Challenges of Tourism in Orlando Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Challenges of Tourism in Orlando - Essay Example The growth of Orlando from a small town to a large internationally-recognized tourist city has been shaped by several factors. The hostilities between Settlers and Seminole Indians resulted in Florida’s statehood. In the 1860s, cattle ranching was the widely practiced activity in Central Florida. However, the practice was characterized by chaos resulting in the violent cattle wars of the 1860s (Frommers, 2015). Earlier, infrastructure was absent, and its development began in the 1870s. As the years progressed, cattle ranching was abandoned, and residents picked up citrus farming, industrialization, and real estate development. Fires and fruit-fly infestation rolled back the gains, but infrastructure expansion and the population growth continued during the Second World War.Postwar prosperity of Orlando was contributed by the strong financial and transportation infrastructure developed during the Second World War. Also, the advent of the air-conditioner attracted more people to the city. The bustling tourism industry discharged millions of dollars into the local economy and the massive industrialization in the 1950s contributed to rapid growth. Elsewhere, the prosperity has been characterized by the absence of civil behavior. The cattle wars of 1860’s saw the seeds for gunfights, bar brawls, and murders. The problem of cattle rustling is an activity that petered down, but has persisted up to now. Orlando’s tourism industry is characterized by theme parks populated with hotel chains and numerous restaurants.

New Technology in the Medical Field Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

New Technology in the Medical Field - Essay Example many healthcare organizations have come up with privacy and security policies that govern the access, use and exposure of organization’s information in order to minimize such risks. An analysis of the privacy and security policies of three recognized healthcare organizations namely Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), Mayo Foundation and Georgetown University Medical Centers reveals some themes that are among them. For all the three healthcare organisations unauthorised access of the organisation’s information is not allowed. This could be those that are stored in computers or those produced as hard copies. In relation to this, there is no unauthorised alteration, revision, transmission or modification of the organisations information or other information within the organisation’s system (Georgetown University Medical Centers, 2007, Mayo Foundation, 2002 and BIDMC Technology Resources Policy, 2007). For all confidential information or programs installed in the organisation’s computers, the staff must get authority from the organisations information officer or office in order to access, delete or modify them. All information deemed to be confidential is protected from external access and their release or exposure constitutes a breach of the security and privacy policies. All staff are not allowed to use the organisations IT for activities that are not related to the organisation’s business activities so as to limit the availability of the network resources to other people. Remote access to organisation’s information is not allowed except for selected workstations or persons authorised by the chief information officer. There are some security and privacy policies that differ significantly between the three healthcare organizations. An example are policies relating to personal privacy when using the organization’s computer information or technology resources. In Mayo Foundation, no one has the permission to access a computer using another

Article summary Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 8

Article summary - Essay Example Many fast-food workers complain that they are working too hard and can hardly make both ends meet. â€Å"We deserve a good life, too† claims Jasmine Almodovar, the protest participant. The organizers expect almost 100 cities to take part into the protest. They are also to engage sit-ins in more than a dozen of cities. One more step is to have home-care workers join. It would definitely let workers and union leaders attract even more attention of great masses of population. At the same time, fast-food chains and many franchise operators refuse to meet the claims of the protesters, since so heavy expenses would certainly make their business unprofitable. However, they acknowledge the human right for non-violent protests. Supposedly, it could be possible to increase salaries on a gradual basis. Though, business model of many fast-food corporations might be based on  minimum-survival profit. It means that the demands of their employees are unlikely to be satisfied. Nevertheless, the campaign may be considered fruitful. The protest persuaded many people that $15 is quite an adequate wage for many workers. Certain cities, such as San Francisco, are to adopt such a wage floor in the nearest future. Also Ms. Henry, the president of the Service Employees International Union, said that this movement made people believe that the impossible may come true one

