IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v25y1931i03p683-689_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Position of the British Parliament

Author

Listed:
  • Pollock, James K.

Abstract

The British Parliament has been passing through a period of pianissimo. Its praises should be sounded very softly, while its inadequacies and imperfections should be given wide attention. This does not imply a lack of veneration and respect for the Mother of Parliaments, but merely that a realistic approach should be made to the present-day value of this progenitor of the sturdy race of legislatures. No political institution is eternally successful, and even British institutions which have evolved so slowly, and in general so soundly, are no exceptions. The halo which surrounds Westminster is so great, however, that it almost blinds one to the imperfections which exist within those hallowed precincts. It seems almost sacrilegious, as a great British statesman recently observed, to attempt to meddle with “those great forms of procedure which have been handed down to us.†And yet when the Mother of Parliaments has so obviously deteriorated as to lose much of the respect and prestige which was formerly its possession, one seems justified in calling attention to its inadequacies.The fact is that in the last thirty years Parliament has gradually become an inefficient legislative body which does not effectively control the government, and which the people can hardly be said to control. As early as 1908, President Lowell wrote that “the House of Commons is finding more and more difficulty in passing any effective vote, except a vote of censure.†In 1931, it is doubtful whether even this can be done in a satisfactory way.

Suggested Citation

  • Pollock, James K., 1931. "The Position of the British Parliament," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 683-689, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:25:y:1931:i:03:p:683-689_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400116028/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:25:y:1931:i:03:p:683-689_11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.