In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note.
Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon.
All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting.
On July 14 2022 03:35 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: But he said he is still staying till October lol
Its not up to him. The conservative party decided September 5th new leader will be announced.
The Tory party cannot officially remove the PM, Boris could stay PM despite not being leader of his party. If Boris does not resign then I believe the only way to force him out is a vote of no confidence in parliament but the Tories are loathe to do that. Or they could wait for the next general election.
If he refuses to go after the party elects a new leader, I’m pretty sure the queen would intervene and sack him. But it’s not going to happen he will go, people are too paranoid.
But we don't know for certain. Parliament has a mechanism for telling the queen to sack the PM, which is a vote of no confidence. The queen has steadfastly remained out of politics, only doing what she is told to do. (The rules are vague though.).
It would not be the first constitutional crisis triggered by Boris and people suggested the queen become involved then too, but she obviously didn't.
We really need a better system.
Well, if you had a non-hereditary head of state like a president with similar powers, then the same thing would happen. Parliament would ask the president to sack the prime minister. The president would have no choice but to do it. The only thing different from now is the title of the person doing the sacking.
I meant we need a system where everything is explicitly written down and does not rely on centuries of convention. Nor should it assume the politicians will act honourably. It is currently assumed that a prime minister will resign when they are removed as leader of their party. Afaik there are no formal rules for what happens if they do not.
The queen appoints the PM under the condition that the PM commands the confidence of the house of commons. Hence the idea of a vote of no confidence. I don't think it legally binds the queen into sacking the PM though.
On July 14 2022 15:44 GreenHorizons wrote: Wild to see "it depends on what the queen does" in 21st century politics
These things don't matter until they do. Before Boris it was understood that politicians would behave 'gentlemanly' so questions such as 'what happens if the PM does not resign after being replaced as party leader?' were never asked.
It is no different than the US not having anti-nepotism laws until JFK.
I'd say a queen making important political decisions for a country in the 21st century is distinct in a number of ways but I certainly am not suggesting the US doesn't have gaping holes in its political system as well.
I meant that we have not needed to change it with our current queen, and these things tend to stay the same until they go wrong and then they are changed. The system isn't pre-emptively changed to safeguard against abuse, sadly, the system is changed afterwards to stop an abuse recurring. Such as JFK's nepotism leading to a change in US law.
The same is also true of our House of Lords. There have been some calls for reform but I doubt any serious reform will happen until the system goes very badly wrong.
I’m all for the Queen sacking Johnson if we get to actually see it.
The Queen finally losing her cool after a whole life of biting her tongue and sucking it up. Hitting Boris with some ceremonial mace and going ‘oh fuck off already’.
I’m picturing the scene where Yoda is shuffling about and hitting R2D2 with a stick.
The Queen acting without the consent and will of Parliament, in this case the majority Conservative party will be the death knell of the monarchy. I would assume that Boris Johnson not resigning will find himself sidestepped, and another government would simply be approved by the Queen.
On July 15 2022 00:01 WombaT wrote: I’m all for the Queen sacking Johnson if we get to actually see it.
The Queen finally losing her cool after a whole life of biting her tongue and sucking it up. Hitting Boris with some ceremonial mace and going ‘oh fuck off already’.
I’m picturing the scene where Yoda is shuffling about and hitting R2D2 with a stick.
All for it.
We're more likely to see the Queen kung fuing her way through parliament beating up every tory with her fancy diamond necklace.
On July 15 2022 05:57 Dangermousecatdog wrote: The Queen acting without the consent and will of Parliament, in this case the majority Conservative party will be the death knell of the monarchy. I would assume that Boris Johnson not resigning will find himself sidestepped, and another government would simply be approved by the Queen.
Boris could have refused to resign his leadership of the Conservative Party if he wanted to fight till the very end. The writing was on the wall however, and any delay by him would just have made his exit more ignominious.
This tory debate in Scotland (only one I listened to partially) is a sign of the trumpification the conservative party. Cheap, broad brush, derogatory, generalized statements about "other people" (scottish politicians, "workers") as well as vague promises of tax cuts helping the economy and thus poor people that have no base in reality of the front runner Truss... These are moments of despair. Are our countries really run by these clowns? Identity politics paving the way to cheap shot country and the nasty jeering displayed by the audience supports them for that.
