I know they once had all the power, but is the parliamentary government in full control now, or can the royals actually affect politics, administration, and control over the country?
Edit: Thank all of you so much for taking the time to answer. This includes all of you with theories of power behind the curtains. It’s actually quite fascinating, and I am still combing through comments.
A very special thanks goes out to all the people that have “politely” corrected my use of the word, “England”. I would remind you that questions are for the point of learning. I appreciate your contribution.
In: Other
Are those two things exclusive? Ceremony is a powerful force.
Yes, but not really. In theory the King/Queen can refuse to give Royal Assent to a Bill that is going to be made into law, but that’s more of a formality, it hasn’t happened in about 200 years and any monarch that refused would find themselves on their ear pretty quickly. For all practical purposes, the monarch is a figurehead who the government governs on behalf unilaterally.
They technically have ultimate authority on any new law being published. Any bill the UK government passes has to go through Royal Assent to actually become law, which is approval by the monarch. These days there is a system of delegation in place, so it’s not actually dependent on them.
If the monarch prevented an extremely unpopular bill from becoming law via royal assent, there would likely be no problem. If they prevented a popular bill from becoming law, they would risk a revolution.
The royal family also owns a significant amount of the land in the UK, and revenue from that land technically belongs to them, although they’ve essentially made the government a landlord, taking a static fee instead. This includes hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland, prime shopping areas, over half the coast, and more.
Everyone who is extremely wealthy has real political power. So, yes, it’s just ceremony, they don’t have any decision power codified in law, but you have to be pretty naive to think they don’t have any real influence in politics
England hasn’t had a royal family since 1707. It’s the King and or Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In theory the monarch still have a lot of power. He can veto any laws, dissolve the parliament (until they reform), command the armies, etc. But this is all theoretical and it would probably not go down well if he tried to use any of his powers. In the 1600s there was even a war between the King and the Parliament which resulted in King Charles being convicted of treason by the Parliament and sentenced to death. The legal grounds for the trial was dubious but that does not matter when you have the majority of the population with you. There are other examples as well from other countries where the monarch were dethroned for vetoing bills that passed the Parliament. So even though the British monarch does theoretically have a lot of power it is most likely not possible to exercise any of those powers.
On paper they are very powerful, but if they tried to use that power they would be removed quickly.
Currently their biggest power which they regularly use is being able to talk to the prime minister, something that lobbyists would kill for.
It’s cosmetic, but has an overly powerful role in the country. The royals and the media have a tight relationship. They need each other. The press uses the Royals to flag wave about how Great Britain is (British exceptionalism, empire, past glories) which of course puts the Royals in a good light. The press also loves the endless sagas. Margaret. Diana. Megan. The royals like this less, but live with it.
The thing I hate about the royal family is that its endurance perpetuates the class system in the UK. If you have a king, you have princes, and dukes, and barons…and all of that shit.
You don’t need it.
Australia and Canada work very well without it. Loads of other places have Royal families that aren’t on the TV every day (Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, etc).
Put it another way. Does Taylor Swift have any real power?
She’s not an elected official or anything, But when she speaks, people listen and take action. That in and of itself is power.
Many constitutional monarchies have an odd form to it (outside specifically of the English);
In the letter of the law, they often have quite a lot of power. Being able to dismiss government/parliament at will for example. Or being able to refuse to sign laws.
One layer deeper, they actually have less power, because either a parliament can override them legally or in practice. As a monarch you do not want to really test your ability, because in the worst case scenario a country can get rid of their monarchy.
Even one layer deeper they actually have quite a lot of power. Usually soft power because they a) know all the important people and b) are filthy rich. Which are two of the things that almost define power.
Latest Answers