Talk:Constitution: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Nick Gardner No edit summary |
John Leach (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "head of state" to "Head of State") |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
I have corrected the widely-held but mistaken impression that Britain, New Zealand etc do not have written constitutions. That impression arises from the fact that they have no single document that can be referred to as "the constitution", and gives the misleading impression that the actions of their governments are not bound by their laws. I have also altered the sentence that gives the - not entirely correct - impression that in a constitutional monarchy the Prime Minister is the de facto | I have corrected the widely-held but mistaken impression that Britain, New Zealand etc do not have written constitutions. That impression arises from the fact that they have no single document that can be referred to as "the constitution", and gives the misleading impression that the actions of their governments are not bound by their laws. I have also altered the sentence that gives the - not entirely correct - impression that in a constitutional monarchy the Prime Minister is the de facto Head of State. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:43, 24 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 15:45, 10 February 2024
I have corrected the widely-held but mistaken impression that Britain, New Zealand etc do not have written constitutions. That impression arises from the fact that they have no single document that can be referred to as "the constitution", and gives the misleading impression that the actions of their governments are not bound by their laws. I have also altered the sentence that gives the - not entirely correct - impression that in a constitutional monarchy the Prime Minister is the de facto Head of State. Nick Gardner 11:43, 24 December 2009 (UTC)