On August 18 2022 06:08 Artisreal wrote: This tory debate in Scotland (only one I listened to partially) is a sign of the trumpification the conservative party. Cheap, broad brush, derogatory, generalized statements about "other people" (scottish politicians, "workers") as well as vague promises of tax cuts helping the economy and thus poor people that have no base in reality of the front runner Truss... These are moments of despair. Are our countries really run by these clowns? Identity politics paving the way to cheap shot country and the nasty jeering displayed by the audience supports them for that.
It is sad, so very sad and scary.
It is rather disheartening, especially given how ineffective the opposition is at punching back through such nonsense.
On August 18 2022 06:08 Artisreal wrote: This tory debate in Scotland (only one I listened to partially) is a sign of the trumpification the conservative party. Cheap, broad brush, derogatory, generalized statements about "other people" (scottish politicians, "workers") as well as vague promises of tax cuts helping the economy and thus poor people that have no base in reality of the front runner Truss... These are moments of despair. Are our countries really run by these clowns? Identity politics paving the way to cheap shot country and the nasty jeering displayed by the audience supports them for that.
It is sad, so very sad and scary.
The 'other'ing of people has been a common tactic for years. In 2019 Johnson demonised remainers and anyone who disagreed with his view of Brexit. In 2015 Cameron exploited the division between English and Scottish by arguing that a vote for Ed Miliband was a vote for Alex Salmond. If you go back further, the Tories demonised all poor people as lazy scroungers and criminals.
The main thing that has changed is the Tories' target demographic.
(It is not only the Tories though. Labour are guilty of other-ing too, but I think to a lesser extent.)
You'd think they'd have some more pressing news, like, I dunno, the new PM appointing an anti abortion deputy PM, or the ongoing cost of living crisis, or the government admitting to yet more covid funding corruption.
But nah, stop the presses, a 96-year-old is going to die.
On September 09 2022 00:34 Garrl wrote: You'd think they'd have some more pressing news, like, I dunno, the new PM appointing an anti abortion deputy PM, or the ongoing cost of living crisis, or the government admitting to yet more covid funding corruption.
But nah, stop the presses, a 96-year-old is going to die.
She’s a constitutionally important 96 year old. It’s not surprising that she’s dying, it’s important that she’s dying. She’s the head of state.
On September 09 2022 00:34 Garrl wrote: You'd think they'd have some more pressing news, like, I dunno, the new PM appointing an anti abortion deputy PM, or the ongoing cost of living crisis, or the government admitting to yet more covid funding corruption.
But nah, stop the presses, a 96-year-old is going to die.
I'm not for monarchy in general but she was a good person nonetheless, I can't recall any bad news she was involved in. Much better than some party leaders who caused nothing but scandals. Also, 70-year rule and working for your country without much private life is true devotion.
On September 09 2022 00:34 Garrl wrote: You'd think they'd have some more pressing news, like, I dunno, the new PM appointing an anti abortion deputy PM, or the ongoing cost of living crisis, or the government admitting to yet more covid funding corruption.
But nah, stop the presses, a 96-year-old is going to die.
She has been Queen longer than most people have been alive. She's seen the rise and fall of UK as the global superpower, and the coming and going of tens of governments. The current one is just a blip on her decades of rule. I have dozens of portraits of her within a couple meters of me(cash/coin), and probably thousands in my building alone.
I can't think of many people more iconic or newsworthy. May she rest in peace.
On September 09 2022 02:43 Zaros wrote: RIP Your Majesty - the Greatest Queen we could have asked for.
This, been a pleasure to have celebrated two Jubilee's in my lifetime and she has brought so many people together, regardless if you liked the royal family or not, every celebration for her was always a community effort and that is great.
RIP and good luck to Charles for following that amazing reign!
I am, and shall remain a staunch Republican, but I found Elizabeth to be a personally admirable, formidable woman, one who understood what public service and duty mean.
EPT
