do you think that the queen or king will ever have to....?

Question

do you think that it is likely that the queen will ever have to use her special powes as monarch and dissolve parliament and run the country on her own till a general election is held again in any unforeseen curcumstanses ie. government becoming too one party dictorial ect.

Answer 1

It is unlikely that any monarch would. It could lead to all sorts of problems and if the same party got back in they could get rid of the monarchy. Let's face it if the mess over the US elections is what it's like to be a republic give me a Monarchy any day.

The last monarch to use the special powers was Victoria who unconstitutionally refused to accept the resignation of her PM. She also with held, temporally, the Royal assent on one occasion.

Answer 2

Those powers are theoretical and will almost certainly never be used. The (uncodified) UK constitution is largely based on the notion of parliamentary sovereignty and the king/queen reigns only in conjunction with a valid parliament, and with the notion that the people are in fact sovereign (and parliament, their elected representatives, being the embodiment of that popular sovereignty) the idea that a monarch could rule without parliament is highly dubious. I just don't think Parliament would accept a monarch arbitrarily dissolving the house of commons, dismissing the government and assuming absolute power: Bear in mind even centuries ago there was a clear precedent of the house of commons declaring such an attempt by the monarch to be treason against the people and country; King Charles discovered parliament would even declare war upon the king in these circumstances.

There is only one possible way I could see the King/Queen assuming power. Say in the event of a massive attack from terrorists or a foreign power that obliterated the structures of government - PM, cabinet, opposition, and most members of the house of commons. Under these circumstances the king/queen would have to call new elections and in the interim appoint a new government even though that government would have no democratic mandate. Even here though I would think it highly unlikely the monarch would rule, although they would certainly be in very close communication with their new prime minister. Convention (world war 2) would suggest a 'National Government' would be appointed for the duration of the emergency, with the monarch instructing the PM to appoint to his cabinet senior people from the various major political parties. The new PM would likely be a former occupant of one of the 4 great offices of state (PM, Chancellor, Foreign Secreatry or Home Secretary) and much of his/her cabinet would have held cabinet office under various previous governments.

Answer 3

The possibility cannot be ruled out entirely. The last time these powers were used was by the Governor General of Australia - Kerr, perhaps 20 years ago. He dismissed the government and called new elections that the opposition won showing that he was in tune with the people, but it was exceedingly controversial at the time.
That said, the Royal assent has not been with-held for more than 300 years.

Answer 4

The Monarch has no Constitutional right to run anything, let alone the country. The Queen is 'Constitutional Monarch' and her 'powers' are limited to asking a suitable Minister to form a government.

Answer 5

Yes i do believe that the queen would use her special powers that she has Devinne right to use. i one situation i could see would be the government of the UK selling our sovereign powers to Europe as the government are perusing this as she know that the people are against such actions i believe she would dissolve Parliament and call an election any we would vote a party will the non European stance i also believe she would be admired for such actions. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!!!

Answer 6

I am depressed to read some of the replies. People seem to be willing to accept a dictatorship or military rule! Don't forget that for all its faults democracy is the least worst form of government. If you are against the current government it can be voted out peacefully - not so an absolute monarch or military dictatorship.

Answer 7

nicely staring on the way you interpret, king queen/monarchy, in all probability they have existed as long as guy. interior the earliest of recorded historic past there have been kings and queens, previous testomony, historical Egypt etc In historical circumstances, Britain replaced right into a determination of kingdoms wherein numerous kings ruled. positioned in simple terms, anyplace people have lived as a social group, there has been a hierarchy, and fairly a pacesetter, picked for capability, information, braveness etc. because of fact the society grew in numbers, and stepped forward so might the device of monarchy, i.e. the dynasty of leaders following on in succession. In Britain our monarchy has over 1000 year historic past and in spite of dissimilar nonsensical rumblings from some, will proceed for the foreseeable destiny. those are my suggestions, not a catalyst for further infantile ramblings!

Answer 8

I think it would be really interesting if she did, but I think she'd need a lot more help now than when she first started, because she sometimes seems a little out of touch with some modern day laws etc. Maybe with a little help from the younger princes she'd do a better job than any of the current political parties!

Answer 9

Kings and Queens are legacy of the past.In modern democracy they have no role.How ever the British are tradition bound to support a worthless system!

Answer 10

I believe mum is smart enough to watch her peas and ques, when it comes to tampering with government. There are many, many British subjects who resent her having any voice in government. A brazen act as you have described, could take the people over the edge in terms of royal involvement in the government.