UK without a government

**Wulfhere** · 05-09-2010, 10:20 PM

I must say this is all very interesting - I wonder how long the UK can go on functioning without a government? Yes, I know the prime minister and other ministers are still in place, but they have no authority, no mandate to govern, and are not doing so - in fact, they appear to be doing nothing at all. We currently have no parliament either, since it's not due to assemble until 18 May - when a motion of no confidence will no doubt boot Brown out of office if nothing has been decided by then. Constitutionally, at what point would the Queen feel obliged to step in and arbitrarily appoint someone as prime minister? There is no precedent in modern times.

**Germanicus** · 05-09-2010, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by Wulfhere

I must say this is all very interesting - I wonder how long the UK can go on functioning without a government? Yes, I know the prime minister and other ministers are still in place, but they have no authority, no mandate to govern, and are not doing so - in fact, they appear to be doing nothing at all. We currently have no parliament either, since it's not due to assemble until 18 May - when a motion of no confidence will no doubt boot Brown out of office if nothing has been decided by then. Constitutionally, at what point would the Queen feel obliged to step in and arbitrarily appoint someone as prime minister? There is no precedent in modern times.

As Morgan Freeman quoted in a film, ...there will be no panic........YOU WILL PAY YOUR TAXES.

**~~Treffie~~** · 05-09-2010, 10:27 PM

It's a funny situation to be in. Bridget Prentice is still the Justice Minister even though she is no longer in government.

**Wulfhere** · 05-09-2010, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by KEN

It's a funny situation to be in. Bridget Prentice is still the Justice Minister even though she is no longer in government.

One gets the impression that all these ministries are just chugging along through institutional inertia, with no one at the helm.

**Murphy** · 05-09-2010, 10:30 PM

Absolute Monarchy FTW!

**Germanicus** · 05-09-2010, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by Aequoreus

Absolute Monarchy FTW!

Only someone who is jobless, lazy, and an embarrasment to his parent's working class ethics would post this^

**Wulfhere** · 05-09-2010, 10:47 PM

If the politicians can't sort it out, it is the Queen's constitutional duty to impose a solution. The only two occasions in her reign when a similar decision arose were in the mid 70s. Ted Heath in 1974 lost the election but didn't resign until the Monday, under pressure from the palace it is believed. The following year the Queen sacked the Australian prime minister Gough Whitlam for acting unconstitutionally (but on that occasion was probably not personally involved in the decision).

**~~Beorn~~** · 05-09-2010, 11:08 PM

[YOUTUBE]RZ2oXzrnti4[/YOUTUBE]

**Murphy** · 05-09-2010, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by Germanicus

Only someone who is jobless, lazy, and an embarrasment to his parent's working class ethics would post this^

'cause you just know so much about me right mate? Germanicus, I am sorry, but filthy old men who have a thing for me isn't exactly up my alley. Perhaps you could try some where else to get off?