顯示具有 政一B 邱科翰 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 政一B 邱科翰 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2019年6月2日 星期日

政一B 邱科翰 (2-14)

姓名 : 邱科翰
班級 : 政一B
學號 : 07114248

[標題] European elections 2019: Tories and Labour punished for Brexit contortions

[內文] The scrap has started.
Were these results an overwhelming cry for us to leave the EU whatever the cost? Or a sign, with some slightly convoluted arithmetic, that the country now wants another referendum to stop Brexit all together?
Guess what, the situation is not quite so black and white, whatever you will hear in the coming hours about the meaning of these numbers.
The Brexit Party's success was significant - topping the poll, successfully building on Nigel Farage's inheritance from UKIP. As a one-issue party, his new group is the biggest single winner.
But the Lib Dems, Greens, Plaid and SNP - all parties advocating the opposite - were victors too.
Those who have been clearly pushing the case for another referendum in order to slam the brakes on Brexit have, this morning, a new confidence, a vigour with which they will keep making their case.
Smashed
While those two sides fight over this election's true meaning, what is clear is that the two biggest parties have been damaged by their various contortions over Brexit, punished by the fiasco at Westminster, and beaten by rivals who have offered clarity while they have tried to find nuanced ways through.
The Tories' performance is historically dreadful. This is not just a little embarrassment or hiccup. In these elections the governing party has been completely smashed.
And for the main opposition to have failed to make any mileage out of the Tories' political distress is poor too - with historic humiliations in Scotland and Wales for Labour as well.
There is immediate pressure, of course, on Labour to argue more clearly for another referendum, to try to back Remain, to shore up that part of their coalition. The dilemmas over doing so still apply even though more and more senior figures in the party are making the case.
Shades of grey
And with the success of The Brexit Party, there is a push for the Tories to be willing to leave the EU without a deal whatever the potentially grave economic costs.
The Tory leadership contest in the wake of these results runs the risk of turning into bragging rights over who can take a harder line on Brexit.
In these elections it seems both of our main Westminster parties have been punished for trying to paint shades of grey when the referendum choice was between black and white. And there is a chance that encourages both of them to give up fighting for the middle.
But that could set our politics on a course where, whatever happens, half of the country will be unhappy. Nothing about these dramatic results sketches out a straightforward route.


[相關憲法條文]
憲法第 62 : 立法院為國家最高立法機關,由人民選舉之立法委員組織之,代表人民行使立法權。
憲法第 63 : 立法院有議決法律案、預算案、戒嚴案、大赦案、宣戰案、媾和案、條約案及國家其他重要事項之權。
憲法第 107 : 左列事項,由中央立法並執行之:
  外交。
  國防與國防軍事。
  國籍法及刑事、民事、商事之法律。
  司法制度。
  航空、國道、國有鐵路、航政、郵政及電政。
  中央財政與國稅。
  國稅與省稅、縣稅之劃分。
  國營經濟事業。
  幣制及國家銀行。
  度量衡。
十一  國際貿易政策。
十二  涉外之財政經濟事項。
十三  其他依本憲法所定關於中央之事項。
憲法第 108 : 左列事項,由中央立法並執行之,或交由省縣執行之:
  省縣自治通則。
  行政區劃
  森林、工礦及商業。
  教育制度。
  銀行及交易所制度。
  航業及海洋漁業。
  公用事業。
  合作事業。
  二省以上之水陸交通運輸。
  二省以上之水利、河道及農牧事業。
十一  中央及地方官吏之銓敘、任用、糾察及保障。
十二  土地法。
十三  勞動法及其他社會立法。
十四  公用徵收。
十五  全國戶口調查及統計。
十六  移民及墾殖。
十七  警察制度。
十八  公共衛生。
十九  振濟、撫卹及失業救濟。
二十  有關文化之古籍、古物及古蹟之保存。
前項各款,省於不牴觸國家法律內,得制定單行法規。

