\ . \


                                    Plan:

  1.   Introduction.

  2.   The main part:

          a) a system of power - what is it ?

          b) the political system of Great Britain;

          c) the comparison of British and Ukrainian political systems.

  3.   Summary.



                                Introduction

  The State System of any nation is not an  artificial  creation   of  some
genius or simply  the  embodiment  of  different  rational  schemes.  It  is
nothing else but a work of many centuries, a product of a  national  spirit,
a political mentality and the consciousness of people.

  I have chosen the topic because of its  obvious  importance.  Ukraine  is
building a sovereign state and it is encounteing a lot of problems.  Ukraine
is suffering an overall deep crisis, trying to set  herself  free  from  the
persistent inheritance of totalitarianism preying  upon  economic,  politic,
national self-consciousness. There is no  universally  efficient  remedy  to
help the Ukrainian society out of  this  grave  condition.  The  process  of
recovery  will  be  long  and  arduous.  Moreover,  the  countrys  eventual
deliverance from totalitarian inheritance  and  its  harmonious  entry  into
civilized world community remain for  that  matter,  hardly  practicable  at
all, unless political culture is humanized, and political education of  such
a kind propagated that would help society  overcome  the  backwardness,  the
pre-modernity of prevailing visions of justice, democracy,  law  and  order,
and the relationship of the individual and the state.

  It is quite clear that in the process of democracy  formation  a  lot  of
problems connected with it will inevitably  appear.  Many  of  them  already
exist. In this solution, a considered usage of foreign experience  can  help
the  Ukrainian  community  to  optimize  the  processes  essential  for  the
transitional period from one political system to another, and not  to  allow
the social prevailing tensions to develop into a national civil crisis.  And
it will also help to save time and resources.



                               The Main Part.

  A system of power is  a  complex  of  organically  connected  and  bonded
together governmental bodies, establishments and persons given  the  highest
authority, and also political parties  and  organizations,  directly  having
the  power  and  putting  it  into  life.  The  sources  of   power   in   a
democratically organized community are its people, and its system. First  of
all, key figures within this  structure  should  be  under  control  of  the
people. This system is the core of  legal  functioning  and  serves  as  the
foundation of state and public life. Its  main  parts  are  legislative  and
executive power.

  If we want finally to live as normal people, we  should  seriously  think
which system of power we subject to and how is it possible  to  improve  it,
how to make it suitable for the interests of our  people  and  what  can  be
taken from foreign, world experience. But one of the main problems  is  that
we are not the only ones, who dont have a  good  system  of  modern  power.
Humanity hasnt yet worked out a suitable and ideal system. That is  why  we
should build our own power by considering all positive and negative  aspects
of the worlds system and our one. But we should not  forget  that  a  power
works well only when its authority is clearly and definitely determined.


Lets compare our system of power with the British one to see whether it  is
competent enough and how well organized it is.



                       The Political System Of England

  The organs of goverment in the United Kingdom of Great Britian are:

     1) the legislature, which consists of the Queen in Parliament, and  is
        the supreme authority of the realm;

     2) the executive, wich consist of:

           c) the  Cabinet  and  other  ministers  of  the  Crown,  who  are
              responsible for initiating and directing national policy;

           d) Government departments, most of  them  under  the  control  of
              ministers,  and  all  staffed  by  civil  servants,  who   are
              responsible for administration at the national level;

           e) local authorities, who administer and manage many services  at
              the local level;

           f) statutory boards, which are responsible for the  operation  of
              particular nationalized industries or public services;

           g) shadow cabinet which is the directing and  leading  body  of
              the oppositional group.

  The most interesting  and  important  aspect  of  the  British  political
system, its pecularity, lies in its division of powers.

  It is common knowledge that Great Britain, having the  oldest  Parliament
in the world, has one of the most stable and effective political regimes  of
our time. Its stability is mostly the result  of  the  division  of  powers,
which, by the the way, is not the exeption from the general rule.

  The main idea of this variant lies in the following: the principle of the
demarcation (division) is combined with a principle of interaction. And  its
principle is  fixed  in  the  British  system  of  power  not  as  something
abstract, but institutionally. I mean a special center, a  linking  section,
which brings together the legislating and executing powers, and at the  same
time is the center of making important political decisions.  Surely,  it  is
the Cabinet and its leader which are at the  head  of  the  whole  executive
system of the state.

