The Queen and Her Prime Ministers


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Absolutely stating the obvious from the Queen. She must be very frustrated at the mess that Brexit has caused her government and her country.
She must be very concerned about the whole thing.

Couldn't agree more with Tarlita.

I find it more than plausible that QEII would have expressed such sentiments, not just once but several times. Not least in recent months.
To me this smells like either an opposition attempt to tarnish the government even further, by leaking frustrated quotes from a person who is universally respected by the people. - It says just as much about the opposition as the government, if that is the case.
Or a leak by someone who genuinely share QEII's frustrations, and who wish to stir the public to force the politicians into action. An act of desperation perhaps?
Or someone within the government circle who is going bananas over the MPs inability to agree on even what day it is let alone agreeing on a political outcome of Brexit.

IMO there is a long list of people who could be tempted to leak this.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely stating the obvious from the Queen. She must be very frustrated at the mess that Brexit has caused her government and her country.
She must be very concerned about the whole thing.

I agree - I feel the same way! HM knows that royals and politics don't normally mix, but Brexit is so bad that even she has felt the need to speak up... what a mess the government have got us in.
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49493632

The government has asked the Queen to suspend Parliament just days after MPs return to work in September - and only a few weeks before the Brexit deadline.

Boris Johnson said a Queen's Speech would take place after the suspension, on 14 October, to outline his "very exciting agenda".

But it means MPs are unlikely to have time to pass laws to stop a no-deal Brexit on 31 October.

Tory backbencher Dominic Grieve called the move "an outrageous act".

He warned it could lead to a vote of no confidence in Mr Johnson, adding: "This government will come down."

But the prime minister said it was "completely untrue" to suggest the suspension was motivated by a desire to force through no deal.

He said he not want to wait until after Brexit "before getting on with our plans to take this country forward", and insisted there would still be "ample time" for MPs to debate the UK's departure.

"We need new legislation. We've got to be bringing forward new and important bills and that's why we are going to have a Queen's Speech," he added.



Two things it will be safe to assume -

The Queen's senior aides will be annoyed that the government has chosen to go down this route which will be seen by some as dragging the Queen into politics

The Queen will be annoyed at having her holiday interrupted by this
 
Well it is up to the Queen now to follow the PM’s advice , which I believe she will, or not. If The Queen refuses to suspend Parliament from mid-Septembet to mid-October as proposed by the PM, he will have no alternative but to resign from office.

I assume the remainers will likely go to court to try to stop the prorogation, but I think the chances of success are remote. If prorogation goes through, a no deal Brexit is all but guaranteed on October 31 unless the European Union compromises on the Irish backstop, which I think is also possible .

Of course there could be a vote of no confidence in the government in the first week of September, but if the remainers cannot agree on an alternativa PM , a general election will be called under the FTPA and nothing prevents BJ from setting the election date after October 31. With the automatic dissolution of Parliament 25 working days before the election, there would be no time for remainers to pass anti-Brexit. legislation either before the Brexit deadline.
 
Last edited:
As the BBC point out, the Queen really has no choice. I heard a good view on the Queen's role from an constitutional academic on BBC when this was being talked about as a possibility a few months back.

As he said, basically the Queen listens to the Prime Minister and it is up to parliament to get the PM to listen to them. So if MPs see this as such an outrage they can do something about it - vote through new legislation quickly in the house or vote no confidence in the PM. A vote of no confidence doesn't even necessarily mean an election, if the Government looses there are 14days for parliament to come up with an alternative government, if they can't only then is there an election. IMO and not trying to get into too much politics, the problem that the PM is hoping to exploit is that the opposition parties can't come together.
 
Last edited:
I thought the sovereign is not dragged into politics. Is Johnson trying to use the queen as cover if Brexit goes sideways?
 
As you said , it is unfortunate that the Queen has been put in that position, but both MPs and the public understand that political responsibility for prorogation falls on the PM, so I don’t see any lasting damage to the monarchy.

As you also said, there could be an alternative government following the vote of no confidence, but that would require the Labour Party to agree to a caretaker , national unity government headed by someone other than Jeremy Corbyn. I don’t think that is likely,.
 
