| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. 21:38 - Sep 12 with 2225 views | NthQldITFC |
Just watched his speech in Westminster Hall to the assembled Lords and MPs and it struck me that he speaks with great gravitas and deep consideration and belief in what he is saying, and will command a great deal of respect from politicians. Obviously he cannot speak publicly on specific policy matters, but his views on important matters, primarily of course the environment, are well-known.
I'm not really either a Royalist or a Republican, but I can see the importance of having an independent Head of State, and I think that our system and the previous and current incumbent have done, and will do very nicely. |  |
| |  |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:42 - Sep 13 with 371 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:35 - Sep 13 by Swansea_Blue |
He's obviously never tried Fergal Imaginary Flying Scooters Inc.
Interesting thoughts above about soft power. I hadn't really thought of that. He's got the platform to be bullish if he wants though - just has to balance it against being perceived as politically biased. I'm sure he could speak out at major environmental events and the like (COP would have been ideal), but try to give the appearance of being politically neutral? He could probably do that on environment issues, because he can stay on the issue and not address the politics.
he couldn't temper the excesses of the Tories though. People hoping for that are going to be disappointed almost certainly. He'd be hung out to dry by client journalists if he tried to meddle. |
Her Majesty could have tempered the excesses of Johnson's Tories by taking decent legal advice from the Supreme Court Justices, and then sending him away with a flea in his ear when he tried to get her to unlawfully shut down Parliament. Or she should have summoned him and sacked him once the case was reviewed by the Supreme Court and he was found to have acted unlawfully.
Inexcusable that the much vaunted "Last Check and Balance" failed at a crucial moment. |  | | |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:50 - Sep 13 with 359 views | bluelagos |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:42 - Sep 13 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Her Majesty could have tempered the excesses of Johnson's Tories by taking decent legal advice from the Supreme Court Justices, and then sending him away with a flea in his ear when he tried to get her to unlawfully shut down Parliament. Or she should have summoned him and sacked him once the case was reviewed by the Supreme Court and he was found to have acted unlawfully.
Inexcusable that the much vaunted "Last Check and Balance" failed at a crucial moment. |
As is clear - am no fan of the Monarchy, but I do think it unfair for anyone to expect her to provide a check/balance.
Had she chosen to do so, she would have been accused of being partial and thus would have fed the republican arguments. What she did was (naturally enough) take the position that would most benefit the long term interests of the monarchy.
Where I do agree (I think) - is that those who argue that she is a "check and balance" simply don't understand the nature of her role - which is pretty much powerless when it comes to politics (and rightly so) |  |
| |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:58 - Sep 13 with 351 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:50 - Sep 13 by bluelagos |
As is clear - am no fan of the Monarchy, but I do think it unfair for anyone to expect her to provide a check/balance.
Had she chosen to do so, she would have been accused of being partial and thus would have fed the republican arguments. What she did was (naturally enough) take the position that would most benefit the long term interests of the monarchy.
Where I do agree (I think) - is that those who argue that she is a "check and balance" simply don't understand the nature of her role - which is pretty much powerless when it comes to politics (and rightly so) |
Apart from that it has always been taught to anyone studying public affairs or politics that the Sovereign is the last check and balance.
And is the case in most modern democracies.
She literally had the personal power to close Parliament or keep it open, and failed to stop Parliament being closed unlawfully. A Prime Minister unlawfully closing down Parliament is literally the stuff of totalitarianism. If our Monarchy doesn't want the job of Final Check and Balance then we need another, watertight, legal check on abuses by the Executive.
In the "Proroguing" case, fortunately the Supreme Court stepped up, Johnson subsequently changed the Law as part of his suite of Enabling Act laws to rid the Courts of the power to challenge Ministerial decree. So His Majesty the King is now the only and final check and balance on Executive power. | | | |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:01 - Sep 13 with 343 views | bluelagos |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:58 - Sep 13 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Apart from that it has always been taught to anyone studying public affairs or politics that the Sovereign is the last check and balance.
And is the case in most modern democracies.
She literally had the personal power to close Parliament or keep it open, and failed to stop Parliament being closed unlawfully. A Prime Minister unlawfully closing down Parliament is literally the stuff of totalitarianism. If our Monarchy doesn't want the job of Final Check and Balance then we need another, watertight, legal check on abuses by the Executive.
In the "Proroguing" case, fortunately the Supreme Court stepped up, Johnson subsequently changed the Law as part of his suite of Enabling Act laws to rid the Courts of the power to challenge Ministerial decree. So His Majesty the King is now the only and final check and balance on Executive power. |
Agree with all of that.