[相關法條]
地方制度法第 18 : 下列各款為直轄市自治事項:
一、關於組織及行政管理事項如下:
 () 直轄市公職人員選舉、罷免之實施。
 () 直轄市組織之設立及管理。
 () 直轄市戶籍行政。
 () 直轄市土地行政。
 () 直轄市新聞行政。
二、關於財政事項如下:
 () 直轄市財務收支及管理。
 () 直轄市稅捐。
 () 直轄市公共債務。
 () 直轄市財產之經營及處分。
三、關於社會服務事項如下:
 () 直轄市社會福利。
 () 直轄市公益慈善事業及社會救助。
 () 直轄市人民團體之輔導。
 () 直轄市宗教輔導。
 () 直轄市殯葬設施之設置及管理。
 () 直轄市調解業務。
四、關於教育文化及體育事項如下:
 () 直轄市學前教育、各級學校教育及社會教育之興辦及管理。
 () 直轄市藝文活動。
 () 直轄市體育活動。
 () 直轄市文化資產保存。
 () 直轄市禮儀民俗及文獻。
 () 直轄市社會教育、體育與文化機構之設置、營運及管理。
五、關於勞工行政事項如下:
 () 直轄市勞資關係。
 () 直轄市勞工安全衛生。
六、關於都市計畫及營建事項如下:
 () 直轄市都市計畫之擬定、審議及執行。
 () 直轄市建築管理。
 () 直轄市住宅業務。
 () 直轄市下水道建設及管理。
 () 直轄市公園綠地之設立及管理。
 () 直轄市營建廢棄土之處理。
七、關於經濟服務事項如下:
 () 直轄市農、林、漁、牧業之輔導及管理。
 () 直轄市自然保育。
 () 直轄市工商輔導及管理。
 () 直轄市消費者保護。
八、關於水利事項如下:
 () 直轄市河川整治及管理。
 () 直轄市集水區保育及管理。
 () 直轄市防洪排水設施興建管理。
 () 直轄市水資源基本資料調查。
九、關於衛生及環境保護事項如下:
 () 直轄市衛生管理。
 () 直轄市環境保護。
十、關於交通及觀光事項如下:
 () 直轄市道路之規劃、建設及管理。
 () 直轄市交通之規劃、營運及管理。
 () 直轄市觀光事業。
十一、關於公共安全事項如下:
 () 直轄市警政、警衛之實施。
 () 直轄市災害防救之規劃及執行。
 () 直轄市民防之實施。
十二、關於事業之經營及管理事項如下:
 () 直轄市合作事業。
 () 直轄市公用及公營事業。
 () 與其他地方自治團體合辦之事業。
十三、其他依法律賦予之事項。
地方制度法第 19
下列各款為縣 () 自治事項;
一、關於組織及行政管理事項如下:
 () () 公職人員選舉、罷免之實施。
 () () 組織之設立及管理。
 () () 戶籍行政。
 () () 土地行政。
 () () 新聞行政。
二、關於財政事項如下:
 () () 財務收支及管理。
 () () 稅捐。
 () () 公共債務。
 () () 財產之經營及處分。
三、關於社會服務事項如下:
 () () 社會福利。
 () () 公益慈善事業及社會救助。
 () () 人民團體之輔導。
 () () 宗教輔導。
 () () 殯葬設施之設置及管理。
 () 市調解業務。
四、關於教育文化及體育事項如下:
 () () 學前教育、各級學校教育及社會教育之興辦及管理。
 () () 藝文活動。
 () () 體育活動。
 () () 文化資產保存。
 () () 禮儀民俗及文獻。
 () () 社會教育、體育與文化機構之設置、營運及管理。
五、關於勞工行政事項如下:
 () () 勞資關係。
 () () 勞工安全衛生。
六、關於都市計畫及營建事項如下:
 () () 都市計畫之擬定、審議及執行。
 () () 建築管理。
 () () 住宅業務。
 () () 下水道建設及管理。
 () () 公園綠地之設立及管理。
 () () 營建廢棄土之處理。
七、關於經濟服務事項如下:
 () () 農、林、漁、牧業之輔導及管理。
 () () 自然保育。
 () () 工商輔導及管理。
 () () 消費者保護。
八、關於水利事項如下:
 () () 河川整治及管理。
 () () 集水區保育及管理。
 () () 防洪排水設施興建管理。
 () () 水資源基本資料調查。
九、關於衛生及環境保護事項如下:
 () () 衛生管理。
 () () 環境保護。
十、關於交通及觀光事項如下:
 () () 管道路之規劃、建設及管理。
 () () 交通之規劃、營運及管理。
 () () 觀光事業。
十一、關於公共安全事項如下:
   () () 警衛之實施。
   () () 災害防救之規劃及執行。
   () () 民防之實施。
十二、關於事業之經營及管理事項如下:
   () () 合作事業。
   () () 公用及公營事業。
   () () 公共造產事業。
   () 與其他地方自治團體合辦之事業。
十三、其他依法律賦予之事項。


