经济学人下载:英国剧变,英国正在宪法剧变的边缘

Even pro-reform politicians admit that many knotty issues would have to be resolved before a Senate could rise from the ashes of the House of Lords. If some members are appointed, will they have less legitimacy than elected colleagues? If a few Anglican bishops are allowed to stay, what about leaders of other faiths? And will today’s peers vote for their own eviction? The 2010 coalition agreement talks of “grandfathering” to allow current peers to remain for some time. The terms of that transition will be considered by a joint committee drawn from both houses of parliament, but “most change is evolutionary in this country”, says the minister soothingly. Senior peers talk of proposals for giving ejected members a soft landing. One proposal would offer retired peers associate membership, including the right to return and visit the House of Lords for tea.

支持改革的政客们也认为在废除在上议院与建立参议院之间还有许多棘手的问题需要解决。如部分议员由任命产生，他们的地位是否会低于选举产生的同僚？又如圣公会的部分大主教可以保留席位，其他教派的领袖呢？今日还在位的贵族会愿意给将代替他们的人投票吗？2010联合政府协议表示基于“祖父条款”（即新的法律或规定通过之前享受的特权或权利）现任贵族将保留一段时间。过渡时期的任期将由来自上下两院的议员组成的联合委员会衡量，但是委员会委员长安慰道“这个国家绝大部分的改变都是革命性的”。一项提议表示给予退休的贵族议员副会员的资格，包括有权回到上议院喝喝茶。

Unfinished business未竟的事业
With so many economic headaches, it may seem puzzling to find the government so focused on constitutional change. Part of the explanation lies in unfinished business. The years of Labour rule, from 1997 until 2010, were a time of frequent (and frequently rushed) alterations to the ancient, patched fabric of Britain’s constitution. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were given their own devolved governments and parliamentary assemblies, with (depending on the region) more or less sweeping powers over everything from schools and health care to transport, housing and policing. The ancient office of Lord Chancellor—formerly the head of the judiciary, presiding officer of the House of Lords and a cabinet minister all at once—was broken into three. A Supreme Court of the United Kingdom was established and hundreds of hereditary peers kicked out of the Lords. London gained a directly elected mayor, as did a clutch of other local authorities and boroughs. Forms of PR were introduced for elections to the European Parliament, the new devolved regional assemblies, the Greater London Assembly and for the direct election of those mayors. But several democratic flaws were left unfixed.

在众多经济难题尚未解决之时，政府如此集中精力改革宪法让人感到迷惑。这部分要归结于一些未竟的事业。工党领导下的1997年至2010年，是频繁（且仓促的）给过去英国宪法打补丁的时期。苏格兰、威尔士和北爱尔兰日益衰退的政府和议会召开大会，或多或少的（各地区情况不同）取得对教育、健康、交通、住房和治安的广泛权力。过去的大法官——曾是集司法部长、上议院议长和内阁大臣三权于一身——现在分权为三人。联合王国的最高法院得以成立，数百名世袭贵族被赶出上议院。伦敦通过直接选举产生市长，另有一批当地官员和大伦敦自治市也是如此。欧洲议会采取PR进行选举，如大伦敦会议等其他新的地区会议也通过直接选举产生市长。但一些民主的缺陷却没有得到弥补。

Political leaders say they are responding to public demands to mend a system that is “broken”. They are right that trust in politicians has collapsed, notably after a string of revelations about MPs and peers caught fiddling their expenses in the last parliament (leading to prison for some). Fully 40% of voters told the latest British Social Attitudes survey that they “almost never” trust any government to put the national interest first. But alas, several of the constitutional fixes on offer are designed to serve the interests of those in power.

政治领袖们表示他们正依公众要求修缮“受损”的体制。公众对政客的信任已经崩塌，尤其是在一系列国会议员和贵族被揭露在议会伪造账目（部分人因此坐牢）等事发后。最近一次英国社会态度调查显示的不少于40%的投票人表示“几乎从不”相信能有哪届政府把国家的利益放在第一位。然而可叹的是，尚有的不少宪法修正方案就是为服务执政人利益而提出的。