Forum Topic

Privy Council

I am starting a new thread on this for clarity purposes. In addition to just learning that the President of the Privy Council is no other than Jacob Rees-Mogg, I found this of great interest too.  
So, the Lord President of the Privy Council is Jacob Rees-Mogg (also Leader of the House of Commons); the Rt Hon Mark Spencer is the Tory Chief Whip and Baroness Evans of Bowes Park is the Leader of the House of Lords.  They wished to deliver the PM's wishes. I think the Queen had very little choice but to sign.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2632d26 Comments

As it us on the tin: the Privy Council for the privileged to conspire and look after their own interests. 

Michael Ixer ● 2632d

Diane Abbott is a member of the Privy Council

Barbara Shillabeer ● 2632d

Yes, she is - I also learnt this today.  But she was not participating at today's Privy Council meeting.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2632d

Johnson and Rees-Mogg ignored and didn't consult the Privy Council as such. There's democracy for you. If I remember membership is quite wide

Michael Ixer ● 2632d

What clarification was needed Ivonne?

Sue Hammond ● 2632d

Jeremy Corbyn is a member of the Privy Council as well but he wasn't invited to the meeting either. The Privy Council has several hundred members but it doesn't look as if they get to vote on decisions like this. In fact I think their quorum is three, so it looks as if Rees Mogg and two like minded mates secretly got together and nipped up to Balmoral to see the Queen and the deed was done. British democracy in action again!

Peter Evans ● 2632d

As I said on an earlier post, proroguing Parliament is not a surprise, it has been discussed in public for months.

Bunny Payne ● 2632d

Can't understand  quite why there are so many but apparently there are 700 members of the Privy Council (more than there is  members of parliament)According to WikiThe Council is composed mostly of politicians (be they from the British government, other parties, or Commonwealth governments) and civil servants, both current and retired (since membership is for life). Among those politicians generally sworn of the council are Ministers of the Crown, the few most senior figures of the Loyal Opposition, the Parliamentary leader of the third-largest party (currently SNP Westminster Leader Ian Blackford), and a couple of the most senior figures in the devolved British governments, including the First Ministers. Besides these, the Council includes a very few members of the Royal Family (usually the consort and heir apparent only), a few dozen judges (the Supreme Court Justices, the Senior Judges of England and Wales, and the Senators of the College of Justice of the Inner House in Scotland) and a few clergy (the three most senior Church of England bishops).and https://privycouncil.independent.gov.uk/privy-council/The Privy Council dates back to Norman times and is one of the oldest parts of Government. (It) goes back to the earliest days of the Monarchy, when it comprised those appointed by the King or Queen to advise on matters of state.These days, however, the Privy Council is simply the mechanism through which interdepartmental agreement is reached on those items of Government business which, for historical or other reasons, fall to Ministers as Privy Counsellors rather than as Departmental Ministers.Although members of the Privy Council are appointed for life, only Ministers of the current Government participate in its day-to-day business and they are accountable to Parliament for all matters conducted through the Privy Council. The Ministerial head of the Privy Council Office is the Lord President of the Council.Privy Council business falls into two main categories:Prerogative business – where there is no legislation allocating the responsibility to a particular Minister, the Privy Council provides a mechanism for Ministerial advice to The Queen, since constitutionally The Queen acts only on such advice.Statutory business – where an Act of Parliament has given order making powers to either the The Queen in Council (Orders in Council) or the Privy Council (Orders of Council).

Lucille Grant ● 2632d

"As I said on an earlier post, proroguing Parliament is not a surprise, it has been discussed in public for months."Do we get to vote for it?

David Ainsworth ● 2632d

And, on Twitter also, Antonia Honeywell writes:- "And so, to everyone who ever defended the monarchy to me by saying it was an insurance policy against the abuse of democracy by power-hungry totalitarians, I say f@)k right off."

David Ainsworth ● 2632d

Antonia  is a writer friend of mine, David. Naturally I endorse her view lol

Lucille Grant ● 2632d

"Antonia  is a writer friend of mine, David."Well, she expressed what I was getting around to writing, but she did it better. Apologies for bowdlerizing her, but there are sensitive types here, I believe.

David Ainsworth ● 2632d

No need for apologies David.

Lucille Grant ● 2632d

Thank you Lucille for the information and apologies for this late reply.As you mentioned, only Ministers of the current Government participate in its day-to-day business and they are accountable to Parliament for all matters conducted through the Privy Council. It seems to me it was interpreted as Members "loyal" to the current political party at No. 10.Sadly, it is obvious the Queen had no alternative but sign the Order of Prorogation. Also, many people now blame the Queen for this.I find it unforgivable that they involved the Queen in this Brexit mess.  Such cowardice and a lack of moral fibre.Somebody in another thread mentioned coup d'état.  Could not agree more.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2631d

Thanks Lucille. I thought the membership was quite wide, thanks Ford looking up and confirming that. I ran out of time yesterday. As someone said on the radio while I was in the process of waking up (sorry didn't catch their name) this probably isn't unconstitutional (the UK doesn't have a defined constitution), it might be illegal if its done specifically or maliciously to stop the will of parliament, although that might be difficult to prove, but it is certainly manipulative as unlike a recess prorogation terminates a parliamentary session so all current legis!atiokn is terminated and parliament can't be recalled or reconvened easily, and this is the longest period of prorogation for something like flirty or more years: Bullingdon Club rules? Interesting how all those conservatives like Gove who said how bad prorogation was a few weeks ago are now saying it's perfectly normal. As I said elsewhere, given its really the privy council who control the royal prerogative and the Queen just rubber stamps it perhaps we could save money by scrapping the monarchy, particularly when they have rather dubious members associating with convicted paedophiles and nicknames like Randy Andy? 