But do you not concede that had she done so it would have presented/argued that she had got involved in politics and had taken a decision that (as she is unelected) was ultimately undemocratic? | |
| |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:07 - Sep 13 with 331 views | Ryorry |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 14:20 - Sep 13 by NthQldITFC |
There's a fuzzy line in there somewhere, isn't there?
Surely he can use expressions such as "We must protect our beautiful planet" and "We must support the young people doing wonderful things to help nature" but avoid statements like "If they approve a new coal mine in Surrey I'll set the Beefeaters on them".
Where's the line in between? |
Depends on context I guess, & he'll have advisors. |  |
| |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:09 - Sep 13 with 328 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:01 - Sep 13 by bluelagos |
Agree with all of that.
But do you not concede that had she done so it would have presented/argued that she had got involved in politics and had taken a decision that (as she is unelected) was ultimately undemocratic? |
Not if she had brought the case to the Supreme Court, before granting Johnson the proroguement.
And she could have sacked him after the Supreme Court made their ruling, on the grounds that he had failed the electorate by unlawfully closing the democratically elected Parliament, broken the Law, and, as her Prime Minister, given her unconstitutional and unlawful advice and so lost her trust.
I think she would have been on rock-solid ground legally and a joint statement from all living previous Prime Ministers and Speakers supporting her position would have buttressed it further.
When we actually needed it, we didn't have a final check and balance on a Prime Minister unlawfully suspending our democratically elected Parliament. That needs to be sorted, and if the King would not be willing to that job, then we need an alternative final check and balance. | | | |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:11 - Sep 13 with 320 views | bluelagos |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:09 - Sep 13 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Not if she had brought the case to the Supreme Court, before granting Johnson the proroguement.
And she could have sacked him after the Supreme Court made their ruling, on the grounds that he had failed the electorate by unlawfully closing the democratically elected Parliament, broken the Law, and, as her Prime Minister, given her unconstitutional and unlawful advice and so lost her trust.
I think she would have been on rock-solid ground legally and a joint statement from all living previous Prime Ministers and Speakers supporting her position would have buttressed it further.
When we actually needed it, we didn't have a final check and balance on a Prime Minister unlawfully suspending our democratically elected Parliament. That needs to be sorted, and if the King would not be willing to that job, then we need an alternative final check and balance. |
"...and if the King would not be willing to that job, then we need an alternative final check and balance"
Like in many a republic :-) | |
| |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:23 - Sep 13 with 304 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:11 - Sep 13 by bluelagos |
"...and if the King would not be willing to that job, then we need an alternative final check and balance"
Like in many a republic :-) |
Yes, whilst I have been uncomfortable for years with the hereditary monarchy, on justice and equality grounds, I have not moved beyond "ambivalent" because of the stability argument (and the personal qualities of the Queen).
But her failure to intervene over the Proroguing of Parliament marked the point at which I moved to fully supporting huge Constitutional Reform, including Proportional Representation, an elected Second Chamber and elected Head of State.
The cobbled together system failed us massively at a very important point in our history. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:28 - Sep 13 with 284 views | bluelagos |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 16:23 - Sep 13 by ArnoldMoorhen |
Yes, whilst I have been uncomfortable for years with the hereditary monarchy, on justice and equality grounds, I have not moved beyond "ambivalent" because of the stability argument (and the personal qualities of the Queen).
But her failure to intervene over the Proroguing of Parliament marked the point at which I moved to fully supporting huge Constitutional Reform, including Proportional Representation, an elected Second Chamber and elected Head of State.
The cobbled together system failed us massively at a very important point in our history. |
Always said you're a wise man :-) | |
| |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 18:06 - Sep 13 with 246 views | Radlett_blue |
| King Charles really does speak very well, does he not. on 15:50 - Sep 13 by bluelagos |
As is clear - am no fan of the Monarchy, but I do think it unfair for anyone to expect her to provide a check/balance.
Had she chosen to do so, she would have been accused of being partial and thus would have fed the republican arguments. What she did was (naturally enough) take the position that would most benefit the long term interests of the monarchy.
Where I do agree (I think) - is that those who argue that she is a "check and balance" simply don't understand the nature of her role - which is pretty much powerless when it comes to politics (and rightly so) |
This is the problem of our so-called constitutional monarchy. There are times when the sovereign does actually have a decision to make e.g. whether to permit a PM to call a General Election or ask someone else to try to form a government, the issue over prorogation of Parliament etc. If the sovereign is incapable of performing this type of function, they are as of as much use as a Christmas decoration. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