心得評論:
Even though voting for the EU elections ended earlier, it wasn’t until Monday that the polls were announced, so it’s technically fit for use here. Instead of focusing on how bad the two main parties fared, I would like to look from another perspective, and that is the Union. Ever since the draft agreement came out, the countries that made up the UK had been in a tense relationship. The SNP, largest party in the Scottish parliament and third largest party in the Commons, had marked their intention to remain in the EU, and even went as far as to threaten the Union. The Irish republican Party, Sinn Fein, were absent the whole time. The Party of Wales, the Plaid Cymru, though not so extreme as the SNP or Sinn Fein, hasn’t been friendly to England either. 
Outsiders tend to view Brexit as an “UK” issue, a one-country affair. This simply implies they know nothing about the complexity of British politics. It is always a four-country issue. After the Scottish referendum a few years back, the UK granted Scotland more powers, making Scotland far more autonomous than Wales or Northern Ireland. This move may have calmed some “soft-lining” advocates, but hardline Scottish nationalist have used this increased power to their advantage. The SNP performed well in the 2017 elections and played their part in the failure of Brexit, which they deemed as an English affair, opposed by the Scottish. Similar goes to Irish and Welsh nationalists. One must always remember that, even in England, where support for the UK were at their highest, its support never peaked beyond 70%. Britain is a union of four nations, and Brexit made that clearer than ever. The two main parties, primarily based in England, had been leading the debate on the “English” issue known as Brexit since the beginning. No wonder there was fury. The EU elections may be an indicator on how pissed the voters are, but beyond the polls, there is always tension to be eased, relations to be managed. 
As for Taiwan, we don’t have this sort of problem here, since the law made it clear which government deals with what. There are no hidden “reserve powers”, no underlying nationalist agendas (as the political system doesn’t regard Taiwan as a union of nations). Even if conflicts do arise, well, the central government has its ways (which may include direct intervention/takeover). 

2019年5月26日 星期日

政一B 邱科翰 (2-13)

