Liberal Democrats

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Liberal Democrats Liberal Democrats From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about the British political party. For similarly named parties in other countries, see Liberal Democratic Party. For the system of government, see Liberal democracy. Liberal Democrats Leader Nick Clegg MP Deputy Leader Simon Hughes MP President Tim Farron[1] MP Founded 2 March 1988 Merger of Liberal Party and SDP Preceded by SDP-Liberal Alliance 8-10 Great George Street, Headquarters London, SW1P 3AE [2] Youth wing Liberal Youth Membership (2010) 65,038[3] Liberalism Social liberalism Cultural liberalism Economic liberalism[4] Internal ideological trends: Ideology • Green politics • Green Liberalism • Civil libertarianism • Internationalism[5] • Social democracy • Community politics[6] Radical centre to Centre- Political position left[7][8][9] International Liberal International affiliation European Liberal Democrat European affiliation and Reform Party European Alliance of Liberals and Parliament Group Democrats for Europe [10] Official colours Yellow 57 / 650 House of Commons [11] 79 / 738 House of Lords [12][13] European 12 / 72 [14] Parliament London Assembly 3 / 25 Scottish Parliament 5 / 129 5 / 60 Welsh Assembly [15][16] 3,078 / 21,871 Local government [17] Website libdems.org.uk Politics of the United Kingdom Political parties Elections The Liberal Democrats are a social liberal political party in the United Kingdom which supports constitutional and electoral reform,[18] progressive taxation,[19] wealth taxation,[20] human rights laws,[21] cultural liberalism,[22] banking reform[23] and civil liberties (the party president's book of office is John Stuart Mill's 1859 On Liberty). The party was formed in 1988 by a merger of the Liberal Party and the Social Democratic Party. The two parties had formed the electoral SDP–Liberal Alliance for seven years before then, since the SDP's formation. The Liberals had been in existence for 129 years and in power under leaders such as Gladstone, Asquith and Lloyd George. Nick Clegg was elected leader in 2007. At the 2010 general election, Liberal Democrats won 23%[24] of the votes resulting in 8.77% of the parliamentary seats, that being 57 of the 650, making them the third-largest party in the House of Commons, behind the Conservatives with 307 seats and Labour with 258. No party had an overall majority; the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats formed a coalition government, with Clegg becoming Deputy Prime Minister and other Liberal Democrats taking up government positions.[25] Contents [hide] 1 Ideology o 1.1 Policies 2 History o 2.1 Founding o 2.2 Post-1988 history . 2.2.1 Ashdown (1988–99) . 2.2.2 Kennedy (1999–2006) . 2.2.3 Campbell (2006–2007) . 2.2.4 Clegg (2007–present) o 2.3 In coalition government (2010–present) . 2.3.1 Liberal Democrat Government Ministers . 2.3.1.1 Members of the Cabinet . 2.3.1.2 Other Ministers 3 Backbench committees 4 Electoral results o 4.1 European elections o 4.2 Scottish Parliament elections o 4.3 Welsh Assembly elections 5 Structure o 5.1 Membership figures 6 Leaders o 6.1 Deputy Leaders o 6.2 Party Presidents o 6.3 Leaders in the European Parliament 7 See also 8 References 9 External links o 9.1 State parties o 9.2 Regional parties o 9.3 Party sub-organisations o 9.4 Historical information o 9.5 Miscellaneous [edit] Ideology The opening line to the preamble of the Liberal Democrats constitution is "The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society, in which we seek to balance the fundamental values of liberty, equality and community, and in which no one shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity."[26] Most commentators describe the party as either centrist or centre-left[27][28]. In 2011 party leader and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said "But we are not on the left and we are not on the right. We have our own label: Liberal."[29] There are two main strands of distinct ideology within the party, social liberals and the economic liberals, more commonly known as Orange Bookers. The social liberals are seen as being the more traditionally centre-left end of the party with Orange Bookers being more towards the centre. The principal difference between the two is that the Orange Bookers tend to support greater choice and competition and as such aiming to increase social mobility through increasing economic freedom and opportunity for those with more disadvantaged backgrounds. Whereas the social liberals are more commonly associated with directly aiming to increase equality of outcome through state means. Correspondingly, Orange Bookers tend to favour cutting taxes for the poorest in order to increase opportunity contrasting with social liberals who would rather see higher spending on the disadvantaged to reduce income inequality.