DaisyAnne
And the USA, with its effective, elected head of state, did so much better, didn't it Grany
What you describe as " political manoeuvres" are acts that are allowed under the constitution - that of resigning to show a lack of confidence. There is no single law against doing such a thing. It is simply rubbish to say it is unconstitutional. It's certainly not great that a government has got itself in this position. That, however, is a fault that should be firmly laid at the feet of the Conservative Party - not the Queen.
This harping on, about giving outright power to an elected head of state is beginning to sound like a search for a Mummy Bear or a Daddy Bear you can cling on to. We are grown-ups; we mess up. Perfection is not one of our attributes. However, the onus is on us to think critically not to rush for the arms of someone bigger who will save us from 'difficult' thinking.
Our problems lie with Parliament and blaming anyone else is a low blow. Parliament still has democratic control and can vote "No Confidence" in the Government if necessary. In that case, the Queen would dissolve it.
So why not tell us what Parliament, where the power lies, can do instead of aiming off the topic yet again.
A parliamentary system should put parliament at the centre, accountable only to the voters. In the UK parliament is weak in the face of government power, and that's largely because of the Crown and the monarchy.
The Crown gives the government huge powers to take decisions without parliament or to control parliamentary business, whether that's deciding when parliament will be running or having the power to ensure proposed laws they disagree with have little chance of getting passed.
Parliament is weak in the face of government, largely there to do what it's told. But in terms of the power of make laws, change our constitution and determine our rights, parliament is all powerful.
In the UK parliament is sovereign, which means it's the highest power in the land. No court can overturn a decision made by parliament, no treaty can override laws passed by parliament. A court could rule that a law conflicts with a treaty, or with another law, but a judge can't override or scrap that law.
That's not how a democracy should work. Parliament is there to work for us, not to rule over us. And given the control government has over parliament, the current constitution ends up concentrating huge amounts of power in the hands of the Prime Minister and government ministers.
In terms of domestic law the British government is one of the most powerful in the democratic world.
A real parliamentary democracy
The answer to this is simple enough. There's no need to throw the whole constitution out the window. We just need to make every part of it more democratic and re-balance power between people, parliament and government. Here's how.