Alzheimer's disease Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Alzheimer's disease - Essay Example lois Alzheimer first detected and described this disease in 1907 in Auguste Deter, a middle aged woman who was diagnosed with the dementia and some disorders in her brain function. Untill 1970s this disease defined as a rare condition that affect old people, but Robert Katzman proved that Alzheimer`s disease is not a normal part of aging and it is the same condition as senile dementia. The statistic shows that Alzheimer`s disease affected approximately 26.6 million of people in 2006. Clinical trials predict that prevalence of the Alzheimer`s will be 1 out of 85 people by 2050 worldwide. (Web MD, 2014) There are several types of Alzheimer`s disease depending on the severity. They include mild and moderate Alzheimer`s disease. Mild Alzheimer`s is an early stage of this disease that characterized with temporary memory loss. Patients at this stage usually have problems with complicated tasks, forget where they put their things, get lost, cannot find words to explain their thoughts and have changeable mood. People can normally survive with this type of Alzheimer`s but they required appropriate treatment to reduce possible symptoms. (FÃ ¶rstl H, 1999) Neuropsychological testing can detect this type of Alzheimer`s disease because the symptoms can be confusing with aging. Moderate Alzheimer`s is the most complicated and longest stage of the disease. It is progressive and can leads to overall memory lost. Patients with this type of Alzheimer`s usually do not remember their biography, family, friends and have problems with thinking and language. In this stage patient`s cannot normally live without help of the caregivers and treatment. It can last for years and finally lead to death. People with Alzheimer`s disease can live approximately 7 years after diagnosis. Only in 3% of all Alzheimer`s cases patients lived for 14 years after diagnosis. (Wenk GL,2003) At the cellular level Alzheimer`s disease mainly affect neurons in the cerebral cortex. Neurons lose their ability to

Genetically Modified Organisms, Nutritious Foods Research Paper

Genetically Modified Organisms, Nutritious Foods - Research Paper Example Polan (394) supports genetic engineering by noting that it has come up with bananas and tomatoes that produce the vaccine. He goes ahead to note that genetic engineering produces crops like New leaves that can protect themselves from pest without the need for pesticides. The two qualities floated above help protect the environment from air and water pollution which is brought about by the chemicals present in the pesticides used to get rid of pests in the farms. The chemicals find a way into the ecosystem and can bring about detrimental effects to the soil by degrading it, air by affecting respiratory tracks of humans and hydrology by entering the hydrology cycle. GMO hence help reduce the use of these harmful pesticides. Polan uses the above statement to refer to the tight competition that apples face from other sugary food in the market. He notes that ‘And in a culture of easy sweetness apples now had to compete with every other kind of sugary snack food in the supermarketâ⠂¬â„¢ (136). He even goes ahead to note that Red and Golden delicious known for their exceptional sweetness came to dominate the monoculture that the orchards had become. The above statements imply that the breeders who produce sugary apples that compete with junk food rely heavily on the two breeds of apple that is, Red and Golden Delicious. â€Å"A century ago there were several thousand different varieties of the apple in commerce.† (137). Polan says that all these have a common parentage of either of the following breeds: Red Delicious, Golden Delicious, Jonathan, Mackintosh and Cox’s Orange Pippin.