[30] Being an Orange Booker and a social liberal within the party are not mutually exclusives. David Laws, one of the most economically liberal MPs in the party said in Parliament "I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his kind comments about Gladstonian Liberalism. I hope that this is not only Gladstonian Liberalism, but liberalism tinged with the social liberalism about which my party is so passionate."[31] Indeed the Orange Book, to which the term refers, discusses the need for a more complete liberalism for the party, more fully supporting the liberalism as a whole including social liberalism. The social liberalism in the party stems from the start of the 20th Century when the Liberal party were bringing about many reforms, known as Liberal reforms which are often viewed as the creation of the modern public welfare system in the UK. A major part of creating the liberal welfare reforms was done by David Lloyd George, who later went on to become Prime Minister. They may also often look to William Beveridge who is credited with drafting further advancements of the welfare state and especially the National Health Service (NHS) and also social liberal economist John Maynard Keynes. In February 2009, many social liberals founded an internal party pressure group, the Social Liberal Forum to pursue social liberal policies within the party. In a poll of Liberal Democrat members on 30 April 2011 64% classed themselves as social liberal with 35% counting themselves as economic liberals. Others high on the list were progressive with 65%, social democrat 34%, 45% centre left, 60% internationalist, 44% radical, 41% green.[32] In December 2011, in a speech to the Demos think tank and the Open Society Foundation Clegg put forward his definition of the three main political traditions in Britain, saying: "Socialists support the idea of the good society, typically judged in terms of equality of income. In order to bring about this end they use the state quite aggressively in terms of labour market regulation, centralised public services and through tax and benefits. Conservatives support the idea of a big society, with responsibility shared throughout society - people are responsible both for themselves and each other. The emphasis is naturally on non-state institutions such as marriage, the family, churches and voluntary organisations. The liberal ideal is of the open society, where power is vested in people, not in the state or other institutions. This means that individuals need the capabilities and opportunities to chart their own course through life, and to hold institutions to account. So while the good society needs a strong state, and the big society needs strong social institutions, the open society needs strong citizens."[33] [edit] Policies The party was the first major party in the United Kingdom to formally endorse same-sex marriage.[34] List of policies followed by their status in the current Liberal Democrat - Conservative coalition government. Economy: Tax-free earning threshold to rise to £10,000, paid for by a "mansion tax" of 1% on properties worth over £2m applicable to value of property over that figure. — Tax- free earning threshold to rise to £10,000, to be achieved by 2015. Annual savings totalling £15bn, including scrapping ID cards and not renewing the Trident nuclear deterrent. — ID cards scrapped, Trident under review for cost effectiveness and decision on its replacement pushed back until after next general election. Minimum wage set at same level for all workers aged over 16 - except apprentices. Replace council tax with local income tax (England only). Schools: Pupil premium of £2.5bn given to head teachers, aimed at disadvantaged children, which could allow average primary school to cut class size to 20 pupils. — £488 per child on free school meals, is given to schools on top of their main funding. Total pupil premium funding for 2011-12 is £625m and is due to rise to £2.5bn a year by 2014-15.[35] Introduce shared parental leave from work, extended to 18 months over time, and right for fathers to attend ante-natal appointments. Right for grandparents to request flexible working. — From April 2011 fathers will be able to take any unused maternity leave themselves if their partners go back to work early. Plans also announced to consult on further reforms to the current system of parental leave.[36] Workplace scheme for 800,000 pupils to give them the opportunity to gain skills and experience. — £1bn of new funding will provide opportunities including job subsidies, apprenticeships and work experience placements for 500,000 unemployed people. The government will subsidise 160,000 work places by providing £2,275 to any private sector business willing to hire an unemployed person aged 18 to 24 years old.[37] Replace national curriculum with "minimum curriculum entitlement" in state-funded schools and scale back tests at age 11. More freedom for school management. Health: Cut size of the Department of Health by half, abolishing or cutting budgets of quangos, scrapping Strategic Health Authorities and seeking to limit pay of top NHS managers to below level of prime minister.
