B1038 – Royal Prerogative Powers Bill 2016 (Second Reading) Watch

This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
B1038 – Royal Prerogative Powers Bill 2016 (Second Reading), TSR Labour Party

Royal Prerogative Powers Bill 2016
An Act to distribute the powers of the Crown to the Prime Minister and Parliament

BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—

1: Definitions
(1) The Royal prerogative is a body of customary authority, privilege, and immunity, recognized in common law and, sometimes, in civil law jurisdictions possessing a monarchy, as belonging to the Sovereign alone.
(2) The prerogative of mercy is the right and power of the Sovereign to pardon an offender.
(3) Ne Exeat Regno is a writ which issues to restrain a person from leaving the kingdom.

2: Prerogative of Mercy Reform
(1) All power concerning the prerogative of mercy shall be transerred to the home office, attorney of devolved regions and the Supreme Court.
(2) The Monarch will no longer have the power to pardon convicted persons.

3: Overseas Territories
(1) Power of recognising foreign states will be transferred from the Monarch to Parliament.
(2) Power of annexing territory will be transferred from the Monarch to Parliament and the Monarch will no longer have discretion as to the extent to which the government will take over the former government's liabilities.
(3) Power of altering British territorial waters and ceding territory will be transferred from the Monarch to Parliament.
(4) Ne Exeat Regno will be removed.

4: Armed Forces
(1) Power of authorising the use of the armed forces will be transferred from the Monarch to Parliament.
(2) The Prime Minister is to be the commander in chief of the armed forces.

5: Treaties
The signing of treaties will be carried out by Prime Minister, not the Monarch

6: Immunity from the Law
The Crown will no longer have the power to enter upon, take and destroy private property.

7: Extent, Commencement and Short Title
(1) This Act extends to the United Kingdom.
(2) The provisions of this Act come into force on the 1st of January 2017.
(3) This Act may be cited as the Royal Prerogative Powers Act 2016.


Notes
Governmental powers implemented on the advice of the Prime Minister and Cabinet should be subject to parliamentary scrutiny and require parliamentary approval. Important decisions such as whether to authorise the armed forces or not should be decided by an elected Parliament, not an unelected Sovereign. The royal prerogative slows the ratification of legislation and is an uncessary obstacle. The royal prerogative is a waste of parliamentary time and it slows the ratification of legislation.

Changes for the second reading:
Spoiler:
Show
- Fixed Term Parliament Act repeal has been removed
- Notes adjusted
0
tengentoppa
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
I welcome the removal of the fixed term parliament act repeal. It was obviously a mistake on the part of the drafter of the bill.

But the bill is still entirely deceitful. Royal prerogative powers are not truly exercised by an "unelected sovereign" and have not been for centuries. They are exercised by the government of the day, which holds the confidence of parliament. This misrepresentation in order to give the royal prerogative power the appearance of being undemocratic is deplorable.

The notes also suggest a lack of scrutiny of these powers, when in fact they are subject to judicial review and any excesses of power were reigned in by the then Appellate committee of the House of Lords.

The notes also present the royal prerogative powers as an impediment to efficient government when nothing could be further from the truth. On the contrary, requiring parliamentary approval for the various royal prerogative powers would significantly slow down the enactment of legislation and make government more inefficient.

Our entire constitution, including parliamentary sovereignty, the two-party system and FPTP, is geared towards efficiency. Prerogative powers, exercised by the government of the day, are a necessary and accountable part of that process.

Now that we have established that the supposed justifications for this bill are falsehoods, the question then arises as to why this bill was put forward. It would appear to be a cynical attempt to get rid of the monarch by the back door, rather than calling the referendum that such a momentous constitutional decision would require.

It is a reprehensible bill, and I encourage all members to vote nay.
1
Andy98
  • Study Helper
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
Abstain, largely because I need to do a lot more research to make an informed decision
0
SakuraCayla
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
The reason for the bill is not to remove the Queen, we know such a bill would not pass, and we can't have a referendum till next term I believe and I doubt a Monarchy referendum would be high on the list. We respect this is the view of the majority of the House and instead have decided to try a change in the relationship between the Monarch and the House of Commons. A halfway point the two different views, trying to reform some of the issues those opposed to the Monarchy have that aren't related to the Monarchy itself existing.
0
Wellzi
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
If anything, I wish the monarch was more involved in governing the country. It's regrettable that Her majesty has chosen to take even more of a backseat than her predecessors have
0
3121
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
Nay. Half of what is listed is already a parliamentary power but stated as a monarchy power to maintain that relationship between parliament and the monarch and show they work together, the monarch always acts on behalf of its government, parliament and the people. It's important we build on that trust by having the monarchy act on behalf of parliament and the government to demonstrate the system works and not take away the neutrality aspects of politics they can participate in.
1
3121
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
(Original post by Wellzi)
If anything, I wish the monarch was more involved in governing the country. It's regrettable that Her majesty has chosen to take even more of a backseat than her predecessors have
I agree. So long as she isn't too forceful of her opinions and takes both sides but leans to one like you do in a GCSE English exam, I think the public would like her especially since she upholds British values.
0
Wellzi
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
(Original post by zayn008)
I agree. So long as she isn't too forceful of her opinions and takes both sides but leans to one like you do in a GCSE English exam, I think the public would like her especially since she upholds British values.
Exactly. The monarch should be capable of unifying all Britons across party lines, and maintain a sense of unity across the country
1
username2585877
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
Aye
0
CoffeeGeek
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
Nay.
0
Saracen's Fez
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#11
This bill is in cessation.
0
Saracen's Fez
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#12
This bill has gone to a third reading.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you give blood?

Yes (50)
9.52%
I used to but I don't now (14)
2.67%
No, but I want to start (189)
36%
No, I am unable to (122)
23.24%
No, I chose not to (150)
28.57%

Watched Threads

View All