姓名 : 邱科翰
班級 : 政一B
學號 : 07114248

[標題] Laura Kuenssberg: May was just overwhelmed by the job, BBC Politics, UK

[內文] She was just overwhelmed. Overwhelmed by the divisions in her own party, that she simply did not have the political ability to patch up.
At the start she boasted about not being a creature of Westminster's bars and cliques. But it meant this very private politician had few true friends to help when things turned sour, and neither the powers of patronage, nor the capability to schmooze or arm twist to get people around to her point of view.
Few of her cabinet colleagues, even now, know her well at all, one saying that "as things got harder the circle got smaller". Another revealed that "there was no trust, and no faith".
Settling the Tories' decades-long dispute over Europe was always perhaps beyond just one leader. But the wounds have got more painful under her leadership, rather than fading away.
Mrs May was overwhelmed too by the contradictions of the Brexit policy she set. A reluctant Remainer at the start, she wanted to prove to her party that she really wanted us out.
So she set red lines that strangled the possibility of a straightforward deal. This led to an uneasy compromise that would struggle to thrill anyone, after the country had made a binary choice in the referendum. And, as for her plan, she herself, let alone the cabinet, never had much appetite to sell it.
As Mrs May stood in Downing Street to announce she was going, she urged compromise. But her political opponents are already remarking that it was a plea she only heeded far, far too late.
This has been a broken administration for a long time. The idea that in a matter of weeks a genuine compromise could be reached with the other parties - after nearly three years of trying to stick to a Tory strategy - was always far-fetched.
It's also worth noting how quickly her cabinet colleagues turned when her compromises would have meant having to vote for legislation that might have enabled another referendum - votes that would have been a drag on their chances in the leadership race.
Mrs May was also, of course, overwhelmed by Parliament. I'll always remember the morning after the general election in 2017, when a senior Tory said: "From now, me and only six mates will be able to stop anything happening."
How prescient that proved to be. The Commons has indeed become a place where small groups pursuing the purity of their policy have overpowered attempts at pragmatism.
Mrs May's departure marks the end of an episode of collective Westminster failure too. There is nothing right now that suggests the next leader will turn that into success.
No one could ever accuse the departing prime minister of not caring enough.
Contrast her agony at the end of her lectern statement with David Cameron's shockingly casual whistle as he went back into Number 10.
Even in this moment of huge drama Mrs May wanted to make a point about changes she has been able to make: action on domestic violence, trying to tackle racial discrimination, attempts to deal with lack of housing.
But she must know that the chapter in our history bearing her name will be about Brexit, and her failure to achieve it.
There was always perhaps a mismatch between the scale of the challenges and her political ability: overwhelming in the end for Theresa May, with the public and her party underwhelmed by her.


[相關憲法條文]
憲法第 17 : 人民有選舉、罷免、創制及複決之權。
憲法增修條文第 2 (節選) : 總統於立法院通過對行政院院長之不信任案後十日內,經諮詢立法院院長後,得宣告解散立法院。但總統於戒嚴或緊急命令生效期間,不得解散立法院。立法院解散後,應於六十日內舉行立法委員選舉,並於選舉結果確認後十日內自行集會,其任期重新起算。
憲法增修條文第 3 (節選) : 行政院院長由總統任命之。行政院院長辭職或出缺時,在總統未任命行政院院長前,由行政院副院長暫行代理。憲法第五十五條之規定,停止適用。
行政院依左列規定,對立法院負責,憲法第五十七條之規定,停止適用:
一、行政院有向立法院提出施政方針及施政報告之責。立法委員在開會時,有向行政院院長及行政院各部會首長質詢之權。
二、行政院對於立法院決議之法律案、預算案、條約案,如認為有窒礙難行時,得經總統之核可,於該決議案送達行政院十日內,移請立法院覆議。立法院對於行政院移請覆議案,應於送達十五日內作成決議。
如為休會期間,立法院應於七日內自行集會,並於開議十五日內作成決議。覆議案逾期未議決者,原決議失效。覆議時,如經全體立法委員二分之一以上決議維持原案,行政院院長應即接受該決議。
三、立法院得經全體立法委員三分之一以上連署,對行政院院長提出不信任案。不信任案提出七十二小時後,應於四十八小時內以記名投票表決之。如經全體立法委員二分之一以上贊成,行政院院長應於十日內提出辭職,並得同時呈請總統解散立法院;不信任案如未獲通過,一年內不得對同一行政院院長再提不信任案。
憲法增修條文第 4 (節選) : 立法院立法委員自第七屆起一百一十三人,任期四年,連選得連任,於每屆任滿前三個月內,依左列規定選出之,不受憲法第六十四條及第六十五條之限制:
一、自由地區直轄市、縣市七十三人。每縣市至少一人。
二、自由地區平地原住民及山地原住民各三人。
三、全國不分區及僑居國外國民共三十四人。