Recommended publications
  • Influences in Voting and Growing Networks
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Influences in Voting and Growing Networks Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0fk1x7zx Author Racz, Miklos Zoltan Publication Date 2015 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Influences in Voting and Growing Networks by Mikl´osZolt´anR´acz A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Statistics in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Elchanan Mossel, Chair Professor James W. Pitman Professor Allan M. Sly Professor David S. Ahn Spring 2015 Influences in Voting and Growing Networks Copyright 2015 by Mikl´osZolt´anR´acz 1 Abstract Influences in Voting and Growing Networks by Mikl´osZolt´anR´acz Doctor of Philosophy in Statistics University of California, Berkeley Professor Elchanan Mossel, Chair This thesis studies problems in applied probability using combinatorial techniques. The first part of the thesis focuses on voting, and studies the average-case behavior of voting systems with respect to manipulation of their outcome by voters. Many results in the field of voting are negative; in particular, Gibbard and Satterthwaite showed that no reasonable voting system can be strategyproof (a.k.a. nonmanipulable). We prove a quantitative version of this result, showing that the probability of manipulation is nonnegligible, unless the voting system is close to being a dictatorship. We also study manipulation by a coalition of voters, and show that the transition from being powerless to having absolute power is smooth. These results suggest that manipulation is easy on average for reasonable voting systems, and thus computational complexity cannot hide manipulations completely.
    [Show full text]
  • Copy of 2008122008-Cwells-Regulated
    1 donation information continues on reverse Late reported donation by regulated donees 15 February 2001 - 31 January 2008 (where data is available) Regulated donee Donor organisation Donor forename Donor surname Donor status Address 1 Address 2 Jimmy Hood MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Keith Simpson MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Cheryl Gillan MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Elfyn Llwyd MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Ian Stewart MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Ian Stewart MP Manchester Airport Plc Company PO Box 532 Town Hall John Gummer MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Christopher Beazles BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Chris Smith MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Mike Weir MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Tony Worthington MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Ian Davidson MP BAA plc Company 130 Wilton Road Paul Tyler BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Matthew Taylor MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Menzies Campbell MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Archy Kirkwood BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road David Hanson MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Colin Breed MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road David Marshall MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Mark Oaten MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Diana Wallis MEP Manchester Airport Plc Company PO Box 532 Town Hall Christopher Ruane MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Tim Loughton MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Robert Wareing MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road Robert Wareing MP Manchester Airport Plc Company PO Box 532 Town Hall John McFall MP BAA Plc Company 130 Wilton Road
    [Show full text]
  • Africa Update
    ML Strategies Update David Leiter, [email protected] ML Strategies, LLC Georgette Spanjich, [email protected] 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Sarah Mamula, [email protected] Washington, DC 20004 USA 202 296 3622 202 434 7400 fax FOLLOW US ON TWITTER: @MLStrategies www.mlstrategies.com SEPTEMBER 18, 2014 Africa Update Leading the News West Africa Ebola Outbreak On September 10th, the United Nations (U.N.) World Health Organization (WHO) reported that the number of Ebola cases in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) had doubled over the past week to total 62 cases. Thirty-five of the patients infected with Ebola have died, including seven health care workers. The Ebola outbreak in the DRC is separate from the worsening Ebola crisis in West Africa. All of the cases in the DRC are localized in Jeera country and can all be traced to one initial case that was reported on August 26th. The new statistics for the Ebola outbreak in the DRC were posted here. On September 11th, Liberian Finance Minister Amara Konneh held a press conference on the impacts of the Ebola outbreak in Liberia, warning that the country is at war with an enemy that it cannot see. Minister Konneh’s remarks echo those delivered last week by Liberian Defense Minister Brownie Samukai, who cautioned that the Ebola crisis poses a serious threat to Liberia’s national existence. Both ministers reported that the epidemic has disrupted the country’s ability to function normally and put further strains on Liberia’s already weak health care infrastructure. Excerpts from both press conferences were highlighted here.
    [Show full text]
  • In America, Why Does Proportional Voting Have to Attack Political Parties?
