ChatterBank2 mins ago
So Betty Can Change The Laws
So Betty can change the laws - for her own benefit. So much for the "figurehead only" claim. And what will super-Green sonny Charlie think.
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There's obviously a difference between a citizen challenging a law in Court, or via writing to their MP etc, and Her Majesty lobbying privately, behind-the-scenes, in a manner that is neither open nor even challengeable. I'm generally supportive of the monarchy, but not when it interferes with legislative matters.
That misses the point. The Crown has several privileges when it comes to vetting or influencing legislation that almost everybody else does not. This is part of the Constitution, and while to some extent it has become a mere formality, it still is the case that the Crown can see and even shape legislation before Parliament even sees it. In this particular case, the Crown has been able to carve out a sole exemption to a policy that should apply universally, and in particular has been able to do so even before anybody else knew that the Bill existed.
That's a power that is a historical hangover from a time when the Monarchy was relevant to shaping and passing legislation. Nowadays, such matters are or ought to be at most formality, but there's no guarantee beyond convention of this.
That's a power that is a historical hangover from a time when the Monarchy was relevant to shaping and passing legislation. Nowadays, such matters are or ought to be at most formality, but there's no guarantee beyond convention of this.
Also, because this occurred before the Bill was put before the Scottish Parliament, it might well be wondered what would have happened had the exemption not been granted. It seems quite reasonable to infer that this exemption was seen as necessary to obtain the Queen's Consent, which means in turn that the Bill would not even have been put before Parliament without it. If so, that's troublesome, because it's a de facto veto over legislation.
No law was changed. A proposed bill was amended after consultation. Amendments to propsed legislation are commonplace, that's why they are discussed as bills before they become acts. The fact that the Queen will be exempt from compulsory purchase orders on her private estates does not affect anyone else. It is just another cheap dig at the crown.
I have nothing at all against individual members of the royal family (except maybe Andrew). They were born into it and had no choice but the institution of Monarchy is wrong and should be abolished. End of (as they say).
I'm constantly surprised that HM, Charles & William can't see that their reign is an anachronism that must be ended.
I'm constantly surprised that HM, Charles & William can't see that their reign is an anachronism that must be ended.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank5 mins ago
ChatterBank15 mins ago
ChatterBank20 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles26 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.