Debate on Genetically Modified Food Essay Example for Free

Debate on Genetically Modified Food Essay For millions of years, the world has evolved and developed, by selective breeding to adapt into the society, which it is today. Natural adaptations and changes have occurred in various species of plants and animals, which even modern scientists cannot explain. Our world has survived for well forever, without genetically enhanced produce, so why should it invade humanity now, just because we can? Many scientists, who are in favour of GM foods, claim that it is simply the next step on from selective breeding; however they seem to have overlooked one difference. Genetic modification of anything requires the introduction of alien genes into a species, to modify it and this is certainly not a natural process. For example, GM Soya has been modified using genes that will make it resistant to certain herbicides, such as roundup. Although this may seem like a good thing on the surface, what happens when the pollen from these GM foods is passed on to native species? Aspects like this seem to have been overlooked. It is also a worry, because genetic engineering can be very unpredictable and the damaging effects of GM foods irreversible; if left unconfined it could get out of control. It is possible to end up creating harmful characteristics such as toxins unawares. This doesnt necessarily condemn GMOs but it proves the unpredictability of genetic manipulation. The establishment for GM foods is keen to cover up any findings, which may turn people against GM foods, (possibly due to the huge profits involved). One particular scientist, in a report from the Rowett Research Institute, had been independently researching the effects of GM potatoes on rats. What his studies found was that they had a detrimental effect on the immune system and the growth of the rats. However when the establishment found this out, this man was reduced from being a well-respected researcher to a mad cap scientist. Although it is agreed that genetically modifying grain to include beta-carotene (vitamin C) may aid hunger and poor eyesight problems in third world countries, there is a large-scale scandal going on among large biotech companies, who want to increase their already large profits. GM food production, gives larger firms a loop hole in which they are able to abuse the power of modifying these crops to their own specification. Recently, there have been reports that these companies have developed doomsday seeds, which they want to sell onto the world market particularly the struggling third world. These seeds have been genetically modified, so that once they have grown, the seeds they produce will genetically destroy themselves. These seeds may be an excellent money-spinner for the firms who sell them, but surely it is morally and ethically wrong to sell such seeds to poor and starving countries? The companies also have the added leverage over other seed producers because they are able to genetically modify their plants to grow faster and thus their seeds are cheaper than others. These people in the third world will eventually be forced into a downward spiral of having to buy new crops every year, because they are unable to afford the more expensive normal seeds. And what would happen if these genes happened to escape into the environment? GM genes may spread into wild populations with unpredictable and potentially harmful consequences; In this case, they may even cause crops to produce sterile seeds, which could have an adverse effect on the ecosystem. If we are to have confidence in GM foods, then larger businesses should be kept out of research. The way GM foods are being exploited by powerful corporations is a threat to democracy. These crops are unsustainable in light of longer-term plans and the great majority of the GM market is focussed more on profit rather than improving our diet. Insufficient testing has taken place to ensure their safety for public consumption. Research should be carried out independently, to assess whether such foods would be a benefit to our society and the effects it will have on the eco-system. Only then should they be allowed onto the market.

