of UK constitutional law. This article analyses the nature, scope and effects of parliamentary practice and procedure at Westminster, and how they are utilised by government ministers, the opposition and backbench members, for their respective political ends. It considers the impact of recent procedural changes and likely future developments.

Clemens Jürgenmeyer untersucht in diesem Beitrag, inwieweit das indische Regierungssystem als Westminster-Modell (Mehrheitsdemokratie) nach britischen Vorbild angesehen werden kann. Dabei stützt sich der Autor auf die von Arend Lijphart formulierten Merkmale einer Mehrheitsdemokratie. Da sich ein solcher Demokratietyp jedoch zumeist in homogenen und nicht oder wenig föderalen Staaten herausgebildet hat, kann Indien nicht als Westminister-Demokratie gesehen werden. Vielmehr osziliert das indische Regierungssystem zwischen Mehrheits- und Konsensdemokratie und wird dabei entscheidend von den handelnden Akteuren beeinflusst.

In the first edition of his Patterns of Democracy (1999), Lijphart used the term 'Westminster model' 'interchangeably with majoritarian model. Despite both the constitutional reforms introduced since the change of government in 1997 and the outcome and consequences of the 2010 general election, Lijphart concluded in the second edition of his book (2012a) that 'recent changes in British politics do not change the overall character of Britain as a prime example of majoritarian democracy.' Lijphart's perspective is challenged by this article–-which also examines the effect of the 2015 general election on the nature of the Westminster system through the prism of Lijphart's Patterns of Democracy. It is argued that first, the Westminster system has never represented the majoritarian ideal; second, that it has noticeably moved towards greater consensus as a result of the various constitutional reforms introduced since the change of government in 1997 on the one hand and the outcome and consequences of the 2010 general election on the other; and third, that the 2015 general election has somehow stopped this general trend towards greater consensus.