To ask about the Queen

[Allthestarsarecloser]

So say it goes really tits up in the country in January (which of course it will in a no deal brexit) - can the Queen get rid of the government & Boris! If the country is in peril? What’s the protocol? We’ve never had a rogue government before in recent history so what is the precedent?

Just been discussing this at home & have no idea of the answer so AIBU to ask mumsnetters for their thoughts?

there's a law to make it automatic, the PM doesn't need to pop round to the Palace and ask her nicely any more

Since when?!? I’m pretty sure Boris still had to justv12 months ago?!?!

parliament and government mixed up, dissolving parliament doesn't vacate ministerial positions

No but if you read what I posted about royal peragrotive and dissolving parliament it could mean that government resigns!

It kind of makes there position untenable

@PolPotNoodle

You're getting parliament and government mixed up, dissolving parliament doesn't vacate ministerial positions, it just means that the house of commons isn't working.

Anyway, the royal perogative in relation to dissolving parliament is redundant now as there's a law to make it automatic, the PM doesn't need to pop round to the Palace and ask her nicely any more.

I do wish people knew how to use google

theconversation.com/why-the-queen-said-yes-to-boris-johnsons-request-to-suspend-parliament-122597

He had to ask her permission to perougue/suspend parliament last year

And this is a line taken from this

The queen’s power to suspend – or even dismiss – Parliament is unquestioned. The buck stops with her

So that doesn’t sound like there’s a law that makes royal perogrative irrrelivent intact it sounds like royal perogrative is very much till in force!

@RizzleDrizzle you could just google it yourself but it came in in 2011 - the fixed-term parliament act. Funnily enough the Conservatives want to repeal it and go back to royal perogative.

I did read your post and i don't agree with it. The Queen is neutral so will not get involved in a campaign to remove a democratically elected parliament, and even if she did there is no obligation for a government to resign as they are not the same thing. The Queen dissolving parliament is essentially saying that no one of any party gets to be an MP any more, that is it. It doesn't really matter what might possibly maybe happen, its about as useful as pondering whether an meteor might crash into the houses of parliament and solve that problem for us.

@RizzleDrizzle I do wish you knew how to read. Suspending parliament isn't the same as dissolving it. Go and look up the briefings on the FTPA as I really just cannot deal with people who are willfully ignorant.

@Allthestarsarecloser

Rogue government as in not acting in the best interest of its citizens- putting food security and medicine at risk

The people chose it

And not only can she force government to dissolve she absolutely can dismiss the prime mister

www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brexit/brexit-can-queen-actually-sack-boris-johnson-1406329

I’ll give you a bit of a spoiler to the article the answer to the question can the queen sack Boris as posed in the headline is yes as any monarch can, in fact the last time a monarch did was in the 18hundreds a lot more resently than a monarch used the power to disolve paraliment

the FTPA as I really just cannot deal with people who are willfully ignorant!
I have in fact I read it before I posted that

Also yeah your still wrong see the post I previously posted m
Funny what using google finds isn’t it.

As for dealing with the willingly ignorantly neither can I?!?!

Funny how I hack stuff up with articles rather than just calling people willingfully ignorant ain’t it!

Will this incessant bore ever end? Are ppl who voted to remain going to go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on for the next 50 bloody years.

I am in Oz and the queen did sack the PM. However, this happened because the opposition blocked supply (ie. no money available to run the country). This was meant to trigger an election but the PM refused an election. This broke constitutional law, and the Governor General wrote to the queen and asked her to dismiss him. So she did. In her capacity as Head of State. She doesn’t have the power to just sack a PM except in very specific situations where the government can’t function.

@VenusTiger

Will this incessant bore ever end? Are ppl who voted to remain going to go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on for the next 50 bloody years.

Personally I will bang the REJOIN drum until we get back in, or until I die, whichever is sooner.

Even if the queen could do anything I doubt she would. Brexit won’t impact her or her family and she’d never want to do anything which could be interpreted as political.

@VenusTiger

Will this incessant bore ever end? Are ppl who voted to remain going to go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on for the next 50 bloody years.

Yes they will. Suck it up.

@Tinkerbell456 Completely off topic, but my word, I liked Gough Whitlam. An amazing and imposing man. Malcolm Fraser, on the other hand, …

@VenusTiger

Will this incessant bore ever end? Are ppl who voted to remain going to go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on for the next 50 bloody years.

Of course they are, and for probably much longer than 50 years.

Having said that, I think some people really need to get it into their heads that the Tories won, and won comfortably.

So, really, there’s a huge amount of, ahem, sucking up required, all round.

People voted for this so the country will get what it wants. Despite that being more expensive food, lack of medicines, increased risk of terrorist attacks.

Weirdly people voted for this!

Hi Tazza1. Gough was a true statesman and extremely intelligent too.

Mrs Lebowski: the queen could also have a terrible, clumsy accident whilst knighting Trump. After all, if she was charged with mutter she could just pardon herself. As for the spiking of the orange noggin on London Bridge- pure shock and quite understandable.

Oops, mutter should be murder.

He certainly was Tinkerbell. I wish we had anyone of half his merit in government today.

Btw I don’t think it’s quite as simple as to say that Gough’s refusal to resign or call an election was unconstitutional. There is a convention that if the government can’t ensure supply then the PM should do this, but it’s not an express constitutional provision I think - and there is also a convention that the Senate shouldn’t block supply and that the GG should act on the PM’s advice. Whitlam also still had a majority in the Reps.

Kerr was probably on decent legal ground in dismissing Whitlam because the GG has very broad reserve powers under the Constitution, but the Coalition had engineered the situation and I think it is clear Kerr exercised his power for partisan reasons.

She never gets involved in matters of state and why should she? we VOTED for this shower of shite

I won’t argue with you about Kerr being partisan Gremlinateit. The government couldn’t govern though. Game of brinkmanship between Whitlam and Fraser?

Well, the Coalition blocked supply after getting the numbers in the Senate by defying a convention to replace retired senators with members of the same party. Then Whitlam wanted Kerr to call a senate election to solve the problem, and Kerr refused because he favoured Fraser, so Whitlam threatened to have Kerr recalled, but Kerr was too quick for him and dismissed him first.

I did not know that. Pretty sneaky then, on behalf of the Libs and Kerr.

Yes I agree! So tricksy, and all the time pretending to have the moral high ground.

Are basic social studies part of the British schools curriculum? How can you be a participating citizen and not know the answers to these questions?