Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
Your post manages to tangle itself up in contradictions. "What they don’t do is take the place of the Executive, on selective motions, which is exactly what they have done." So, which is it? Either you think they're taking the place of the legislature or you don't think they are.
|
No it doesn’t, you are just having a hard time understanding. I thought I was quite clear.
If Parliament has an issue with the Executive and believes they are pursuing and action that is reckless or may harm the nation.
What they should do is call for a motion of “ no confidence” and either replace the government with another one that commands support from the house or trigger an election.
What they shouldn’t do is take the place of the Executive by controlling the order paper of the house to control the house on selective matters and push through legislation, which is what they have done.
They have gone against the conventions of our unwritten constitution.
Is that clear enough for you? Or should I draw some pictures too.