Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 599 posts

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#101

Post by markdown »

crumbshot wrote: post #91
etrevino wrote: post #13

I used to work as a scholar of Britain (specifically executions in Early Modern England, but you pick up a lot along the way) and I've tried to explain to a lot of people the amount of influence and control that the monarch actually holds. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing. The Queen can't create legislation, she can restrain it. She is purely a moderating influence in this sense. She could, in theory, name…

> I've tried to explain to a lot of people the amount of influence and control that the monarch actually holds. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing. She used her powers to get an exemption from transparency laws with regards to her personal wealth: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-que... , and Charles did the same to ban his tenants from purchasing freeholds: https://www.theguardian.com…

> Also, every member of the royal family should be stripped of their wealth and exiled.

What about billionaires?

You know, millionaires don't need all their money either.

How about we take all their money and exile millionaires, billionaires, and the monarchy?

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#102

Post by pasabagi »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #95
pasabagi wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps the idea that convention and precedent is the only thing holding the British system together makes it stronger. Coronavirus has been a pretty good litmus test for which countries have good governments, and which countries do not. The UK has consistently led the charts in terms of deaths and infections. I think it shows the fundamental defectiveness of the system itself - a defectiveness that has been pretty…

> since english people have a cultural prohibition against complaining. Complaining about the status quo . If you ever visited Britain, you'd see how much Brits complain. See: whenever it's raining. Or sunny. Or just grey. Or drizzling. Or foggy.

I am English. I have also lived in Germany for several years. I can tell you that there is absolutely no comparison. Germans expect things to work, and write letters if they don't. English people expect things to be broken, and just want to go on with their day. Perhaps complaining is the wrong term - but for example, where my parents live, the train service has the trick of closing one out of two toilets on the train to save on cleaning. That would be literally unimaginable in any other western european nation, because everybody would complain.

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#103

Post by User23 »

DaedPsyker wrote: post #88
User23 wrote: post #46

The Queen is also literally above the law and the military is sworn to her personally and not the government. Of course British history has shown the effectiveness of extralegal measures for dealing with bad monarchs so those powers are still limited.

The monarch isn’t above the law, it has been granted immunity from being sued but this is all entirely on the gift of parliament. Inside the robing room used just before she addresses the House of Lords is a copy of the death warrant for Charles I as a little reminder of who really is in charge.

The courts are literally the Queen’s. As for Charles I that was the result of losing a civil war and in case it’s not blindingly obvious exactly the kind of extralegal remedy I was referring to.

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#104

Post by Apofis »

etrevino wrote: post #13

I used to work as a scholar of Britain (specifically executions in Early Modern England, but you pick up a lot along the way) and I've tried to explain to a lot of people the amount of influence and control that the monarch actually holds. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing. The Queen can't create legislation, she can restrain it. She is purely a moderating influence in this sense. She could, in theory, name…

Except she has not exercised her right to stop the Brexit which is entirely damaging to the United Kingdom and which the population was lied into by their current prime minister Boris Johnson. She also will not abdicate to allow someone younger and with more sense to actually make the decision.

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#105

Post by pasabagi »

s17n wrote: post #89
pasabagi wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps the idea that convention and precedent is the only thing holding the British system together makes it stronger. Coronavirus has been a pretty good litmus test for which countries have good governments, and which countries do not. The UK has consistently led the charts in terms of deaths and infections. I think it shows the fundamental defectiveness of the system itself - a defectiveness that has been pretty…

That's ridiculous - in the US, at least, our failure to contain the virus was clearly due more to a substantial portion of the population not wanting to contain it (and this ambivalence being correctly reflected in the government's actions) than any failure of governance. Of course, these people were a minority, but that just leads to the question of the appropriate protection of minority rights in a democracy, to wh…

Well, in the UK, there are quite clear policy failures that led to deaths (two late lockdowns, 'eat out to help out', etc). It's not hard to see if you look at the graphs, and match them up to when the lockdowns were put in place.

Polls showed that people in general were quite keen on lockdowns, as it so happens.

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#107

Post by deepsun »

StavrosK wrote: post #99
crumbshot wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've tried to explain to a lot of people the amount of influence and control that the monarch actually holds. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing. She used her powers to get an exemption from transparency laws with regards to her personal wealth: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-que... , and Charles did the same to ban his tenants from purchasing freeholds: https://www.theguardian.com…

> one of the many reasons why the monarchy should be abolished. Doesn't that just shift corruption to the next party? I don't see why logically switching the ruling party would abolish corruption. It might even increase it.

Speaking from a very corrupt eastern european country -- practice shows that each change of power lessens corruption somewhat -- who knows what next leaders will dig out, better stay safe. The longer same functioneers stay in power, the deeper is corruption.

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#108

Post by crumbshot »

StavrosK wrote: post #99
crumbshot wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've tried to explain to a lot of people the amount of influence and control that the monarch actually holds. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing. She used her powers to get an exemption from transparency laws with regards to her personal wealth: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-que... , and Charles did the same to ban his tenants from purchasing freeholds: https://www.theguardian.com…

> one of the many reasons why the monarchy should be abolished. Doesn't that just shift corruption to the next party? I don't see why logically switching the ruling party would abolish corruption. It might even increase it.

Corruption amongst other members of the upper and ruling classes is not a good reason to avoid dealing with the most undemocratic of them all.

Also, the wider principle is that there shouldn't be an untouchable hereditary ruling class at all. It's an absolute nonsense.

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#109

Post by chillwaves »

markdown wrote: post #101
crumbshot wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've tried to explain to a lot of people the amount of influence and control that the monarch actually holds. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing. She used her powers to get an exemption from transparency laws with regards to her personal wealth: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-que... , and Charles did the same to ban his tenants from purchasing freeholds: https://www.theguardian.com…

> Also, every member of the royal family should be stripped of their wealth and exiled. What about billionaires? You know, millionaires don't need all their money either. How about we take all their money and exile millionaires, billionaires, and the monarchy?

Can you even make a case that monarchs earned their wealth?

Re: The Queen has more power over British law than we thought

#110

Post by admissionsguy »

markdown wrote: post #101
crumbshot wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've tried to explain to a lot of people the amount of influence and control that the monarch actually holds. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing. She used her powers to get an exemption from transparency laws with regards to her personal wealth: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-que... , and Charles did the same to ban his tenants from purchasing freeholds: https://www.theguardian.com…

> Also, every member of the royal family should be stripped of their wealth and exiled. What about billionaires? You know, millionaires don't need all their money either. How about we take all their money and exile millionaires, billionaires, and the monarchy?

Exclude first-generation millionaires and we have a deal.
Post reply on HN