{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012795275590551181, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.277777777777778, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cultral Adaptation of the Westminster Model: Some examples from Fiji and Samoa

The Westminster system has been a very successful model of responsible government having demonstrated its relevance around the globe in a wide variety of cultural settings – national and provincial. Cultural adaptability is arguably a critical part of the explanation for the institutional success of the Westminster model. A capacity for localising is scarcely the only reason, of course. The enormous extent of the British Empire, its policy of indirect rule and its less troubled disengagement with colonisation were important elements contributing to a widespread acceptance of the Westminster model as the winds of change blew through the Empire creating a need for democratic legislatures. Nevertheless, a political seed planted in foreign soil does not flourish if it cannot adjust to its new environment and is not nourished locally. And, in some circumstances, the process of adaptation has been itself a significant challenge.