ITV Political Editor on Twitter:
"This feels like the constitutional crisis we’ve been expecting: PM saying he has to suspend parliament, Speaker replying it’ll happen over his dead body. The Queen is now in the hideous position of being the rope in tug of war between PM and MPs, between executive and legislature."
 
Why exactly is the PM suspending Parlement? What is the point/ use of doing so?
 
Why exactly is the PM suspending Parlement? What is the point/ use of doing so?

To ensure that the opposition will not have enough time to prevent something the wast majority of this country does not want - a no-deal Brexit.

This is a fairly open political coup - roping the Queen into it is just the type of thing that we could expect from the current PM. Another potential scapegoat figure in the long list of potential scapegoats.
 
Breaking news; The Guardian is reporting that Jeremy Corbyn has written to the Queen requesting an audience.

It is a very irresponsible move putting the Queen in an uncomfortable position. To be confirmed.
 
Breaking news; The Guardian is reporting that Jeremy Corbyn has written to the Queen requesting an audience.

It is a very irresponsible move putting the Queen in an uncomfortable position. To be confirmed.

Might be too late - I'm hearing the Balmoral meeting has happened & the order has been made.

Edited to add this might be an unfounded rumour so don't take it seriously - lots of stories whirling around people's phones today.
 
Last edited:
As I said before, nothing good was going to come out of Brexit. The whole idea of Brexit has thrown the U.K. into a bad tailspin.
 
This is the last thing a 93 year old Queen needs during her respite from her busy life. I know how much she loves being at Balmoral.

If I had to guess what was going through her head right about now, it would be "Off with their heads! The lot of them!" :lol:
 
This is the last thing a 93 year old Queen needs during her respite from her busy life. I know how much she loves being at Balmoral. " :lol:




Since we are on TRF, it is appropriate to see how the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic is trying to spin today's events.


Boris Johnson has placed the Queen “in the firing line” over Brexit, according to the anti-monarchy campaign group Republic. It floated the possibility that a parliamentary crisis could become a royal crisis.
Republic’s spokesman, Graham Smith, said Johnson had thrown British politics into a deep crisis “and has shone a spotlight on the impotence of the Queen and the role of the monarch’s powers”.
“Already people are petitioning the Queen to intervene, but she won’t. Not because she can’t, but because the Queen’s first priority is always the preservation of the monarchy.
“But Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament has created a unique crisis for the Queen. The convention is that the Queen does as she’s told by the PM. But in normal times the PM has the full support of a majority in the Commons.”
“Constitutionally the Queen is free to decide whether or not to go along with the government’s plans or support the sovereign parliament. So the Queen has a choice to make, and she’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t.”
Smith added: “Will the public care about the constitutional niceties? How much the Queen fulfils the public’s expectations and hopes will determine how much the parliamentary crisis becomes a royal crisis.”

For the record, a YouGov poll in the run-up to last year’s royal marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle found that seven in 10 Britons support Britain continuing to have a monarchy.
Monarchists were also slightly more likely to be leave voters, with those who cast a ballot in 2016 splitting 56/44% in favour of Brexit. Those who were against Britain having a royal family voted 65/35% in favour of remain.
 
The Queen will do what the PM asks because that's the convention provided he has the confidence of the House of Commons. Currently, there's been no vote of 'no confidence' to prove that he doesn't have it.
 
I just saw the news report.

In one word Murky.

Interesting days ahead following the mess that is Brexit in the UK.

I have never heard the word prorogue before so had to look it up.
Means; to suspend parliament with dissolving it.
EDIT; sorry i should have said. Discontinue a session of parliament.

I hope we don't have to have a crash course in constitutional law of the UK to understand the coming days and weeks.
I know the British don't have a written constitution as such and use precedence instead. All very confusing at tmes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Liberal Democrats have confirmed that their leader Jo Swinson has written to the Queen protesting the decision and requesting a meeting.

The BBC are reporting that Jeremy Corbin has done the same and requested a meeting with the Queen also.

So this really has put the Queen in it, whatever she decides to do in regards to meeting them or not she will be criticised.

The BBC has reported that the President of the Privy Council Jacob Rees-Mogg has been to Balmoral and made the formal request and is now returning back south. Not surprisingly there have been no pictures or comment from BP on this.