Development of Powers withing the British Constitution

Development of Powers withing the British Constitution â€Å"†¦the description of British government as an elective dictatorship is no longer appropriate.† (V. Bogdanor The New British Constitution (2009) Oxford, Hart). Discuss, considering in particular Bogdanor’s argument that the separation of powers has been strengthened within the British Constitution in recent years. Britain is described as not having a written constitution, instead it is simply: a set of inductive generalisations[1] which have resulted in Britain not having a formal separation of powers. Due to this lack of structure, the power within the constitution can become concentrated to a single group. Consequently an Act which would be held as undemocratic in places where there is a written constitution e.g. the United States, will not be in Britain. This essay aims to analyse the doctrine of the separation of powers, focusing on how the principle operates in the British Constitution where the separation between the branches of government is not strictly adhered to. It will examine how this entwining relationship has led to Britain living in an elective dictatorship opposed to the democracy it is advertised to be. Additionally, it will consider how the recent developments of the constitution, including the introduction of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, has led to the separation of powers being strengthened therefore the democracy of Britain increasing. The separation of powers is one of these principles that is found, in one form or another, in most modern constitutions[2]. It is a feature predominantly in constitutions which operate a system of government that is based on the law. The importance of the doctrine is significant because it underpins the way the power is used within a state. Nowadays, it has been recognised as having a crucial role in the constitution; it remains important to distinguish the primary functions of law-making, law-executing and law-adjudicating. If these distinctions are abandoned, the concept of law itself can scarcely survive.[3] Poor division of power between the different organs would mean it is impossible to prevent abuse therefore a dictatorship could arise. The principle suggests that the correct way to separate the power is to divide it equally into three separate organs, each with independent roles from each other. If each of these branches perform a different function then the constitution will run efficiently. The branches today are known as; the legislative- who create law; the executive- responsible for the day to day running of the constitution; the judiciary- they apply the laws. This means if these divisions are adhered to then the constitution will successfully run as an organised democracy. The Greek Philosopher, Aristotle, was the first to classify the government as being split into three elements; The three are, first, the deliberative, which discusses everything of common importance; second the officials and third, the judicial element.[4] These distinctions are based purely on a political entity[5]whereas todays understanding of the principle focuses more on different branches of the government. Todays theory comes from the French Constitutional Theorist Montesquieu who popularised the doctrine in his book, the Spirit of the Law[6]. He breaks down the institutions as legislatures, executives and judges who exercise certain specific functions making laws, executing laws and adjudicating disputes about laws[7]. These branches can be translated to the British Constitution. The Legislative branch is made up of Parliament whose function is to pass legislation which regulates the citizens and to scrutinise the work of the executive in order to ensure that they are not abusing their powers. Britain has a bicameral legislative branch which means that it is composed of two chambers; the House of Lords and the House of Commons. The members of the House of Commons are elected by the British public and the party with the most seats form the government. This means that it is a fairly elected democracy. In Britain the role of the executive is to formulate and implement policies. It is led by the Prime Minister who is responsible for the overall conduct of the government and the ministers who are the head of each department. The role of the judiciary is to interpret the legislation and apply the law in accordance with how Parliament intended it when they created it. The judicial branch covers all judges however, it is those which sit in the higher courts who are most important to the operation of the British Constitution because they are in a position to challenge the government and ensure that it functions with the law. It has been argued that in Britain, the result of not having a codified constitution is that there is no consequences in place if one branch exceed the limit of power they have according to the separation of powers theory. The principle came under significant criticism around the 1980s. One of the main criticisms was by Brazier who stated that the arrangement of the British Constitution is: at best a weak separation of powers at worst a separation in name only[8]. Locke, an English Philosopher was concerned with the division of power and the consequence if the separation was not equal. Concentration of power can seriously affect the organisation and functioning of the constitution. He believes that: it may be too create a temptation to humane frailty apt to grasp for Power, for the same persons who have the power of making laws, to have also in their hands the power to execute them, whereby they may exempt themselves from obedience to the laws they make [9] This means if there is too much power concentrated to one person, or to one branch of the government, it would lead to the system as a whole being corrupt. It would provide people with the opportunity to use the system to their own advantage, essentially creating laws others do not agree with thus creating a dictatorship. The idea that too much power can result in one group using it to their advantage can be seen within the British Constitution, where there is many overlaps between the branches. This led to Lord Hailsham describing the structure of this constitution as an elective dictatorship[10] because although the government is elected by the public, they abuse the amount of power they have been given and use this to their own advantages- they act like dictators. In theory it appears that the roles of each branch are clearly distinguished however, this is not the case in practice. However, Montesquieu also recognises that the division of power between the organs of the state is not always amicable, there can be overlap between the branches and it still be a democracy. This idea there is overlap in the British Constitution can be supported by Parpsworth who claims: a separation of powers is not, and has never been a feature of the UK constitution. An examination of the three powers reveals that in practice they are often exercised by persons which exercise more than one such power.