    In America, why does proportional voting have to attack political parties? Jack Santucci⇤ April 5, 2018 Abstract This chapter traces the early history of proportional-representation advocacy in the United States, asking why reformers embraced the single transferable vote (STV). This “ranked-choice” bargain was not easy to strike. Arriving at it appears to have involved resolving several disagreements: over the appropriateness of direct-democracy reforms, faddish interest in majority-preferential voting around the election of 1912, how much weight should be given to administrative factors (e.g., propensity for voter error), and whether proportional voting ought to permit parties to present themselves on ballots. Most of these issues came to a head in Los Angeles, where, in 1913, the United States’ first-ever referendum on proportional voting failed. The reform coalition fractured along class lines. By 1915, these issues were e↵ectively resolved, with STV’s first passage and enshrinement in the Model City Charter. Note to readers: subsequent chapters cover (a) the adoption of STV in 23 more cities, (b) how parties adapted to it, (c) and why it was repealed in all but one by 1962. ⇤I write here as an independent scholar. Contact: [email protected]. 1 Writing in 1939 for the American Political Science Review, Harold Gosnell had a sensible idea. Cities with proportional representation (PR), he argued, would be better o↵under his “list system with single candidate preference.” The ballot would contain party-written lists of candidates. The voter would vote by marking an “X” next to their favorite candidate. The sums of votes for parties would determine their shares of seats, and the sum of votes for each candidate would determine whether they got one of their party’s seats.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of UK Electoral Systems
    Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts The impact of UK electoral systems Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Dunleavy, Patrick and Margetts, Helen (2005) The impact of UK electoral systems. Parliamentary affairs, 58 (4). pp. 854-870. DOI: 10.1093/pa/gsi068 © 2005 Oxford University Press This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/3083/ Available in LSE Research Online: February 2008 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final manuscript accepted version of the journal article, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer review process. Some differences between this version and the published version may remain. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. Forthcoming in Parliamentary Affairs, September 2005 THE IMPACT OF THE UK’S ELECTORAL SYSTEMS* Patrick Dunleavy and Helen Margetts In the immediate aftermath of the general election the Independent ran a whole-page headline illustrated with contrasting graphics showing ‘What we voted for’ and ‘What we got’, followed up by ‘…and why it’s time for change’.1 The paper launched a petition calling for a shift to a system that is fairer and more proportional, which in rapid time attracted tens of thousands of signatories, initially at a rate of more than 500 people a day.
    [Show full text]
  • Single-Winner Voting Method Comparison Chart
    Single-winner Voting Method Comparison Chart This chart compares the most widely discussed voting methods for electing a single winner (and thus does not deal with multi-seat or proportional representation methods). There are countless possible evaluation criteria. The Criteria at the top of the list are those we believe are most important to U.S. voters. Plurality Two- Instant Approval4 Range5 Condorcet Borda (FPTP)1 Round Runoff methods6 Count7 Runoff2 (IRV)3 resistance to low9 medium high11 medium12 medium high14 low15 spoilers8 10 13 later-no-harm yes17 yes18 yes19 no20 no21 no22 no23 criterion16 resistance to low25 high26 high27 low28 low29 high30 low31 strategic voting24 majority-favorite yes33 yes34 yes35 no36 no37 yes38 no39 criterion32 mutual-majority no41 no42 yes43 no44 no45 yes/no 46 no47 criterion40 prospects for high49 high50 high51 medium52 low53 low54 low55 U.S. adoption48 Condorcet-loser no57 yes58 yes59 no60 no61 yes/no 62 yes63 criterion56 Condorcet- no65 no66 no67 no68 no69 yes70 no71 winner criterion64 independence of no73 no74 yes75 yes/no 76 yes/no 77 yes/no 78 no79 clones criterion72 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 monotonicity yes no no yes yes yes/no yes criterion80 prepared by FairVote: The Center for voting and Democracy (April 2009). References Austen-Smith, David, and Jeffrey Banks (1991). “Monotonicity in Electoral Systems”. American Political Science Review, Vol. 85, No. 2 (June): 531-537. Brewer, Albert P. (1993). “First- and Secon-Choice Votes in Alabama”. The Alabama Review, A Quarterly Review of Alabama History, Vol. ?? (April): ?? - ?? Burgin, Maggie (1931). The Direct Primary System in Alabama.