In theory parliament will only lose a few days (4 days) as October usually sees parliament in recess (not sitting) while each political party holds their party conference. However, there was a lot of talk of MPs voting to make the recess shorter as it would come so close to Brexit. There is also the issue that when parliament is prorogued any legislation not yet passed is 'forgotten' and has to be started again from scratch, thus severely limiting MPs ability to vote through legislation to prevent a no deal Brexit.
 
Last edited:
Well, this is all rather frightening, if also very interesting from a purely political standpoint.

Boris is attempting a coup. Real leadership is needed in this moment. Sadly, I do not believe that will be found with the Queen much less with Boris and co (including Corbyn).

It seems around the world, our leaders are rather gleefully jumping head first into disaster.
 
Perhaps a vote of no confidence will be a solution? As I'm not British nor that informed on the workings of the government, I only know bits and pieces of what I've learned here. Wouldn't a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson seek to resolve the problem without dragging HM, The Queen into it?

On one hand we have a 93 year old monarch that has had a stellar reign for 67 years. On the other hand, Parliament seems to go through Prime Minsters lately like toilet paper.

This conversation is not only interesting, but educational for me.
 
The reality is the Queen has very little power, we are in a constitutional crisis now, but would have also been if the Queen had turned down the request from the PM.

The reality is, the only way we can get out of this now is for Parliament to take control. They could (and bear in mind the Speaker is on side as such) have a vote of no confidence, assuming Johnson lost that would leave 14 days to find a new government or the country face an election. As one constitutional expert said, the higher power in the land is really parliament, if given a choice of do what parliament vote for or what the PM asks her the Queen will do what parliament votes.
 
The Queen approved the request, according to BBC.
 
HMQ has continued her 60 year 'habit' of abiding by the advice of her PM, and assented to the prorogation of her Parliament.

There has been a prorogation of Parliament pretty much every year before a Queen’s/King’s Speech since time immemorial.

But for some reason the media have never reported any previous prorogation as a “shutdown” or “suspension” of Parliament...

As for Mr Bercow, [the Speaker] this is not the 17th century and he’s no John Hampden. Under his speakership Brexit has been debated to death in the Commons to no avail.

The MP's that voted against a deal three times in Parliament, the Speaker and all those who have spent the last 3 years attempting to subvert the result of the 2016 referendum have caused this...
 
Last edited:
In reality there was no doubt she would.
It really is though shocking to see a government so readily throw HM under the bus in effect.

Can you just imagine the Queen's Speech on 14th October? The streets will be full of protestors who (given that the PM and his ministers will already be in Parliament) will direct their anger at the Queen as she makes her way and likewise MPs and Lord will I suspect make their voices heard during what should usually be a sedate and to be honest boring speech.

The government argues that they are simply adding 4 days extra to the October recess. However others have pointed out that during a recess select committees can still meet, ministers can be summoned to answer and all legislation waits until MPs return. When it is prorogued, which it will be for almost 5 weeks (the longest since 1940s), select committees do not sit and all legislation not already passed has to start again so in effect parliament has no power (which is great for a PM plagues by division in the House).
 
I'm intrigued to see what the Palace does about the requests from the Leader of the Labour Party (HM's Official Opposition) and the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, amongst others for meetings with the Queen.

If they refuse such requests does it make it look like HM is refusing to listen to anyone else and a puppet of the government. Bear in mind that as a Privy Counsellors himself the Leader of the Labour party has a right of access to the Queen on matters of public affairs.

But equally if she agrees to meet them what can she say at the end of it? She can't really just change her mind because they have met her.
 
Whether Mr Corbyn , and the rest are prepared to traipse up to Aberdeenshire for what will [inevitably] be 'a wasted journey', remains to be seen..

As you say HMQ will not change her mind, she has taken the advice of her PM [as she is constitutionally bound to do], and that is already 'signed and sealed'.
 
Last edited:
Might be too late - I'm hearing the Balmoral meeting has happened & the order has been made.

Edited to add this might be an unfounded rumour so don't take it seriously - lots of stories whirling around people's phones today.

So it wasn't a rumour then...

As this thread is about the Queen's role in our politics, I'll refrain from adding my opinion of the Prime Minister & his actions as that would be off topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom