The Westminster Parliament appears to be tearing itself apart. The current turmoil resembles the time before party whips came to play the role they do today. In the old days, parties were not stable: a leader could not depend on the votes of other MPs and Lords as a matter of course. Much of the time, a member of the legislature had to be persuaded or cajoled into voting in favour of a proposal.
NEO ran a post at his blog, yesterday, commemorating George Washington. The post is well worth a read. In particular, I was struck by George Washington’s dislike for political parties (especially on the basis of geographical divisions). He knew history well, and he was a true patriot. He desired that the people would be united and that faction would not lead to tyranny. Struggles, he contended, can lead to people placing their faith in one man: and that man can prove unworthy of such faith. The people loved George Washington – they put their faith in him. That he should hold such a view speaks highly of his humility and moral fibre.
The legislature holds a dangerous position in the United Kingdom’s constitution. AV Dicey, the great legal scholar, held that Parliament could make a law on any matter it chose, and that statute is the highest form of law in our country. In other words, Parliament is omni-competent and supreme. Our American cousins (who separated from us long before Dicey was born) wisely avoided creating a legislature that could hold such pretensions.
We were not wise enough to limit our own Parliament directly – though it ceased to hold its lofty position when the United Kingdom joined what would become the EU. The infamous Factortame cases revealed just who occupied the highest position. Leaving the EU would mean that we would revert to the former position of Parliament being supreme and omni-competent.
Many of us who voted for Brexit (and perhaps some remainers who have subsequently re-thought their position) do not want to see a reversion to Dicey’s concept of Parliament. Our country is in sore need of constitutional reform, alongside the other changes in law and culture that would make our nation a better host for the Kingdom of Heaven. We need a Parliament that will be limited, just as the American Congress is subject to the Constitution of the United States of America. It must not be free to pass any law it pleases – Parliament should never have been free to pass a law permitting abortion.
An ideal Parliament would know that it answers to a Higher Power, whence comes all authority on this earth. It would respect the right to life and the right to the fruit of one’s labour, and the enjoyment of one’s property. As our country continues to endure political turmoil, it is my prayer that God will raise up politicians after His own heart, who will reform our laws and constitution.
All Along the Watchtower 
Thanks, Nicholas for the link. Washington was, as I said, the indispensable man for us, and an ideal we’ve never again reached. General Lee, who considered him his spiritual grandfather was perhaps the closest. They come at most once a millennium or so.
But you know, when I was in high school those many years ago, we had a primer on the British system (this would be pre-EU). Even then it struck me as dangerous with the Parliament at one and the same time, the highest court, the legislature, and choosing the chief executive. Obviously, it just organically grew that way, so there’s no fault to be found. It still is. You’ve been very lucky, primarily in your hereditary nobility my reading suggests. But that check too has been defenestrated, now it is all concentrated in the House of Commons.
The future? Well, no one knows, but I do think this. It is asking an awful lot to expect your government to properly reform itself. It has happened only once, and Washington led that effort, both in the field as a soldier, and then as a statesman. And even here, with that legacy. the Republic, as I write so many days, is in danger from the enemy within.
Someplace our countries both forgot about Original Sin. For that is exactly what the American system was founded on. In Federalist #51, James Madison makes the point.
“But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department, the necessary constitutional means, and personal motives, to resist encroachments of the others… Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man, must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.”
And so, even with the hoped-for success of Brexit (At this point, I think the only useful type to be WTO/no deal Brexit) you face the possibility of the Tyranny of Parliament for it truly is as Lord Acton said, “The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority; or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections.”.
As Chalcedon has often reminded us, “Politics is downstream from culture”. And so we come at last to another founder, John Adams, who wrote in 1798, that:
“We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”
And so I wish you good luck and good fortune. It’s a parlous course, but there is no other for a free people.
LikeLiked by 1 person