  The main 4 principles of division of powers are:

           1)  sovereignty  of  the  Parliament,  as  the  highest  body  of
              political management;

           2) the leading role of the Cabinet  and  the  government  in  the
              legislative process;

           3) a strict Parliamentary and commitee control of the legislative
              branch;

           4) a special role given to the State Machinery,  which  not  only
              executes the instructions, but  also  influences  a  political
              process.

  So, as we see, the legislators provide the  execution  of  the  laws  and
resolutions of the Parliament by controlling the  State  machinery,  and  in
its turn, the state  machinery  participates  in  the  legislative  process,
providing its preparatory stage (by doing a spade-work).


                             British Parliament.

                  The Comparison Of Two Political Systems:

                         Ukrainian And British Ones.

  1.   The first distinction may seem to be the form of rule:

  Ukraine is a respublic. And Britain, as you probably know, is  considered
to be a parliamentary monarchy.

  The Queen is the personification of the U.K. By law, she is the  head  of
the executive branch, an integral part of the legislature, the head  of  the
judiciary, the commander-in-chief of all armed forces of the Crown  and  the
temporal head of the established Church of England. But in  practice,  as  a
result of a long evolutionary process, these powers  have   changed.  Today,
the queen acts only  on  the  advice  of  her  Ministers  which  she  cannot
constitutionally ignore. In fact she reigns but she doesnt rule.

  However, the monarchy has  a  good  deal  more  power  than  is  commonly
supposed. There remain certain discretionary powers  in  the  hands  of  the
monarch, known as the Royal Prerogative.


  2.   The Ukrainian and the British Parliaments have at least four similar
functions:

          a) to work out legislation, including the creation of a budget;

          b) to control the government;

          c) to represent and respond to public opinion;

          d) to influence actively the people by  acquainting  them  openly
             with the facts, concerning the accepted desisions.

  The difference lies in the electoral systems and the rules for  recalling
the government.

  But there is also  one  more  remarkable  peculiarity  of  the  Ukrainian
Parliament: the political history  of  Ukraine  does  not  know  any  potent
legislative bodies (we can hardly take into account the  experience  of  the
Soviet Congress ).

  3.   Both Ukraine and  Britain  are  countries  with  the  representative
democracy (which means that the people delegate power to the  bodies,  which
act on their behalf).

  The difference is, that Britain has a parliamentary form  of  government,
and Ukraine, in its turn, has  a  so-called  semi-presidential  form.  The
main distinctions of this forms are shown in the table, given below.


|The British parliamentary form    |The Ukrainian semi-pesidential  |
|                                  |form                              |
|1. The election solves two        |1. The election solves just one   |
|questions:                        |question:                         |
|On one hand, the forming of the   |Either the problem of forming the |
|Parliament. And on the other hand,|Parliament or the creation of the |
|the creation of the Government and|Government.                       |
|different coalitions.             |                                  |
|2. The Government is formed only  |2. The Government is formed by    |
|by the Parliament.                |both the President and the        |
|                                  |Parliament.                       |
|3. The executive Power is         |3. The executive Power is not     |
|separated.                        |separated.                        |


  4.   Unlike Britain, Ukraine has  different  bodies  of  legislative  and
executive power, and one body doesnt interfere with  the  activity  of  the
other.

  5.   The negative features of the British system may seem to be too  much
power  in  the  hands  of  Prime  Minister  and  rather  uncontrolled  local
government.


                                   Summary

  Having compared two political systems, I have come to the conclusion that
the form and the level of development of the systems are influenced  greatly
by the history of the State. The second  factor  is  that  of  evaluationary
progress, which usually improves  the  existing  order  and  makes  it  more
democratic.

  Having analysed two state systems, I have noticed  the  tendency  towards
the reinforcement of the executive power and a lessening of the  legislative
power.  But  still,  parliament  remains  an  integral  institution   in   a
democratic society.

  I have studied the British political experience concerning  the  division
of powers and I can say that with all its originality,  the  British  System
is not something unique or exceptional. This system should be taken  as  the
foundation stone of the cooperation  of  two  powers  in  countries  with  a
representative democracy.

  The reason for the lasting discussion of this problem  in  the  Ukrainian
Parliament lies not only in involving the  interests  of  powerful  persons.
Actually, it is the  result  of  the  amateur  level  to  understand  this
problem.



                         A list of used literature:

     1.     , 1993

     2. M.Y.Mezey   Comparative Legislatures, Durham, 1979

     3.  , , 1992

     4. ..    ,  , 1992

     5. A book of Britain,  , 1977

     6.    // , 1991

     7. Entony Sempson  Anatomy of Britain, 1992

     8.     , , 1993



" \ . \ "