2 ms·
Because the Prime Minister asked her to. So was it really the whim of one unelected person or the whim of the democratically elected leader in an undemocratic s
by goosedragons 4y ago
Because the Prime Minister asked her to. So was it really the whim of one unelected person or the whim of the democratically elected leader in an undemocratic spirit? Her refusing would have caused it's own issues because precedent said to follow the PM advice.
- vkou 4y agoThe PM that no longer had the confidence of parliament a month after the election of his minority party. It's reasonable for the PM to ask for such a self-serving thing, it's not for that ask to have been acquiesced to. There were three options (that I can think of) for dealing with that situation: 1. Allow the coalition to form government. 2. Hold another election, a month after the previous one. 3. ...Suspend parliament for a few months, so that the coalition can't hold a vote to push the minority government out! #2 is pretty nuts, but kind of justifiable, but #3 was absolutely nuts. (And had the bonus points of threatening that a non-confidence election half-a-year after the previous one is 'okay', despite Parliament being entirely non-functional for most of that intervening time.) That there aren't clear rules about this, or that a minority PM can prevent a majority coalition from ousting him is the maddening part.