Why did Brown have to 'ask' the Queen's permission to call an election ?

[Funky_Gibbon]

No it wouldn't. It's just the way things are done in this archaic system we have.

 

You don't think that people would be outraged at one person overturning the results of a democratic election on a whim?

[danot]

No, same process as every other PM since our current system has been in place.

I can't recall him being elected.

[Gormenghast]

You don't think that people would be outraged at one person overturning the results of a democratic election on a whim?

 

The Queen is just the titular (Oooh matron) head of the government. She couldn't really overturn a government decision.

 

And if she did, think of the loss of income to the family. It won't happen.

[Chris_Sleeps]

So what traditions do make sense?

Very few, really. In the grand scheme of things. Yet i'm only for scrapping the display of power by an old woman. Why go and ask her? "Ma'am, is it okay if the masses vote?" Yet she has no power to say no.

 

You are very correct about the tourists though. Nobody travels to France, or Germany, or Italy, or Spain, or Portugal; do they?

[DragonofAna]

You don't think that people would be outraged at one person overturning the results of a democratic election on a whim?

 

I do not think it would result in a cry to get rid of the monarchy. It would cause some sensational changes. But monarchists would still win the day, and the queen would still be where she is.

 

And I suppose it would depend on who came into power. I dare say that if by some fluke the Klu Klux Klan were elected and the queen refused to accept them then most people would be quite happy.

[Chris_Sleeps]

I do not think it would result in a cry to get rid of the monarchy. It would cause some sensational changes.

She'd break the law; it would be illegal. The 1689 Bill of Rights says we have 'Freedom to elect members of parliament without interference from the sovereign.'

[daftlad]

In theory yes but no monarch will ever test that theory because 24 hours later the country would be in anarchy with mass protests. It'd be the end of the monarchy.

 

now that would be a great idea, an end to the free loading royal family and the inbreds that are there

[DragonofAna]

now that would be a great idea, an end to the free loading royal family and the inbreds that are there

 

Idiot.

 

She'd break the law; it would be illegal. The 1689 Bill of Rights says we have 'Freedom to elect members of parliament without interference from the sovereign.'

 

Sorry but the Queen is the law

 

She couldn't do any worse than the government at running the country. Now off with their heads. :hihi:

[Gormenghast]

You should all read Samuel Pepys diary, and the history of the Civil War to know where all this comes from.

[Andy]

She'd break the law; it would be illegal. The 1689 Bill of Rights says we have 'Freedom to elect members of parliament without interference from the sovereign.'

 

Who'd lock her up though? Don't police officers and the armed forces swear allegiance to the crown? And the court case.... The crown versus the crown?