Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oc...to-legislation

Why is this allowed to happened in a democracy? There is lots of legislation that affects me so why I am not able to reject or change laws?

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

because we elect those to make the choices for us apparently.

It would be impossible to have a referendum on every single law change or change to legeslation in the country.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

I think the point is that someone who isn't elected appears to be able to make some choices for us.

And everyone is keeping stumm about why this is allowed. Quite shocking to be honest.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Actually, why they have to do it is explained here http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/oc...ent?intcmp=239

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Again Prince Charles sticking his nose into things that to be perfectly honest he should not be sticking his nose into.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Ah. Cheers. I was wondering why the reason didn't feature more prominently.

Either way, it's a shocking anachronism.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

So we can be clear that there is no underhand business going on. ;)

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:46 ----------

Try reading the articles before posting.:rolleyes:

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Mmmm l read the Guardian online every morning.:)

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

You obviously missed the bit in Ben's link when you read it yesterday..

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

"gets a veto" and "must give consent" are two rather different propositions and it pays to notice which of those terms is actually used in the article under discussion.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Headline:

Also:

No information is forthcoming over whether this is a simple formality, or if the Prince has actually requested changes to planned legislation.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Headlines are never a good guide to the facts. Believe me, I know. ;)

That said, when both Grauniad articles linked in this thread are read together, the one thing that is clear is that the Grauniad hasn't got a clue whether these powers of consent are ever actually used, or if they amount to a formality, i.e. consent must be sought, but consent is never withheld.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Yes, and that's the rub. This being a formality with proposed legislation never being contested is one thing. If the Prince does contest legislation, it's something that needs sorting straightaway, in a system where the powers of the monarchy are supposedly ceremonial.

But nobody will tell which it is.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

From my reading it's clear they do not know if he was sought concessions to the bills in order to provide consent. However I think the story is that he would need to provide consent in the first place, as far as I was aware there was only Royal assent which was automatically granted to every bill that made it to that stage.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

If it was just a box ticking exercise, then the Government could asy that no bill were changed after consulting the Prince of Wales. As they are not saying that, I would conclude that bills have been changed after consulting Prince Charles

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Try actually reading it :rolleyes:

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

they havent got a clue because the information was withheld, you dont see that as suspicous?

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Don't I?

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

you answered a question with a question, should become a MP :)

you dont know if you find it suspicous?

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

I know what I think, I'm just fascinated by your oratorical style. Your question is constructed in such a way as to require either agreement or denial. If you think I should be an MP perhaps you should be a tabloid hack. ;)

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

So what do you think? Personally, I think it's suspicious that nobody will say if Charles has used the powers he has to request changes to proposed legislation. I think we have a right to know. It seems to me that it's pretty fundamental to the way the UK operates as a democracy.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

I simply asked you if you thought it was suspicous, then that made you go all defensive for some reason. You still havent answered it of course.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

I suspect that when you do find out it won't have made any difference to you,me and the rest of the universe...;)

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Which would be fine. I have no problem with this being the equivalent of Royal assent where it's just a formality and bills get approved automatically. I do have a problem with not being told or given any assurances regarding what the deal exactly is here. This goes right to the heart of our democracy, it isn't 'just one of those things'.

Frankly, I'm a little surprised how you can get all passionate about the right to protest, and brush aside potential interference of one of the royals in the legislative process without question.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Actually you didn't ask me if I thought it was suspicious. You constructed your post to suggest you already think I find it suspicious and to challenge me to deny it. Forcing a premise on the person you're asking a question of is a tactic beloved of Paxman and the like. In an open discussion of ideas, neutral, open questions are much more preferable, e.g. "do you think it's suspicious?" is neutral; "you don't find it suspicious that ... ?" is not. The former asks for information; the latter implies disapproval of one possible answer.

And I know I haven't answered the question yet. Unlike your good self, when confronted with an entirely new scenario I previously knew absolutely nothing about, I prefer to conduct an open-minded search for additional information before forming a view. One blatantly muddled article in the Grauniad is not enough for me to form suspicions about anyone's motives.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Don't see what the fuss is about ,surely the same Princes perogative would have applied to previous Dukes of Cornwall and why shouldn't the land owner of such a large area be consulted on matters that directly affect him or his tennants

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Because our system of government is supposed to be a parliamentary democracy rather than a feudal system.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Because we have lived with this system for a very long time and I very much doubt that Charles would do anything to bring the constitution he is a part of to it's knees over anything venal.I trust the man,can't see what he has ever done to make him seem an untrustworthy member of the royal family.Frankly I trust him more than I do the entire houses of Parliament.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

It has been for a few hundred years ,but i'm sure that his predecessors had the same privilege and no-one kicked up a fuss .

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Trust is good I suppose, but at the same time you acknowledge that this issue could bring the constitution to its knees.

I realise that the UK constitution is a somewhat cobbled together string of historical accidents, so some of these issues are unavoidable. What worries me however is that no-one appears to be willing to give the public any assurances that these powers aren't acted upon. As I said before, I think we have a right to know what the deal is here. Brushing it under the carpet makes a mockery of our democracy.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

If they're got nothing to hide then why don't the publish all the details? If any policies were changed what have they got to be frightened of?

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

Because the operating principle of the Civil Service is not to divulge anything you don't have to.

"if you're not hiding something then you would publish it" doesn't cut any ice with them, and nor should it - as an argument it's flawed anyway, because it suggests that covering something up is the only reason not to submit it to scrutiny.

Re: Prince Charles gets to veto government bills
 

sorry if thats how you understood it, the way I meant it was asking you if you found it suspicous. If you dont then thats fine, everyone has their own view.