Future of the European Union

[Furunculus]

I think that Pan' is referring to the traditions of English politics. While the 'loyal opposition' is supposed to have a shadow government ready to step forward with their policies if a vote of no confidence shifts the governing party from office (the political alternative function you allude to), traditionally that loyal opposition party has been much more 'pushy' during questions etc. so as to force the government to clarify policy and their reasons for taking certain actions so that voters might be better informed. The opposition is supposed to ask the tough questions that put the government on the spot and not go along to get along save where the national interest is so clear that more or less all parties agree on a particular policy.

Yes, at least I would certainly agree:

It is not tory/labour domindation of the institutions that makes the british political system so effective.
Not too is it the winner takes all nature of an adversarial electoral system to the commons.
It isn't the great reserve of wisdom in the Lords and its dogged pursuit of the role of a revising chamber.
It isn't even the great flexibility of an uncodified constitution.

No, it is the 'process' of parliament that is a function of all of the above.
That jostling of ideas, in an environment of sharp legal elbows and fractious political tempers.
This process has a tendency to rub off the sharp corners of ideas put before parliament, such the the resultant product better fits the wider polity.

Her majesty's loyal opposition have not been performing their essential role in 'jostling' the executive.
They seem more interested in their internal transformation project, with a pious hope that their ideological project will roll out the back of the scrum of a Tory government.

I have enormous confidence in the 'process' of the parliament, and thus the effectiveness of the british political system, but the engine doesn't always run smooth.