Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

tjwmason

(14,819 posts)
3. muriel gave a very thorough answer
Sat Dec 24, 2011, 07:42 AM
Dec 2011

I'd just add that such an act would be unable to remove the requirement that a parliament last five years maximum without the explicit agreement of the Lords (in which the coalition has no majority, as noted above).

The Lords has the power to delay most legislation, no power over financial legislation, and still retains veto power over legislation affecting the length of parliaments. This was last used in 1945, the 1935 parliament had its life extended (one year at a time) due to the war effort; in 1945 after VE Day but before VJ Day the Commons supported a further year's extension but the Lords refused to play ball.

Thus if such a bill were passed, it wouldn't be able to affect the requirement for the government to face the voters every five years (plus a few weeks for the election campaign).

Of course, even with British party discipline (which is far higher than in Congress), the thought that all M.P.s from any party would support such a bill is extreme.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»United Kingdom»ignorant question about U...»Reply #3