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.
Abstain, largely because I need to do a lot more research to make an informed decision
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.
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
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.
This bill is in cessation.