Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
I think the speaker would work to allow a vote of No Confidence, which with the threat of a prorogue may well be won, before the PM had the chance. In which case the palace only needs to stall rather than take a position.
|
In my scenario the palace isn’t taking a position - merely indicating what position it would take if asked. The key is “if asked” ... anyone being considered for an honour, for example, is asked, whether they would accept it *if* they were asked. In that sense, nobody actually offered a gong by the Queen ever refuses.
The way Royal power is used is a key aspect of our constitutional settlement, and the threat of its use, or the threat of withholding it, is arguably even more powerful in situations like this.
Raab is a long way from power at the moment but his words are ill-advised and I suspect if he did get the top job he would go cool on the idea of prorogation long before it became an immediate issue. There are plenty of people more intimately acquainted with the constitution than he is who would most likely spell this out for him before it even got to the point of the palace informally warning him that the queen would decline to cause a constitutional showdown between the Crown and Parliament.