“生态环境”用语产生的特殊时代背景

本文随着地理学家黄秉维院士的回顾,对1980-1982年五届全国人大宪法修改过程中,将草案中的“生态平衡”改为“生态环境”一词、并写入宪法的过程,再现出来予以分析讨论,认为“生态环境”概念提出的背景是全球和中国谋求环境保护事业发展的时代潮流,侧重的是人民生存于其中的自然环境的生态质量,具有积极的社会昭示作用和教育意义,不宜仅从学理上认为“生态环境”的提法有错,因为真实的世界往往比学者头脑中的理论思维更精彩。学术界于2005年5月展开的对“生态环境”、“生态环境建设”概念的研讨,贡献了许多真知灼见,然而,从“生态环境”一词在人大常委会产生过程的基本事实判断,它属于具有相对独立性的政府用语(法定名词),而非严格的科技名词,主要使用于国家行政管理层面,而学术研究中则主要是尊重学者自己的理解和创作。至于如何健全政府用语、消除政府不当用语在国家社会生活中可能带来的负面影响,正是学术界应该积极探讨的问题。     

Devolution and Parliamentary Representation: The Case of the Scotland and Wales Bill, 1976–7

For as long as devolution has been debated in the UK, there has been fierce discussion as to the representation of the would‐be affected areas at Westminster. That this has been the case is a consequence of Westminster's dual remit as both a state‐wide and a sub‐state legislature. While this dual remit was relatively straightforward when applied to all nations of the UK, it does, however, raise serious questions about the equality of MPs at Westminster in the face of asymmetric devolution that would carve out parliament's remit in some, but not all, parts of the UK. These questions bedevilled Gladstone's Irish Home Rule Bills in the late 19th century and have been a recurrent feature of debate following New Labour's devolution programme in the late 1990s, culminating in the adoption of a system of ‘English Votes for English Laws’ by the house of commons in October 2015. This article looks at this issue through the lens of the ill‐fated Scotland and Wales Bill introduced by the Callaghan government in 1976. It explores the roots of the bill and how, and why, the idea of referring the question of territorial representation, post‐devolution, to a Speaker's conference, came to secure the initial support of cabinet as the best answer to this problem, and why the government swiftly changed its mind. Parliamentary statecraft considerations served to push a Speaker's conference onto the institutional agenda, before ultimately dooming it to failure.     

‘Chatham's Ghost’ and the Enduring Spectre of Lord Bute's Secret Influence: A Political Negotiation of 1778

Hints about the rise, fall, and reformulations of ministries were common currency in 18th‐century British political rhetoric. However, in 1778, chief among such rumours were three purported negotiations between the earls of Bute and Chatham, aimed at bringing one or both of them into administration. So damaging were these rumours to the political legacies of both individuals and their families, however, that they resorted to a ‘press war’ in order to absolve their respective kinsmen of any involvement. Drawing on previously neglected sources, this work examines these negotiations of 1778 and the subsequent press war in order to highlight the longevity, potency, and significance of the myth of Lord Bute's secret influence 15 years after his resignation from high office. In doing so, this work seeks to correct the common narrative that Lord Bute ceased to be a potent political symbol for constitutional issues following the publication of Edmund Burke's Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents in 1770. Far from being merely an anomalous and spontaneous revival of ill‐sentiments towards Lord Bute, this episode should be seen as a flashpoint in a process of vilification and traducement of the Scottish earl that had never, in fact, ceased and was symptomatic of the continuation of symbolic, or hieroglyphic, depictions of arguments concerning the significant constitutional issues which had been raised by Bute's political presence since the accession of George III.     