Michael Ixer ● 2631d

Now now, I hope that you are not confecting outrage as the utterly genuine, honest and real Jacob Rees-Mogg would so eloquently phrase it?

David Ainsworth ● 2631d

David. Just promoting debate about our democracy, our "leaders", and their inconsistencies and idiosyncrasies.

Michael Ixer ● 2631d

Hello Michael,I agree with you, well, mostly....  I think the Queen does one heck of a lot more than just rubber stamp decisions...  The monarchy does not cost us that much (£0.69 per person) but the income they generate for the UK is really considerable.All those in line to the throne do behave rather well.  But, as in any family, you get those who do not do so.  I think the monarchy is larger (in every sense of the word) than just Randy Andy......

Ivonne Holliday ● 2631d

Hi Michael - one of the major problems we have is that we don't have a written constitution as my French partner keeps reminding me. Not sure I'd want a President  Boris though although the French electoral system seems to work better than ours.

Lucille Grant ● 2631d

Lucille, Ivonne. On one level I feel a hereditary monarch - particularly one who is also head of the "established" Church of England - is an anachronism in a 21st century, multicultural, democracy. However, it's difficult to make comparisons as constitutions and presidential roles vary; we're all familiar with Trump, Macron, Putin and now Bolsanaro but I bet many of us would scurry to Google to remind us of the German president's name whereas we all know Mrs Merkel is the Chancellor. So on another level I think the Queen does a good job under the circumstances (even Trump seemed to  try to be in his best behaviour when meeting her) and obviously she is at present also Head of the Commonwealth, a position that could gave more significance in consolidating international relations if we crash out of Europe? And to be honest, comparing Charles and William with some world heads of state I do rather feel "if it ain't broke don't fix it". I just think these questions need to be asked from time-to-time, and we should recognise that in spite of how it's dressed up to appear so all executive power rests with the government who advises her to sign documents. Sometimes in business one goes for a " satisfactory and sufficient " solution rather than trying (and perhaps failing) to achieve the optimum solution: perhaps today's monarchy fits that test?

Michael Ixer ● 2631d

Not sure why all the fuss. They were due to close parliament for 90% of this period whilst they all went on the p..s at annual conferences.So much outrage over a few days. Anyway it'll give you all a march or two to go on and get your daily steps up. Perhaps the pm is simply looking to draw a line and move on

Andy Pike ● 2631d

"So much outrage over a few days."Really, just a few days eh?, well then the PM recognising the importance of this question could have actually ADDED a few more days for debate and motions, especially as he is so confident of victory."Perhaps the pm is simply looking to draw a line and move on"Yeah, that'll be it. No ulterior motive. I am sure that he is just wanting to draw a line (or cross his fingers and cry "truce"). But move on, onwards and upwards. Towards his goal.------------Sensible words from Hugo Rifkind on Twitter:-"Politically, as opposed to morally, I reckon the big miscalculation with proroguing is the decision to lie about why they're doing it."

David Ainsworth ● 2631d

Andy, Parliament was due to go into recess, not prorogation, and this prorogation of five weeks is the longest since 1945 for no apparent reason. Other posts explain the significant differences between recess and prorogation - Google them if you don't believe it. The problem is Johnson appears to be dishonest - see the end of this letter to 1 nation Conservatives to gain their support for his PM bid! I don't know if any were foolish enough to believe his comments on prorogation. (Posted by a reliable journalistic FB friend.) So the problem is many of us distrust Johnson - it's one of the few things that apparently Farage and I would agree on 🙂

Michael Ixer ● 2631d

Hello Michael,Your post reminded me to the famous "there can be no change without continuity, there can be no continuity without change".I think the Queen has proved to be a strength of continuity in the sea of change the UK has seen during her reign.  She is the stability needed at all times.Politicians come and go, some successful others not so much.  But, having lived in South America for quite a few years under their presidential system, I can categorically and emphatically say that having a Head of State like the Queen, always above politicians, is not only an incredible privilege but also a godsend. Imagine Boris Johnson, Jeremy Corbyn or, heavens forbid, Nigel Farage as Head of State? The fact that she was "ambushed" into signing the Prorogation Order reflects on the quality of our current politicians but certainly not against her.

Ivonne Holliday ● 2631d

Thanks for posting this letter signed by Johnson. He  just continues to lie constantly.

Lucille Grant ● 2631d

The source for this was apparently the Tory MP for Eddisbury: https://twitter.com/Sandbach/status/1166749095723245568?s=20

Michael Ixer ● 2630d