[相關法條]
公民投票法第 1 : 依據憲法主權在民之原則,為確保國民直接民權之行使,特制定本法。本
法未規定者,適用其他法律之規定。
公民投票涉及原住民族權利者,不得違反原住民族基本法之規定。
公民投票法第 2 : 本法所稱公民投票,包括全國性及地方性公民投票。
全國性公民投票,依憲法規定外,其他適用事項如下:
一、法律之複決。
二、立法原則之創制。
三、重大政策之創制或複決。
地方性公民投票適用事項如下:
一、地方自治條例之複決。
二、地方自治條例立法原則之創制。
三、地方自治事項重大政策之創制或複決。
預算、租稅、薪俸及人事事項不得作為公民投票之提案。


心得評論:
So the day has come, and what started out as a “strong and stable” Tory premiership has come to an end. May was widely believed to be a firm and determined public servant, who focuses on the task and delivers the results. She took hits that most male politicians cannot endure, she brushed off criticisms and doubts that would otherwise result in total disaster, and until days ago, somehow managed to keep together her Cabinet.
Perhaps it’s her personality, she never had much allies when she needed them. Her party, despite winning their largest victory since Thatcher’s leadership, never recovered from the snap election, and so did May. Backstabbed by both the front and backbenchers, she struggled to keep the Conservative and Unionist Party united. Her premiership saw the highest rate of ministerial resignation and the most defeat for a government under the reigning monarch. 
It wasn’t her fault then, I suppose, as NO Tory minister could’ve carried this job back in 2016. She took on an office with enormous pressure and impossible tasks at hand. She forced her way through obstacles, through the fiercest opposition ever seen under the reigning monarch. She managed to strike a deal with the EU nonetheless, and had tried three times to persuade the Commons to approve it. Her accomplishment in office was, depending on one’s political stance, somewhere between “just about managing” to “arguably remarkable”, given her minority government and the limits placed on her political manoeuvring. Yet it all comes down to Brexit. Like her predecessor, the first female prime minister, she was also forced out of office over European affairs. Even though her time in the Commons were mostly spent on discussing “normal” issues, her entire premiership seems to be tied to the single topic of pulling the UK out of the EU. This is not fair. This isn’t the right way to verdict a politician’s historical legacy. She delivered little, yes, but she also had little to work with from the very beginning. She faced the most hostile opposition in recent decades, and had so ministers and backbenchers defying party orders, they didn’t even make the news anymore. She had her ideals, yet she went against her own beliefs and compromised again and again, hoping to form a consensus and gather support. Some criticised her as stubborn, they were wrong. She showed that she is capable of changing, of adapting, to meet current needs. She recognises reality, even if that means humiliation, or as some may consider, a display of weakness. No prime minister has been humiliated like this in the past two or three decades. Yet she carried on for nearly three years (the fifth shortest time in office since 1900). That is diligence. She may not be Thatcher, the Iron Lady, but she is still a steely woman. Friday marks the first time she has shown emotion in public. I’d say be easy on her. She did as she said, she tried her best.  

2019年5月19日 星期日

政一B 邱科翰 (2-12)

