What's Wrong with Pretty?

Mind the Gap: Political Analysis, Public Expectations and the Parliamentary Decline Thesis

“…This did not explicitly challenge the PDT but instead sought to set out a more positive and optimistic reform agenda that was intended to shift the balance of power back towards the legislature. Its central argument was that ‘strong government needs strong opposition’ and this position underpinned a range of books and articles (Walkland 1960; Hanson 1963; Crick 1964; Hill and Whichelow 1964; Robson 1964; Marshall 1965; Ryle 1965; Wiseman 1966; Butt 1969) that all, to varying degrees, argued for the reconfiguration of parliamentary work around a specialised committee system. These analyses suggested that the House possessed a dated and amateurish approach to scrutiny of the executive, and that such scrutiny could no longer be conducted solely by individual MPs on the floor of the chamber, but had to be developed and institutionalised in dedicated, all‐party fora away from the partisan heat of the House.…”

Interior Design Identity in the Crossfire: A Call for Renewed Balance in Subjective and Objective Ways of Knowing

“…It is likely that interior design cannot continue to justify its public existence primarily on its health and safety benefi ts that legal representation compels or, by extension, through an adherence to objective/scientifi c ways of knowing and being known, even though select public pressure may compel it to do so. In the words of Hill and Matthews (2007b ), "While … [protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public] is a fi ne battlecry when marching on state capitols, it should be seen as the lowest common denominator of well-designed spaces, not the end or highest goal" (p. 14). Design is not by its nature a benign element but can become so when grouped too exclusively with objective ways of knowing.…”