Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Biden has pardoned his son because his conviction was a "miscarriage of justice".

405 replies

Cantalever · 02/12/2024 03:14

Is this the total end of standards and even a pretence at integrity in public life? This is a president, who admittedly like all the others, allowed innocent people to be executed in their joke of a justice system. What a hypocrite.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
T1Dmama · 06/12/2024 08:13

People don’t realise that having a Royal family here prevents this kind of BS.

louddumpernoise · 06/12/2024 09:26

T1Dmama · 06/12/2024 08:13

People don’t realise that having a Royal family here prevents this kind of BS.

All it would take is for Parliament to pass a law giving an out going PM the power to pardon and it would happen, the King would sign it off.

With a large majority, a Government can push through any law it wanted, make it a confidence issue, the HoLs could try and stop it but they don't have that power, can only delay.

Perhaps look up what a Constitutional Monarch is?

AdventCarols · 06/12/2024 09:42

With a large majority, a Government can push through any law it wanted

That is why the current Labour majority is such a concern, The level of rebellion needed to stop any legislation means the government have the ability to push through terrible bills. Rebellion is the big advantage of the FPTP constituency MP over PR where an MP represents the party. Though the downside is it was FPTP that lead to the hugely disproportionate majority.

louddumpernoise · 06/12/2024 09:46

AdventCarols · 06/12/2024 09:42

With a large majority, a Government can push through any law it wanted

That is why the current Labour majority is such a concern, The level of rebellion needed to stop any legislation means the government have the ability to push through terrible bills. Rebellion is the big advantage of the FPTP constituency MP over PR where an MP represents the party. Though the downside is it was FPTP that lead to the hugely disproportionate majority.

The Tories had a majority of 80, Labour now have one of 174 but it wouldn't matter if it was 40, if a govt makes it a confidence issue, very few will rebel and risk their seat in a GE.

My point was to the poster who said a Royal Family stop this, they don't, the King or Queen are a figure head, thats all.

Actually a large majority, makes rebellion for likely - outside of a vote of confidence, as the back benches feel safe to vote against the Govt of the day, knowing the Govt wont fall but they can protest in safety!!

AdventCarols · 06/12/2024 10:09

louddumpernoise · 06/12/2024 09:46

The Tories had a majority of 80, Labour now have one of 174 but it wouldn't matter if it was 40, if a govt makes it a confidence issue, very few will rebel and risk their seat in a GE.

My point was to the poster who said a Royal Family stop this, they don't, the King or Queen are a figure head, thats all.

Actually a large majority, makes rebellion for likely - outside of a vote of confidence, as the back benches feel safe to vote against the Govt of the day, knowing the Govt wont fall but they can protest in safety!!

Edited

By the time they got an 80 seat majority, Conservative MPs were getting good at rebelling. 118 had rebelled against May in the previous government. And Boris faced a rebellion of 99 MPs within two years. There comes a point where MPs feel more confident of retaining their seats if they vote against a bill. PMs are not Presidents; party MPs can remove PMs.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page