Confused Britain

[SueEllen]

Another binary brain. The powers of the monarchy are nominal and are never exercised. As for your ridiculous comparison with Iran then anyone with an ounce of sense would suggest that the Iranians should replace their ruling clergy with ours. Or is their system fairer and more democratic? Iranian woman spared stoning for adultery - Telegraph

No they aren't.

Some of the media have reported Charles actions over bills linky and linky. Plus his "influence" on other matters like this


The Queen has a weekly audience with the Prime Minister of the day. You are indicating she has no influence over them?

[vetran]

They have no desire to stop all migration, simply to introduce a points based system like Australia's and apply it across the board.

Trade ties with the EU would remain as they benefit as much from trade with the UK as it does from them, and they're not exactly in a healthy position economically, anyway.

precisely but the EU are not willing to discuss it. Only by brinkmanship will we force them.

[Batcher]

No they aren't.

Some of the media have reported Charles actions over bills linky and linky. Plus his "influence" on other matters like this


The Queen has a weekly audience with the Prime Minister of the day. You are indicating she has no influence over them?

Exactly and the discussions are kept secret. I don't think any PM would refuse anything she requested to be amended.

[petergriffin]

. Only by brinkmanship will we force them.

So not with democracy, then. Thanks for clearing that.

[Batcher]

Since when does adding a link to the Telegraph confer an aura of credibility to a weak argument?

He kept doing it during the Scottish Indyref too. You can't believe anything that's written in newspapers as they don't need to be unbiased.

[expat]

Another binary brain. The powers of the monarchy are nominal and are never exercised. As for your ridiculous comparison with Iran then anyone with an ounce of sense would suggest that the Iranians should replace their ruling clergy with ours. Or is their system fairer and more democratic? Iranian woman spared stoning for adultery - Telegraph

Our clergy? Who is "we"? Church of England clergy are not mine.

And as I suggested in my post, the more extreme powers of the monarchy are not excercised because the more secretive ability to change the suggested laws before they are even put to parliament, obviates the need.

[SueEllen]

precisely but the EU are not willing to discuss it. Only by brinkmanship will we force them.

If the UK and a few other countries encouraged a country France and Germany didn't like into trying to get EU membership we would get this system.

[SueEllen]

Our clergy? Who is "we"? Church of England clergy are not mine.

And as I suggested in my post, the extrem powers of the monarchy are not excercised because the more secretive ability to change the suggested laws before they are even put to parliament, obviated the need.

Like Charles lobbying and ability to see bills before they are presented to the House, and the Queen's weekly audience with the Prime Minister of the day perhaps?

Oh and I forgot we don't elect our senior civil servants and the Heads of Quangos. Remember that the next time there is a flood...

[petergriffin]

Our clergy? Who is "we"? Church of England clergy are not mine.

Actually the British monarch has the constitutional title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England, so if you accept the Queen as the head of state, then the clergy is yours. They are not elected though.

[expat]

Exactly and the discussions are kept secret. I don't think any PM would refuse anything she requested to be amended.

It is more than that: the Queen and Prince Charles get to see bills before they are proposed, and they both have a right to amend any portions that may herm their personal interests.

- they get to change the law before it happens
- it is their right to do so, not just an influence that they may bring to bear
- it need only go against their personal interests, not their constitutional interests.