姓名 : 邱科翰
班級 : 政一B
學號 : 07114248

[標題] Brexit: Theresa May plans 'bold offer' to get support for deal

[內文] Theresa May has said a "new and improved" Brexit deal will be put to MPs when they vote on the EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill in early June.
Writing in the Sunday Times, Mrs May said the bill will be a "bold offer".
Extra protections for workers are expected to be among the proposals, with Mrs May trying to win over the support of some Labour MPs in a final attempt to get her Brexit plan passed.
This comes after the government's talks with Labour over Brexit broke down. 
Mrs May announced this week that MPs will vote on the bill - which would bring the withdrawal agreement into UK law - in the week beginning 3 June. If the bill is not passed, the default position is that the UK will leave the EU on 31 October without a deal.
Labour has said it will vote against the bill while many Conservative MPs also remain opposed, meaning the legislation could fail to clear its first parliamentary hurdle.
But in her Times piece, Mrs May said she will "not be simply asking MPs to think again" on the same deal that they have repeatedly rejected - but on "an improved packaged of measures that I believe can win new support".
The PM said she wanted MPs to consider the new deal "with fresh pairs of eyes - and to give it their support".
Check the small print
With any sales pitch that sounds like it's too good to be true, it's important to check the small print.
And so with Theresa May's promise of a "new and improved" Brexit deal - MPs will be wondering what exactly has changed.
A promise of a further referendum would win plenty of support from Labour but Downing Street's ruled that out.
Changes to the Withdrawal Agreement, including the Northern Ireland backstop, would sway the DUP and many of her own MPs, but the EU won't agree to that.
Additions on workers' rights and environmental protections might be enough to sway a few Labour votes.
And there may be - after a series of votes in Parliament - some movement on the UK's future customs relationship with the EU, but that is as likely to turn off Tory MPs as it is to woo the opposition.
Not for the first time there appear to be no good options for Theresa May.
But a "bold offer" is quite a promise to make, and if her deal has a hope of passing, she will somehow have to live up to it.
_105894347_grey_line-nc.png
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable said his party would be prepared to support the bill if the government agreed to give the public the final say on the terms of exit in a referendum.
He told the BBC's Andrew Marr his party had discussed the "practicalities" of holding another public vote and it was possible before the 31 October deadline.
"We need a proper referendum that will come to a resolution on the issue, with remain on the ballot paper."
'National emergency'
But Change UK spokesman Chuka Umunna said there was "simply not enough time" to hold a referendum before 31 October.
Giving it was "almost certain" the Withdrawal Agreement Bill would be defeated, he said the only option was for the the UK to stop Brexit by revoking Article 50.
"We are facing a national emergency," he told Andrew Marr.
"What would be undemocratic would be imposing a no-deal Brexit on the British people that there is not a mandate for."
A cabinet meeting on Tuesday is to consider plans for a series of "indicative votes" by MPs to establish which proposals could command a majority.
Brexit had been due to take place on 29 March, but the UK was given an extension until 31 October after MPs three times voted down the withdrawal agreement Mrs May had negotiated with the EU.
This prompted negotiations between the Conservatives and Labour aimed at breaking the Brexit impasse, but they collapsed on Friday without an agreement.
The prime minister has also promised to set a timetable for her departure from Downing Street following the vote on her deal.
Before the talks with Labour, the prime minister - whose Conservative Party does not have a majority in the House of Commons - failed to get her deal through three times, by margins of 230, 149 and 58 votes.
The DUP, which supports her government on certain issues, opposes Mrs May's agreement with the EU over its implications for Northern Ireland.
Shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer said the government should include a “confirmatory” public vote in Brexit legislation to "break the impasse".
Labour's preferred plan is for changes to the government's Brexit deal or an election, but if neither of those are possible, it will support the option of giving the public a say on the deal agreed by Parliament.
Meanwhile, Tory grandee Michael Heseltine has said he will vote for his local Liberal Democrat candidate in the upcoming European parliamentary elections - in protest at the government's stance on Brexit.
Lord Heseltine, also writing in The Sunday Times, called on the Tories to back another referendum on Britain's EU membership in order to avoid what he called "the biggest act of economic self-harm ever undertaken by a democratic government."


