Queen distressed by Blair legacy

[Womble]

By god, she aint the only one.
CCTV everywhere, lack of liberties, high crime, massive unmetered immigration, need I go on!!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/que...205078744.html

[Xaccers]

If only she'd dismissed the governmnet and called a general election

[lostandconfused]

or had him executed in 1997

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by lostandconfused

or had him executed in 1997

Would have saved a lot of trouble.

[downquark1]

Why is it reported in an Australian paper and not here?

Can anyone say they are surprised? Can anyone say this makes a difference?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

If only she'd dismissed the governmnet and called a general election

Well, the Queen (ok her representative) unhappy with the Australian goverment did actually disolve it and call an election.

[jkat]

isnt the sidney morning herald a murdoch owned paper??

Originally Posted by jkat

isnt the sidney morning herald a murdoch owned paper??

I believe it is owned by Fairfax Media, part of John Fairfax Holdings Limited.

[cookie_365]

Erm, no fan of Blair, but this is such an obvious fabrication.

Unnamed 'friends' who talk in journalismese, who know the subject so closely they tell them their innermost thoughts, but are quite happy to stitch them up to a C division journo

As well as the fact that the Queen has no right to interfere with the Government (and she didnt). Other than that I dont think the Royal family has ever really liked Blair + Labour so its a safe article to write anyway.

---------- Post added at 18:55 ---------- Previous post was at 18:52 ----------

Originally Posted by Womble

CCTV everywhere, lack of liberties, high crime, massive unmetered immigration, need I go on!!

It may not be down to Labour, But Crime has been going down since mid 90's in most weathly countrys. Immigration peaked in 2004 and now its starting to come down, also unmetered is quite a emotional word in this context are you refering to illegal immigration which by defination cannot be metered.

[Xaccers]

She has every right to interfere, it's her goverment.
She could even dismiss them (oh if only!)

Originally Posted by Xaccers

She has every right to interfere, it's her goverment.
She could even dismiss them (oh if only!)

She can only do that in theory, its not a power she can realistically use anymore. If she did it would pose massive questions over the role of the monarchy and its interference in the democratically elected government using a power which has been ceremonial in the UK for over 100 years.

Just because you could like her to do it because you dislike the current government does not mean it is the right thing to do as I am sure you know.

[Xaccers]

Perhaps you aren't aware of the last time those powers were used to remove a goverment?
1975 in Australia.
Just because someone chooses not to do something they are entitled to do, it doesn't mean they are no longer entitled to do it.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Perhaps you aren't aware of the last time those powers were used to remove a goverment?
1975 in Australia.
Just because someone chooses not to do something they are entitled to do, it doesn't mean they are no longer entitled to do it.

I did say in the UK.

But I am not saying she cannot do it legally, I am saying it would be the most reckless and stupid thing she could do. It would make a mockery out of our political system and it would endanger the idea of the monarcy, giving a massive boost to those who would the UK to turn into a Republic.

You really think a unelected Queen/King should be able to dismiss governments? Bearing in mind that you cant control it so she could just as well dismiss a government you like as one you dont?

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Damien

But I am not saying she cannot do it legally, I am saying it would be the most reckless and stupid thing she could do.

How is reckless and stupid to do the right thing for her people, if things were that bad, it needed her intervention she'd have a duty to act regardless of personal consequences