Difference between revisions of "Talk:Parliament"
From Conservapedia
(→US House of Reps) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
== US House of Reps == | == US House of Reps == | ||
| − | Why is the American [[House of Representatives]] used as an example of a '''parliament'''? There is a very distinct difference between the congressional and parliamentary systems of governance. Surely it can only confuse the reader. [[User:Mrjimbob|Mrjimbob]] 17:52, 27 June 2007 (EDT) | + | Why is the American [[House of Representatives]] used as an example of a '''parliament'''? There is a very distinct difference between the congressional and parliamentary systems of governance. Surely it can only confuse the reader. [[User:Mrjimbob|Mrjimbob]] 17:52, 27 June 2007 (EDT) [edit] Importantly in a parliament the executive is constitutionally answerable to the parliament (Secretaries/Ministers of State in the UK House of Commons for example), and separation of powers is non-existent, unlike the strict separation in place in the US. [[User:Mrjimbob|Mrjimbob]] 17:57, 27 June 2007 (EDT) |
Revision as of 21:57, June 27, 2007
Is this actually correct English?
First past the post elections are ...
Maybe, it only sounds strange to me, since I am not a native speaker of English. --schifra 10:29, 23 May 2007 (EDT)
- It's OK, but I can see why a non-native speaker would find it confusing. I'll hyphenate it, hopefully that'll be clearer?Ferret 16:59, 25 May 2007 (EDT)
US House of Reps
Why is the American House of Representatives used as an example of a parliament? There is a very distinct difference between the congressional and parliamentary systems of governance. Surely it can only confuse the reader. Mrjimbob 17:52, 27 June 2007 (EDT) [edit] Importantly in a parliament the executive is constitutionally answerable to the parliament (Secretaries/Ministers of State in the UK House of Commons for example), and separation of powers is non-existent, unlike the strict separation in place in the US. Mrjimbob 17:57, 27 June 2007 (EDT)
