> Well, you might have a problem with the clause in the > constitution outlawing an "officially sanctioned" hereditary > aristocracy,
Don't go taking any bets on that. Besides, we're phasing them out. There are now only 92 hereditary peers in the House of Lords. All but 2 of them were elected (by other Lords, not by the people). The other 2 are there basically for tradition's sake. Before too long we will get rid of the remaining hereditaries, then look at the whole business of how the 2nd chamber operates, and its relationship with the Commons. At the moment we have a Prime Minister who thinks he's a president, who bypasses his own cabinet, bypasses the Commons and would like to make the Lords totally powerless so that even that flimsy barrier doesn't stop him from doing whatever he wants. I wish Cromwell would come back. He knew what to do with absolute rulers. > and the Queen might dislike giving up her > titles, though she could always move to Australia or Canada. > What a tragedy that would be. Bob