    [Show full text]
  • A Canadian Model of Proportional Representation by Robert S. Ring A
    Proportional-first-past-the-post: A Canadian model of Proportional Representation by Robert S. Ring A thesis submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Political Science Memorial University St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador May 2014 ii Abstract For more than a decade a majority of Canadians have consistently supported the idea of proportional representation when asked, yet all attempts at electoral reform thus far have failed. Even though a majority of Canadians support proportional representation, a majority also report they are satisfied with the current electoral system (even indicating support for both in the same survey). The author seeks to reconcile these potentially conflicting desires by designing a uniquely Canadian electoral system that keeps the positive and familiar features of first-past-the- post while creating a proportional election result. The author touches on the theory of representative democracy and its relationship with proportional representation before delving into the mechanics of electoral systems. He surveys some of the major electoral system proposals and options for Canada before finally presenting his made-in-Canada solution that he believes stands a better chance at gaining approval from Canadians than past proposals. iii Acknowledgements First of foremost, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude to my brilliant supervisor, Dr. Amanda Bittner, whose continuous guidance, support, and advice over the past few years has been invaluable. I am especially grateful to you for encouraging me to pursue my Master’s and write about my electoral system idea.
    [Show full text]
  • Biographies BIOGRAPHIES 327
    Biographies BIOGRAPHIES 327 ALDRICH, John Herbert Articles 1. “A method of scaling with applications to the 1968 and 1972 U.S. presidential elections.” American Political Born Science Review, 11(March):1977 (with Richard September 24, 1947, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA McKelvey). Current Position 2. “The dilemma of a paretian liberal: some consequences Pfizer-Pratt University Professor of Political Science, Duke of Sen’s theorem,” and “Liberal games: further thoughts University, Durham, North Carolina, 1997–. on social choice and game theory.” Public Choice, 30(Summer):1977. Degrees 3. “Electoral choice in 1972: a test of some theorems of B.A., Allegheny College, 1969; M.A., Ph.D., University of the spatial model of electoral competition.” Journal of Rochester, 1971, 1975. Mathematical Sociology, 5:1977. 4. “A dynamic model of presidential nomination Offices and Honors campaigns.” American Political Science Review, Co-Editor, American Journal of Political Science, 14(September):1980. 1985–1988 (with John L. Sullivan). 5. “A spatial model with party activists: implications for President, Southern Political Science Association, electoral dynamics,” and “rejoinder.” Public Choice, 1988–1989. 41:1983. Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral 6. “A downsian spatial model with party activism.” Sciences, 1989–1990. American Political Science Review, 17(December):1983. Fellow, Bellagio Center, 2002. 7. “Southern parties in state and nation.” Journal of Heinz Eulau Award (best article in the American Political Politics, August:2000. Science Review), 1990 (with Eugene Borgida and John L. 8. “Challenges to the American two-party system: Sullivan). evidence from the 1968, 1980, 1992, and 1996 presi- Gladys Kammerer Award (best book on U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral Reform in Canada: the Shape of Things to Come an Executive Summary March 2016
    Electoral Reform in Canada: The Shape of Things to Come An Executive Summary March 2016 We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first- past- the- post voting system. As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that electoral reform measures—such as ranked ballots, proportional representation, mandatory voting, and online voting—are fully and fairly studied and considered .... Within 18 months of forming government, we will bring forward legislation to enact electoral reform. —Justin Trudeau, Real Change: A Fair and Open Government ABOUT THIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Public Services Foundation of Canada and the National Union of Public and General Employees have prepared a comprehensive discussion paper based on a survey of the literature and polling and focus group results, which will be published at a later date. This executive summary provides an overview of the main points without the inclusion of the research, position paper, or polling results. Electoral Reform in Canada: The Shape of Things to Come Executive Summary The Canadian Debate Justin Trudeau promised during the election that this would be the last federal election to use the unfair first-past-the-post (FPTP) system. Although he has indicated that other voting systems would be considered, Trudeau has indicated that his preferred proposal is a version of the single transferable vote (STV) that uses a ranked ballot. His critics say that when STV is used in single member ridings, it is really just an alternative vote (AV) system, also known as an instant run-off system, and the result would be even more unfair in its outcome than FPTP.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix to Memorandum of Law on Behalf of United
