to think the Monarch is just a pointless figure head when it comes to our Constitution

[chomalungma]

Has to follow the advice of the Prime Minister.
Can only listen to ministers of the Government.
Other politicians from other parties can't have an audience with them to give their view.
The Monarch can't really refuse to follow the advice.

Other countries have Heads of States who have to protect the Constitution. We have a Monarch who has to be a figure head, rubber stamp person.

(please note - this is about the Monarch as an instution, not the Queen as a person)

YANBU Our electoral system and constitution are badly in need of reform and modernisation.

We dont have a consitution.

not just in relation to constitutional matters but pointless as a whole.

I listened to Rees Mogg yesterday on Radio 4 and he was basically saying this. He said that the Monarch had to follow the advice of the Prime Minister and agree to what he said.

This whole saga has thrown open so many cans of worms.

not just in relation to constitutional matters but pointless as a whole

That's a separate argument. This is all to do with our Constitution and how we are governed and all those checks and balances.

We dont have a constitution.

We do. It's just not in a handy cut-out'n'keep guide like the US one.

(Which P.J O'Rourke noted was a mere 28 pages and is an instruction manual for a continent. Now look at your car handbook )

Well yes. But that is because of several centuries of gradually limited the monarchs power to prevent the abused of power by an individual that you used to get. I think Queen Victoria may have been the last monarch to refuse a prime minister's request and that early on in her reign. It is a bit silly that having had their power limited we still pretend that their stamp or approval means anything. They do at least have continuity of experience I guess - the Queen has seen more events and met more world leaders than most but not sure how much soft power she can exercise with that experience.

The electoral system is totally no longer fit for purpose. So many other countries have had to revise their electoral system as a result of wars, independence etc but we are still trundling on with a system that is old and relates to different social, economic and political contexts.

Whilst I agree with the thrust of your argument - I am not sure this bit is true -
"Other politicians from other parties can't have an audience with them to give their view."
If I recall correctly from politics A level (sorry), opposition members are part of the Privy Council.

opposition members are part of the Privy Council

How come Corbyn can't see the Queen then?
I am sure that was what Rees Mogg was saying yesterday?

The electoral system is totally no longer fit for purpose. So many other countries have had to revise their electoral system as a result of wars, independence etc but we are still trundling on with a system that is old and relates to different social, economic and political contexts.
^Agree 100% with this - and our parliament is a televised museum full of braying toffs twatting about.

I’m sure you’d be delighted if the Queen vetoed the wishes of a left-wing PM, right? Right?

Incidentally there was at least one thread recently about this which degenerated into people completely (and possibly not accidentally) missing the point and blathering on about tourists, Harry, Wills blah di blah di blah. The average English persons grasp of the UKs constitution is embarrassingly pisspoor, whereas US kids learn theirs (by rote in some places) at school. Although I would be open to an argument about what actually difference it makes ...

I’m sure you’d be delighted if the Queen vetoed the wishes of a left-wing PM, right? Right

Someone needs to defend the Constitution. That's important, regardless of who the PM is. Otherwise who does defend it? Who watches out for the country?

Who watches out for the country?

Quis ipsos custodes custodiet ? As Boris and JRM would damn well know.

Corbyn is a Privy Councillor (as is Diane Abbott) - but he can't just rock up to the palace and tell Brenda what he thinks - he has to wait to be summoned. Brenda has more experience of this than any of them as someone above pointed out - but it's an arcane and archaic system that is badly in need of modernisation.

‏ @Gus_ODonnell
To clarify, the Queen had no option but to accept the PM’s request on Prorogation but making such a political request which is now being legally challenged hardly helps keeping her above politics.

Messy.

"Someone needs to defend the Constitution. That's important, regardless of who the PM is. Otherwise who does defend it? Who watches out for the country?*

Well historically, the move in this country had been for parliament to defend the Constitution (I use that word loosely to cover several different time periods!) And watch out for the country. Which is fine in theory as long as parliament works as political institution which is looking increasingly debatable.

The average English persons grasp of the UKs constitution is embarrassingly pisspoor, whereas US kids learn theirs (by rote in some places) at school.
Yeah fucking good luck getting kids to learn our (mostly but not exclusively) unwritten constitution - what a ridiculous assertion. There are people who have spent their lives studying the fucker and still don't know how it works.

There are people who have spent their lives studying the fucker and still don't know how it works

I wonder what it will take for things to change when it comes to our constitution?

I suspect that the Queen is the person with the best grasp on the Constitution these days.

Yeah fucking good luck getting kids to learn our (mostly but not exclusively) unwritten constitution - what a ridiculous assertion. There are people who have spent their lives studying the fucker and still don't know how it works.

You chose to ignore the following sentence which suggested that just "knowing" something isn't equivalent to understanding it.

And your comments would be just as valid for the US constitution, anyway. Hence SCOTUS, and President Trumps orders being repeatedly struck down.

I suspect that the Queen is the person with the best grasp on the Constitution these days.

Even so, she wasn't actually brought up to be Queen. It was only her Uncles romantic stupidity which made her father King and placed her in line to the throne.

I didn't think we had a constitution?

Certainly not like the USA.

What we have is a bunch of laws and precedents and institutions and so on.

' suspect that the Queen is the person with the best grasp on the Constitution these days.

Even so, she wasn't actually brought up to be Queen.'

???

What an odd comment. You seem to be implying that she doesn't know what she doing as missed out on Queen lessons as a child?

I'm no royalist but that's a really bizarre comment!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom