Unsettling piece on British freedoms -- or lack thereof

When I last lived in Old Blighty, in the early 90s, there was a lot of talk about a Citizens Charter, a sort of Bill of Rights. One afternoon, I was at the pub :shock: and a guy turned to me and said, you've got a Bill of Rights in the states. Do you think we need one?" I responded, "if you didn't need one, we wouldn't have one."

Americans don't realize that in England,

a. the PM runs both the Executive and Legislative branches.
b. there is no independent judiciary.
c. the "2nd house" remains compliant to The Commons knowing full well that if they squawk, the Commons can disband them at will.
d. Parliamentary supremacy allows the PM to eliminate local and regional governments at will. Indeed PM Thatcher eliminated the Greater London Council over night after the Laborite she hated got elected as its head.
e. there is no guaranteed freedom of the press. There's a buttload of prior restraint, and always has been.
f. the Government party is basically all powerful, even if it has only a relatively slim majority. There is NO law that cannot be overturned by a simple majority.
g. the primary role of a legislator is to attend parliamentary debates and SAY NOTHING.

So, no; none of this is really surprising. When your consituents are "subjects" rather that "citizens," not as much individual freedom is expected or allowed.

That doesn't mean they aren't nice people. 8)