[11] This idea can be seen by the role of the Lord Chancellor who had a position within each of the three government branches. He had a legislative function of being the speaker of the House of Lords, an executive function of being a member of the cabinet and a judicial function as being the head of the judiciary. Being the head judge gave the Lord Chancellor the right to participate in judicial proceedings and to appoint judges. This shows that there is more than an overlap between the branches instead it shows that the same person clearly does exercise more than one power.[12] regardless of Montesquieu stating: all would be lost if the same man exercised these three powers[13]. Evidently this suggests that Britain is an elective dictatorship because there is no restriction on the amount of power that each branch can administrate within society, they can influence the functioning of the constitution without regard to the view of the public. The Lord Chancellor was in a strong position to abuse his powers; he could provide himself with more benefits or use the arrangement to influence the branches and allow one organ to dominate the whole constitution. Clearly, his position within all three arms of the government does not conserve the doctrine of the Separation of Powers. However, it could be argued that even though there is clear overlap between the roles, the question of abusing power was irrelevant as the Lord Chancellor optionally chose to remain impartial to each branch when undertaking the particular function it required; in recent years, the Lord Chancellor had rarely sat as a judge and never on matters affecting the government. This suggests that the British Constitution was never operating in a way which could be described as an elective dictatorship[14], instead it has always been an independent system[15]. However, there are exceptions to this; Lord Mackay, however, did sit in the leading case Pepper v Hart, [1993] AC 593, on which he offered a dissenting judgement[16] which shows that there are exceptions and the lines between the branches have been overstepped. Regardless of this only being an exception there was a clear overlap in the way the functions of the branches were being performed so the Labour Party, the current government at the time, introduced the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 which led to dramatic reforms, specifically regarding the position of the Lord Chancellor. His position at the head of the judiciary has now been replaced by Lord Chief Justice who is now in charge of the deployment of judges and allocation of work in Courts in England.[17] Additionally, his legislative function as the speaker of the House of Lords has been replaced by the Lord Speaker. This means that since the reform, his function is now purely in the executive branch of the government where he remains to be a member of the cabinet.[18] Evidently, the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 has strengthened the doctrine of the separation of powers in Britain as the overlaps between the arms have been reduced thus the power distribution has been equalised. However, not everybody agrees that the reforms towards the Lord Chancellor has increased the democracy in Britain. His role was described as a necessary evil vital to ensuring the smooth running of the separate estates. [19] This criticism suggests that the Labour Government removed the connection between the branches which may reduce the effectiveness of the organisation of each function. However, the reform was essential because if these distinctions are abandoned, the concept of law itself can scarcely survive.[20] Another problem with the separation of powers in the British Constitution is the overlap between the legislative and executive. Theoretically, the executive initiate the creation of new laws and it is for the legislatures to debate and pass the proposals once the content has been agreed upon. This means that the legislative is supposed to have control over the executive however, in practice it is clear that the Executive tends to dominate the legislature, because the party and electoral systems usually produce a strong majority government, what Lord Hailsham called an elective dictatorship[21]. This means that the executive is therefore present at the heart of Parliament.[22] Being at the centre of the government structure allows the executive to have strong persuasion over the legislatures, meaning they can get the result they wish without the House of Commons standing in their way. This supports Bagehots description of the British Constitution being; the close union, the nearly complete fusion of the legislative and executive powers[23] as it appears that they operate as one branch; the executive. This intertwining relationship can be seen as there is a strong convention that ministers are members of one or other House of Parliament[24] as well as the Prime Minister being a member too. As a result they will have strong influential powers over the decisions of both the executive and the legislative. This is because the ministers will be less likely to challenge the decisions of their party therefore their activities will not be questioned so they will be able to initiate any changes they wish. This means they are able to operate an elective dictatorship without checks to the amount of power they are using. However, it could be argued that the separation of powers still exists because there are procedures in place to ensure the doctrine remains a strength of the British Constitution. For example, there is a limit on the number of ministers who can be members of the House of Commons. This will ensure that the amount of influence they have is limited. Additionally, there is the opportunity for a backbench revolt. This is where a large number of MPs who are not ministers or in cabinet for the leader, vote against them to try prevent them from carrying out their propositions. One example is from 2001 where; more than 100 Labour backbenchers rebel over the attempted removal of two Labour MPs from the chairmanship of important parliamentary committees.