3 ms·

No the House of Commons would stop him. Unlike the USA, countries with governments based on the Westminster system, such as Australia, NZ etc don't give the Pr

No the House of Commons would stop him. Unlike the USA, countries with governments based on the Westminster system, such as Australia, NZ etc don't give the Prime Minister this type of unlimited power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_system

skissane 10y ago
I don't think the two systems are fundamentally different. If a British PM has a Commons majority and retains the support of their own party, they can basically do whatever they like. Conversely, if Congressional Republicans wanted to stop Trump, they could pass legislation stripping him of much of the power Congress has delegated to him (and override any veto), they could pass a joint/concurrent resolution censuring his policies (and even calling for his resignation), they could begin impeachment proceedings, they could refuse to pass the budget until he gives in to their demands. (They may well not do any of these things – but if they don't, it is because they don't want to, not because they lack the power to.) So I'm not convinced the US system and the UK system are fundamentally different here. Both give the executive utterly vast amounts of power. Both give the legislature the ability, by somewhat different routes, to remove the executive.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > I don't think the two systems are fundamentally different. If a British PM has a Commons majority and retains the support of their own party, they can basically do whatever they like. The difference is that a PM has no independent power; they don't just need a partisan majority in the Commons, they need the confidence of the majority of the Commons. The President has independent power, and is not subordinate to the Congress the way the cabinet (including the PM) is to the Parliament in a Westminster system.
  - skissane 10y ago
    Strictly speaking, the British PM's legal power comes not from Parliament but from the Monarch - they are a minister of the Crown, first in rank among the Lords Commissioners appointed to collectively exercise the office of Lord High Treasurer, one of the Great Officers of State. Now, as a matter of longstanding convention, the Monarch will appoint whoever commands the confidence of the House of Commons-but that convention is nowhere enshrined in law. Turning to the US, under the US Constitution, Congress is arguably the most powerful branch, since Congress has the power of impeachment to remove the President and judges (including Supreme Court Justices), whereas neither the President nor the Supreme Court have any corresponding power to remove Members of Congress. Congress can impeach Trump but Trump can't impeach even the most insignificant Representative.

skissane 10y ago

I don't think the two systems are fundamentally different. If a British PM has a Commons majority and retains the support of their own party, they can basically do whatever they like. Conversely, if Congressional Republicans wanted to stop Trump, they could pass legislation stripping him of much of the power Congress has delegated to him (and override any veto), they could pass a joint/concurrent resolution censuring his policies (and even calling for his resignation), they could begin impeachment proceedings, they could refuse to pass the budget until he gives in to their demands. (They may well not do any of these things – but if they don't, it is because they don't want to, not because they lack the power to.) So I'm not convinced the US system and the UK system are fundamentally different here. Both give the executive utterly vast amounts of power. Both give the legislature the ability, by somewhat different routes, to remove the executive.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> I don't think the two systems are fundamentally different. If a British PM has a Commons majority and retains the support of their own party, they can basically do whatever they like. The difference is that a PM has no independent power; they don't just need a partisan majority in the Commons, they need the confidence of the majority of the Commons. The President has independent power, and is not subordinate to the Congress the way the cabinet (including the PM) is to the Parliament in a Westminster system.
- skissane 10y ago
  Strictly speaking, the British PM's legal power comes not from Parliament but from the Monarch - they are a minister of the Crown, first in rank among the Lords Commissioners appointed to collectively exercise the office of Lord High Treasurer, one of the Great Officers of State. Now, as a matter of longstanding convention, the Monarch will appoint whoever commands the confidence of the House of Commons-but that convention is nowhere enshrined in law. Turning to the US, under the US Constitution, Congress is arguably the most powerful branch, since Congress has the power of impeachment to remove the President and judges (including Supreme Court Justices), whereas neither the President nor the Supreme Court have any corresponding power to remove Members of Congress. Congress can impeach Trump but Trump can't impeach even the most insignificant Representative.