Delegitimation provided by the constitutional pact in the First Republic

Abstract

Far from being a value shared by the country’s political parties, republican Italy’s constitution has given rise to confrontation depending on the interpretations given to it in the main phases of transition of the country’s political system. Antifascism as a fundamental statute of public life, on the one hand, and the great parliamentary system framework, on the other, established the boundaries of democratic legitimacy. Although this process contributed to strengthening the country’s democratic foundations, particularly with regard to the risk of a possible authoritarian swing in the aftermath of World War II, it also affected a political dialectic strongly conditioned by the delegitimizing element underlying the constitutional charter. Attempts at institutional reform as well as opposition to any understanding between the two parties that benefited the most from a literal interpretation of the constitution, that is, the Christian Democratic Party and the Italian Communist Party, often ran the risk of being demonized. This led to a kind of short-circuit which, in the long run, eroded the democratic fabric itself, feeding the spiral of mutual delegitimation that marked the political life of the country in these republican years.     

澳门民间财神信仰旅游资源研究

民间财神信仰是中国财文化的重要组成部分,是澳门地区最具特色的民间信仰之一,近年来已成为澳门主要的旅游资源之一。财神又是博彩业的行业神,但是由于中国大多数地区禁止博彩,因此关于此类信仰的研究甚少。本文从澳门民间财神信仰出发,分析了澳门民间主要祭祀的财神的功能与形象,并探讨了澳门博彩行业神信仰的神灵系统构成及其具备的特点。     

‘These new rights’: social security in the postwar Italian debate

At the end of World War II the Italian welfare system, which had taken shape under Fascism, was in need of a radical overhaul. Nevertheless, the wait for organic, structural reform dragged on for over two decades without arriving, even in the Sixties, at an efficient framework for the welfare state capable of dismantling the corporatist, familist one inherited from Fascism. This article reconstructs the debates on social security and social rights after World War II. Beginning with the interest that was sparked, even in Italy, by the Beveridge Report, I will investigate the meaning given to the expressions “social security” and “social rights” by politicians and technocrats engaged in trying to reform the Italian Welfare State.     

The Rhetorical Premiership: A New Perspective on Prime Ministerial Power Since 1945

The long‐standing debate about the power of the British prime minister has focused excessively on formal instruments of control exercised within Whitehall. By contrast, not enough attention has been paid to the ways in which prime ministers use rhetoric, formally and informally, to maintain themselves in power and to achieve their policy aims. The term ‘rhetorical premiership’ is used here to denote the collection of methods by which prime ministers since 1945 have used public speech to augment their formal powers. Set‐piece oratory remained consistently important throughout the period, in spite of new technology and the rise of the sound‐bite. However, parliamentary rhetoric underwent some important changes, and prime ministers spoke outside the Commons with increased frequency. Historians of the premiership should draw instruction from those scholars who have studied the rhetoric of US presidents, although caution must be exercised when drawing comparisons. Future study of the rhetorical premiership should involve close textual analysis of prime ministerial speeches, but this should not be at the expense of archival sources, from which important insights into the speech‐making process can be gleaned.     

George III and Parliament*

Circumstances were auspicious when George III came to the throne in 1760, but soon his political actions were much criticized and he was accused from early in his reign until well into the 20th century of weakening the independence of parliament and undermining the constitution. Some contemporaries did defend him and these views received powerful support from Sir Lewis Namier and his followers in the 20th century. Both interpretations have their flaws, however, because of the failure to recognize the profound changes in the context in which George acted over his long reign and the subtle changes that occurred in Britain's unwritten constitution over that half century. By examining how the king appointed and dismissed ministers, sought to influence the composition of both houses of parliament, and endeavoured to shape government policy, this article seeks to revise our understanding of the king's relations with parliament and the constitution and to relocate our overall assessment of him between those offered by his many critics and defenders both during his reign and long afterwards.     

Constitution‐writing,nationalism and the Turkish experience

Until recently there has been relatively little attention paid to the question of how the relationship between the state, its citizens and the nation is articulated in constitutional texts. This paper seeks to address this gap through an examination of how the rules of belonging to the nation are discussed by the political elite and how these discussions find their final formulation in the constitutional texts. The analysis focuses on the Turkish case at two constitution‐writing moments (1924 and 1961). While such moments have conventionally been assumed to be ‘revolutionary’, the data on Turkey highlights continuities rather than radical changes over time. More particularly, it underscores the resilience and salience of the principle of nationalism over time.