[25] which led to the reinstatement of two Transport and Foreign Affairs Select Committees. This suggests that although the executive try and overstep their powers by going against the opinions of the public which could effectively mean Britain is a dictatorship, there are checks and processes in place for their decisions to be effectively challenged. Members of cabinet can, and have, also taken stands against their own parties. A recent example of this can be seen by Tony Blair who proceeded with the Iraq War despite the majority of his cabinet disagreeing with his actions and a further two resigning. This example shows that the government are not persuaded by the actions of their cabinet or backbench revolts. This shows the need for checks to prevent the abuse of power is essential. The legislature has the duty to ensure that the executive do not overstep this limit ensuring that control is maintained, reducing the chance of an elective dictatorship. These checks mean that Bogdanors suggestion that we are less of an elective dictatorship is correct; the rules ensure that nobody gains too much control. In conclusion, the doctrine of the separation of powers is a feature of the peculiarly British conception of the separation of powers that Parliament, the executive and the courts have their distinct and largely exclusive domain.[26] Before the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, the power was not constrained to the three separate organs. Instead the distinctions were not clear therefore the power was subject to being abused and concentrated to different branches. The reforms led to a redistribution of power in the British Constitution which has effectively led to a decrease of living in an elective dictatorship, just as Bogdanor suggests. Bibliography Allan, T. R. S.. First principles: the Rule of Law and Separation of Powers. Constitutional justice: a liberal theory of the rule of law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. 31-52. Barnett, Hilaire. Fundamental Constitutional Concepts; the separation of powers. Constitutional administrative law. 7th ed. London: Cavendish Pub., 2009. 71-91 Bates, Clifford The Fundamental Similarity between Montesquieu and Aristotle http://www.academia.edu/5192735/THE_FUNDAMENTAL_SIMILARITY_BETWEEN_MONTESQUIEU_AND_ARISTOTLE>. Blair Backbench reforms. BBC News. BBC, 26 Feb. 2003 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2802791.stm>. Bogdanor, Vernon. The new British Constitution. Oxford: Hart Pub., 2009. Bradley, Anthony, and Keith Ewing. The relationship between legislature, executive and judiciary. Constitutional and administrative law. 15 ed. Longman, 2010. 78-88 Brazier, Rodney. Constitutional reform: reshaping the British political system. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print. Constitutional Reform Act 2005. Constitutional Reform Act 2005 www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/4/contents> Lord Hailsham Elective dictatorship. The Listener, 21 October 1976 Lord Phillips, Lord Chief Justice. Interview by Marcel Berlins. Personal interview 2007 Montesquieu, Charles de Secondat. The spirit of the laws. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Parpworth, Neil. Separation of Powers. Constitutional and administrative law. 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. 18-20 R Benwell and O Gay, The Separation of Powers www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn06053.pdf‎> Watts, Duncan. Constitutions. Understanding US/UK government and politics a comparative guide. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2003. 26-43. 1 [1] V Bogdanor,The New British Constitution(1st, Hart, 2009) 22 [2] A W Bradley and K D Ewing,Constitutional Administrative Law(15th, Pearson) 78 [3] T. R. S. Allan,Constitutional Justice: A Liberal Theory of the Rule of Law (Oxford, 2003) 31 [4] Aristotle Politics as citied in H Barnett, Constitutional Administrative Law(7th, Routledge, 2009) [5] Clifford Bates, The Fundamental Similarity Between Montesquieu and Aristotle (academia.edu 2005) http://www.academia.edu/5192735/THE_FUNDAMENTAL_SIMILARITY_BETWEEN_MONTESQUIEU_AND_ARISTOTLE> accessed 11th January 2014 [6] C Montesquieu ,The Spirit of the Laws (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought)(1st, Cambridge University Press, Oxford 1989) [7] Clifford Bates, The Fundamental Similarity Between Montesquieu and Aristotle (academia.edu, 2005) http://www.academia.edu/5192735/THE_FUNDAMENTAL_SIMILARITY_BETWEEN_MONTESQUIEU_AND_ARISTOTLE> accessed 11/01/2014 [8]R Brazier,Constitutional Reform: Reshaping the British Political System(3rd, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2008) 108 [9]J Locke,Two Treatises of Government(ed. Laslett), chX11, para 143 as cited in A W Bradley and K D Ewing,Constitutional Administrative Law(15th, Pearson) 81 [10]Lord Hailsham, Elective dictatorship The Listener (21 October 1976) [11]N Parpworth,Constitutional and Administrative Law(7th, Oxford, 2012) 20 [12]N Parpworth,Constitutional and Administrative Law(7th, Oxford, 2012) 20 [13]C Montesquieu ,The Spirit of the Laws (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought)(1st, Cambridge University Press, Oxford 1989) [14]Lord Hailsham, Elective dictatorship The Listener (21 October 1976) [15] The Lord Chief Justice 2007 Interview[2007] [16] V Bogdanor,The New British Constitution(1st, Hart, 2009) 66 [17]Lord Chief Justice (www.judiciary.gov.uk 2014) http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/the-judiciary-in-detail/judicial+roles/judges/lord-chief-justice> accessed 11/01/2014 [18]Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (www.legislation.gov.uk 2005) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/4/contents> accessed 11/01/2014 [19]V Bogdanor,The New British Constitution(1st, Hart, 2009) 63 [20]Allan,Constitutional Justiceas cited in A W Bradley and K D Ewing,Constitutional Administrative Law(15th, Pearson) 88 [21] D Watts,Understanding US/UK Government and Politics: A Comparative Guide(Oxford 2003) 36 [22] R Benwell and O Gay, The Separation of Powers (www.parliament.uk 2013) accessed 11/01/2014 [23] Bagehot,The English Constitution 65as cited in A W Bradley and K D Ewing,Constitutional Administrative Law(15th, Pearson) 78 [24] A W Bradley and K D Ewing,Constitutional Administrative Law(15th, Pearson) 84 [25] Blairs backbench rebellions (www.news.bbc.co.uk 2003) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2802791.stm> accessed 11th January 2014 [26] R v Home Secretary[1995] 2 AC 513as cited in A W Bradley and K D Ewing,Constitutional Administrative Law(15th, Pearson) 78