Why doesnt the Queen take power??

Question

With so many greedy and selfish politicians that dont really care about upholding the magna-carter at all.

Why doesnt the Queen do what the people want and close parliment and oust Gordon Brown, also since she is head of both the military and legal system there is no reason why she cant.

I really think the Royalty should help us out more. Oust the gits who arnt doing a good job..

Answer 1

wow i have no clue but that guy or what ever that was rude he rude because he's an a-$$ not cuz hes AMERICAN cuz i'm AMERICAN to and not rude like him so plz don't say sh-it like that plz thankyou hope you get a good answer and have a nice day

Answer 2

A little think known as the 1689 Bill of Rights.

It is the basis of England's constitutional law.  Signed by William III and Mary II, it stripped the monarchy of all its power and gave the control of the country to Parliament.  

The monarchy no longer had the belief of the "Divine Right of Kings".

England's last, true absolute monarch was Elizabeth Tudor.  When she died in 1603, the absolute monarchy died with her.

It's useless talking about the Magna Carta too.  Much of it has been repealed by Parliament following the signing of the 1689 Bill of Rights.  Only clauses 36, 38, 39 and 40 are still in effect.

Sorry to disappoint you :-)

I don't think we should lose the monarchy because they have done a lot for this country, they generate a lot of revenue for the country.  I think the monarchy should stay seated right where it is.

Answer 3

I think, that as a British subject, you should learn more about your form of government, which, even WE, in the states, know is a Consitutional Monarchy.

The Queen's powers are limited, by design.

The road leading to the current form of government only BEGAN with the (and I will spell it slowly, to make sure you can read it properly)  M-a-g-n-a C-h-a-r-t-a.

As a legal document, the Magna Charta no longer applies.

Answer 4

The Queen doesn't have to. It just might be a tradition or something.

Answer 5

She can't

Answer 6

she is not allowed.

Answer 7

I'm not exactly sure....but I think it's because the Queen is only a figure head now. Her power was taken away by the people of england with the paliment system. She has no real ability to take charge of England's government again...not without the support of the people and military at the very least.

I could be wrong....but I think she's only in charge of military and legal matters in name only....no power to back it up at all.

Answer 8

Too much work for one person.    I think Queen Victoria did just that and dismissed a PM that she did not like and replaced him with one that she favored, but the government didn't last very long.

I guess the main reason is she prefers to reign and not rule.    Seems like everyone in Parliament likes to argue.  Maybe she just doesn't want to argue with people.

Answer 9

The Post Office can't deliver the mail in 24 hours and it's called 'The Royal Mail' with the Queen's head on the stamps.  If HM the Q doesn't care about that insult to her dignity, then she is unlikely to bother herself about more important matters such as the erosion or the UK's ancient liberties under recent governments.

Rather like the series of Popes, our monarchy seems more keen on its continued survival than its useful purpose.

God help us all; the army remains loyal and available at short notice to solve the problem you allude to but who will lead?

Answer 10

She doesnt really have the power to do that. Her powers these days are limited and a lot of them are traditional or ceremonial.

And would you really want a non-elected party to just close parliament, oust the prime minister and take over the country?

I think in other places they call that a coup and troops move in to restore order.

That would be a sight to see - bowing, saluting and handcuffing all at the same time.

EDIT: You didn't actually get it wrong. Just the spelling. The MAGNA CHARTA and the MAGNA CARTA are the same document.

Answer 11

There's more politics in royalty than there is in politics!! She can't without the Parliaments consent, yet the Parliament cannot not run without the Queen's consent.

It's really weird but then isn't all politics?

Answer 12

Britain has never actually been an absolute monarchy. Monarchs throughout our history have always had to rule by consent. Whether that consent was coming from Barons, The Church or Parliament. The most obvious and most cited case of royalty trying to assume absolute power is the case of Charles I. He believed in his God given right to rule as he saw fit without interference and as a result there was the civil war, Charle's execution and the establishment of a republic. So no monarch since has dared defy Parliament in the same way.

However, to my understanding it is still theoretically possible for the Queen to dismiss Parliament and assume direct control of the government, but why would anyone do that? That would mean that every aspect of British life would be brought directly under her control, aspects which previously were handled by hundreds of politicians would now be her personal responsibility. Today's society in Britain would be impossible for one person to control.

Answer 13

Many intelligent people in the UK think that, rather than taking power, she should take a powder and bring the anachronistic monarchy to a close.