[相關憲法條文]
憲法第 17 : 人民有選舉、罷免、創制及複決之權。
憲法第 53 : 行政院為國家最高行政機關。
憲法第 58 : 行政院設行政院會議,由行政院院長、副院長、各部會首長及不管部會之政務委員組織之,以院長為主席。
行政院院長、各部會首長,須將應行提出於立法院之法律案、預算案、戒嚴案、大赦案、宣戰案、媾和案、條約案及其他重要事項,或涉及各部會共同關係之事項,提出於行政院會議議決之。
憲法第 63 : 立法院有議決法律案、預算案、戒嚴案、大赦案、宣戰案、媾和案、條約案及國家其他重要事項之權。
憲法增修條文第 3 (節選) : 行政院依左列規定,對立法院負責,憲法第五十七條之規定,停止適用:
一、行政院有向立法院提出施政方針及施政報告之責。立法委員在開會時,有向行政院院長及行政院各部會首長質詢之權。
二、行政院對於立法院決議之法律案、預算案、條約案,如認為有窒礙難行時,得經總統之核可,於該決議案送達行政院十日內,移請立法院覆議。立法院對於行政院移請覆議案,應於送達十五日內作成決議。
如為休會期間,立法院應於七日內自行集會,並於開議十五日內作成決議。覆議案逾期未議決者,原決議失效。覆議時,如經全體立法委員二分之一以上決議維持原案,行政院院長應即接受該決議。
三、立法院得經全體立法委員三分之一以上連署,對行政院院長提出不信任案。不信任案提出七十二小時後,應於四十八小時內以記名投票表決之。如經全體立法委員二分之一以上贊成,行政院院長應於十日內提出辭職,並得同時呈請總統解散立法院;不信任案如未獲通過,一
年內不得對同一行政院院長再提不信任案。 

[相關法條]
The Cabinet Manual, Introduction (節選) : 
9. In the exercise of its legislative powers, Parliament is sovereign. In practice, however, Parliament has chosen to be constrained in various ways – through its Acts, and by elements of European and other international law. 
10. Parliament also scrutinises executive action. Indeed, the government of the day is primarily responsible to Parliament for its day-to-day actions. This function is exercised through a variety of mechanisms, such as the select committee system, Parliamentary questions, oral and written statements, debates in both Houses and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. See Chapter Five for more on Parliament. 
12. Ministers’ powers derive from legislation passed by Parliament, the Royal Prerogative and common law. They are subject to an overarching duty to act in accordance with the law. The courts rule on whether ministerial action is carried out lawfully.
13. The roles of the Prime Minister and Cabinet are governed largely by convention. The Prime Minister is the Sovereign’s principal adviser, chairs Cabinet and has overall responsibility for the organisation of government. Cabinet is the ultimate arbiter of all government policy; decisions made at Cabinet and Cabinet committee level are binding on all members of the Government, save where collective agreement is expressly set aside, and any minister who cannot accept them is expected to resign. 
Chapter 5 (節選) : 
5.11  Scrutiny of the Executive is one of the core functions of Parliament.

心得評論:
It never gets boring now, does it ? The Brexit drama is on again, and the very country that founded parliamentary democracy would be put to the ultimate test. This time, with the seat of power at stake. While there was no consensus whatsoever, this might just be “the” time. It was believed that Government has backup options at the ready, and the bill would be open to further amendments, which might win over some “soft” opposition and calm the rebels within the prime minister’s own party. Success would mean Britain leaving the EU, failure would spell doom for this cabinet. 
To me, whether this deal survives or not, this ought to be the one with most approval. After three defeats, Ms. May must come and recognise the shortcomings of her minority government, and adopt a milder, yet much more adaptable and flexible way of governing. Pushing the same thing over and over isn’t the best way. Multilateral dialogues, constructive opinion forming, and open discussions is the minimal requirement to make Brexit tick. These essential procedures arrived way too late, which resulted in failure. Taiwan, a semi-presidential country with some aspects of a parliamentary system, must learn from this. That a deal requires both legislation and executive to work together. The mistakes that Ms. May committed is one that is common, yet preventable.