> that no parliament can bind a future parliament (which has been a bedrock principle for a good while now)
It's that the excuse the UK uses when it breaks international agreements? And I wonder how it works for the ones it hasn't broken (e.g. Good Friday) or stuff like debts.
And things existing "for a good while" is a shitty reason for them to continue existing. The same could be applied to the monarch, or the legal system.
> It's that the excuse the UK uses when it breaks international agreements? And I wonder how it works for the ones it hasn't broken (e.g. Good Friday) or stuff like debts.
Any country is free to break whatever treaties they previously signed. There's just usually consequences to doing so, which is why we still have peace in Northern Ireland.
> And things existing "for a good while" is a shitty reason for them to continue existing. The same could be applied to the monarch, or the legal system.
Oh I completely agree. It's just that if you want to re-invent the wheel, you need to be realistic about how much work and disruption will be involved, and the knock-on effects there will be.
I think people underestimate how much expertise and knowledge we have baked into our system based on these long-standing principles, and what we'd lose by throwing them away.
It's that the excuse the UK uses when it breaks international agreements? And I wonder how it works for the ones it hasn't broken (e.g. Good Friday) or stuff like debts.
And things existing "for a good while" is a shitty reason for them to continue existing. The same could be applied to the monarch, or the legal system.