3 ms·

So now the only way out of a clearly anti-democratic move to silence a semi-democratic parliament, put in place by a Prime-Minister that was not directly electe

by chicob 7y ago

So now the only way out of a clearly anti-democratic move to silence a semi-democratic parliament, put in place by a Prime-Minister that was not directly elected, is by having a non-elected head of state putting a stop to it. Good heavens.

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
Within the last 100 years, there have been at least one instances of the monarch being the last refuge of democracy (in Spain, when Juan Carlos opposed a military coup). The queen may in fact have to be the grownup in the room to get the UK out of this in some fashion. Parliament (and May, and Johnson) don't seem to be able to do it.
pbhjpbhj 7y ago
Not really. The Queen intervenes if she does prorogue as that is exercise of her reserved powers. AIUI since Cromwell's reign ended the monarchy have agreed to give _parliament_ sovereignty. If the monarch does not intervene, then parliament can stop Johnson from becoming de facto dictator. If the monarch ends the established constitution, steps in and uses her executive power to order prorogation of parliament, then Johnson can have his way. The Tories appear to have got in early, and lied, pretending that Johnson PM's right is to take away parliamentary sovereignty whilst the opposite is the case.
- NeedMoreTea 7y ago
  Well parliamentary sovereignty while the monarch wills it, symbolised by the parliamentary mace, without which proceedings can't continue. Proroguing to get his way is seizing power, whichever way they try to paint it. Victoria was the last monarch to actually do something unilateral with the sovereign powers, at some point in the late 1800's. She appointed Gladstone's successor without consulting Gladstone. IIRC that was only because Gladstone hadn't bothered with a successor as he was supposed to and it had dragged on for ages. Charles II, the restored monarch, dissolved parliament in the hopes of a better one a time or three. He had ongoing issues with parliament, almost all over the question of Catholic succession. Lizzie probably has good grounds to intervene given how crassly and illegally Johnson appears to be acting, yet the tabloid outrage if she did could easily cost her the throne. It's a very long time since I read much on the UK constitution, so I couldn't guess what devils are hiding in the details.

by chicob 7y ago

AnimalMuppet 7y ago

Within the last 100 years, there have been at least one instances of the monarch being the last refuge of democracy (in Spain, when Juan Carlos opposed a military coup). The queen may in fact have to be the grownup in the room to get the UK out of this in some fashion. Parliament (and May, and Johnson) don't seem to be able to do it.

pbhjpbhj 7y ago

Not really. The Queen intervenes if she does prorogue as that is exercise of her reserved powers. AIUI since Cromwell's reign ended the monarchy have agreed to give _parliament_ sovereignty. If the monarch does not intervene, then parliament can stop Johnson from becoming de facto dictator. If the monarch ends the established constitution, steps in and uses her executive power to order prorogation of parliament, then Johnson can have his way. The Tories appear to have got in early, and lied, pretending that Johnson PM's right is to take away parliamentary sovereignty whilst the opposite is the case.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Well parliamentary sovereignty while the monarch wills it, symbolised by the parliamentary mace, without which proceedings can't continue. Proroguing to get his way is seizing power, whichever way they try to paint it. Victoria was the last monarch to actually do something unilateral with the sovereign powers, at some point in the late 1800's. She appointed Gladstone's successor without consulting Gladstone. IIRC that was only because Gladstone hadn't bothered with a successor as he was supposed to and it had dragged on for ages. Charles II, the restored monarch, dissolved parliament in the hopes of a better one a time or three. He had ongoing issues with parliament, almost all over the question of Catholic succession. Lizzie probably has good grounds to intervene given how crassly and illegally Johnson appears to be acting, yet the tabloid outrage if she did could easily cost her the throne. It's a very long time since I read much on the UK constitution, so I couldn't guess what devils are hiding in the details.