    APPENDIX TO MEMORANDUM OF LAW ON BEHALF OF UNITED KINGDOM AND EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTARIANS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION LIST OF AMICI HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND AND MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT House of Lords The Lord Ahmed The Lord Alderdice The Lord Alton of Liverpool, CB The Rt Hon the Lord Archer of Sandwell, QC PC The Lord Avebury The Lord Berkeley, OBE The Lord Bhatia, OBE The Viscount Bledisloe, QC The Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury The Rt Hon the Baroness Boothroyd, OM PC The Lord Borrie, QC The Rt Hon the Baroness Bottomley of Nettlestone, DL PC The Lord Bowness, CBE DL The Lord Brennan, QC The Lord Bridges, GCMG The Rt Hon the Lord Brittan of Spennithorne, QC DL PC The Rt Hon the Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville, CH PC The Viscount Brookeborough, DL The Rt Hon the Lord Browne-Wilkinson, PC The Lord Campbell of Alloway, ERD QC The Lord Cameron of Dillington The Rt Hon the Lord Cameron of Lochbroom, QC The Rt Rev and Rt Hon the Lord Carey of Clifton, PC The Lord Carlile of Berriew, QC The Baroness Chapman The Lord Chidgey The Lord Clarke of Hampstead, CBE The Lord Clement-Jones, CBE The Rt Hon the Lord Clinton-Davis, PC The Lord Cobbold, DL The Lord Corbett of Castle Vale The Rt Hon the Baroness Corston, PC The Lord Dahrendorf, KBE The Lord Dholakia, OBE DL The Lord Donoughue The Baroness D’Souza, CMG The Lord Dykes The Viscount Falkland The Baroness Falkner of Margravine The Lord Faulkner of Worcester The Rt Hon the
    [Show full text]
  • 4.3 Presidential Government
    11 MM VENKATESHWARA COMPARATIVE POLITICAL OPEN UNIVERSITY SYSTEMS www.vou.ac.in COMPARATIVE POLITICAL SYSTEMS POLITICAL COMPARATIVE COMPARATIVE POLITICAL SYSTEMS MA [POLITICAL SCIENCE] [MAPS-105] VENKATESHWARA OPEN UNIVERSITYwww.vou.ac.in COMPARATIVE POLITICAL SYSTEMS MA [Political Science] MAPS 105 BOARD OF STUDIES Prof Lalit Kumar Sagar Vice Chancellor Dr. S. Raman Iyer Director Directorate of Distance Education SUBJECT EXPERT Ms. Puppy Gyadi Assistant Professor CO-ORDINATOR Mr. Tauha Khan Registrar Authors Dr Biswaranjan Mohanty: Units (3.3, 6.2, 7.2-7.3) © Dr Biswaranjan Mohanty, 2019 Vikas Publishing House: Units (1, 2, 3.0-3.2, 3.4-3.10, 4, 5, 6.0-6.1, 6.3-6.9, 7.0-7.1, 7.4-7.9, 8, 9, 10) © Reserved, 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication which is material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or transmitted or utilized or stored in any form or by any means now known or hereinafter invented, electronic, digital or mechanical, including photocopying, scanning, recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without prior written permission from the Publisher. Information contained in this book has been published by VIKAS® Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. and has been obtained by its Authors from sources believed to be reliable and are correct to the best of their knowledge. However, the Publisher and its Authors shall in no event be liable for any errors, omissions or damages arising out of use of this information and specifically disclaim any implied warranties or merchantability or fitness for any particular use. Vikas® is the registered trademark of Vikas® Publishing House Pvt.
    [Show full text]
  • Elections REFORM September 2015
    TOPIC EXPLORATION PACK GCSE Theme: Elections REFORM September 2015 GCSE (9–1) Citizenship Studies Oxford Cambridge and RSA We will inform centres about any changes to the specification. We will also publish changes on our website. The latest version of our specification will always be the one on our website (www.ocr.org.uk) and this may differ from printed versions. Copyright © 2015 OCR. All rights reserved. Copyright OCR retains the copyright on all its publications, including the specifications. However, registered centres for OCR are permitted to copy material from this specification booklet for their own internal use. Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations is a Company Limited by Guarantee. Registered in England. Registered company number 3484466. Registered office: 1 Hills Road Cambridge CB1 2EU OCR is an exempt charity. This resource is an exemplar of the types of materials that will be provided to assist in the teaching of the new qualifications being developed for first teaching in 2016. It can be used to teach existing qualifications but may be updated in the future to reflect changes in the new qualifications. Please check the OCR website for updates and additional resources being released. We would welcome your feedback so please get in touch. Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 Activity 1 ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]