The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[VILLAMARV]

7 minutes ago, Enda said:

In this sense I nearly prefer the term "unwritten" to "uncodified"

[bickster]

1 hour ago, Enda said:

Lads, your a monarchy can be both constitutional and theocratic. Those two things are not exclusive.

Your monarch is the head of the Established/official church, and Catholics are forbidden from holding the post. How is that not theocratic? What adjective would you use to describe that, other than theocratic?

Figurehead. Not actual head of church. The head of the Church is the Archbishop of Canterbury. The leader of the country is the Prime Minister. Which is all a load of bollocks and personally I’d drop the monarchy and the church like a hot potato but Herr Madge really is only symbolic and Wealdstone no real power

[chrisp65]

Just now, bickster said:

 only symbolic and Wealdstone no real power

[HanoiVillan]

6 minutes ago, bickster said:

Herr Madge really is only symbolic and Wealdstone no real power

I find that incredibly Harrowing. 

[snowychap]

51 minutes ago, Enda said:

You are being rather obtuse as you know well what I mean and are literally arguing semantics. "Unwritten" is an accepted term (if not universally so) for the UK constitution. You ask what conventions are unwritten, and the answer is nearly all of them. Otherwise they would essentially be statute. In this sense I nearly prefer the term "unwritten" to "uncodified" -- I think the UK Cons is quite codified in that it is systematic and largely well understood, but unwritten! -- but clearly neither terms are technically false.

No, I wasn't being obtuse. I was being direct, in that I directly disagreed with your 'unwritten' as I would to anyone else using the same phrase.

I didn't infer that you actually meant uncodified when you said unwritten, that is true. Why should I? Who is to say that this is actually what you meant? It wasn't obvious because it is often not used in that way.

Could you give me a few examples of the conventions that are unwritten? 'The answer is nearly all of them' is no answer.

Your last line clearly indicates that we're probably, actually, in agreement (and were from the start).

Edited April 2, 2019 by snowychap

[snowychap]

Some sense:

 

[tonyh29]

3 hours ago, snowychap said:

I think that I'm arguing .....

Not very well.  



[snowychap]

2 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Not very well.  



Not a surprise to see no credit for the original (copied) point.

Edited April 2, 2019 by snowychap

[Enda]

11 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Could you give me a few examples of the conventions that are unwritten? 'The answer is nearly all of them' is no answer.

The primary example that I am aware of was in 2010 when there was no formal mechanism for establishing a government.

To quote a Westminster report:

Quote

 

2 Constitutional Rules and Conventions    6. Government formation takes place within a constitutional framework which is largely unwritten and based on precedent.

 

My understanding is this led to the publication of the Cabinet Manual as a guideline for future government formation, but that this is unenforceable by the courts.

Relatedly, and I could be wrong, but I don't believe it is written anywhere that cabinet ministers must be members of either House.

[VILLAMARV]

I couldn't agree more with snowy on this one.

The wrong word is being used. There's no reason to use unwritten when we have the word uncodified. However much it's misuse is normalised.

The inference is all important.

[Enda]

7 minutes ago, VILLAMARV said:

I couldn't agree more with snowy on this one.

The wrong word is being used.

In your opinion. Which is not universally accepted by any standard. For example, in an article called "Britain's unwritten constitution", a professor of constitutional law at KCL writes:

 

Quote

From a comparative perspective, we have what is known as an ‘unwritten constitution’, although some prefer to describe it as ‘uncodified’ on the basis that many of our laws of a constitutional nature are in fact written down in Acts of Parliament or law reports of court judgments. This aspect of the British constitution, its unwritten nature, is its most distinguishing characteristic.

Features of Britain’s unwritten constitution

Another characteristic of the unwritten constitution is the special significance of political customs known as ‘conventions’, which oil the wheels of the relationship between the ancient institutions of state. These are unwritten rules of constitutional practice, vital to our politics, the workings of government, but not committed into law or any written form at all. The very existence of the office of Prime Minister, our head of government, is purely conventional. So is the rule upon which he or she is appointed, being whoever commands the confidence of the House of Commons (the majority party leader, or head of a coalition of parties).

 

 

Edited April 2, 2019 by Enda
i was too snarky

[NurembergVillan]

[VILLAMARV]

15 minutes ago, Enda said:

In your opinion

Obviously, kind of the nature of the beast....

16 minutes ago, Enda said:

Which is not universally accepted by any standard.

rarely is

 

[VILLAMARV]

 

18 minutes ago, Enda said:

For example, in an article called "Britain's unwritten constitution", a professor of constitutional law at KCL writes:

I don't dispute that many examples of it's usage can be cited. (And I know someone else asked you to cite examples)

Having a 'distinguishing characteristic' as he puts it could refer to the equivalent of a mole lets say. Huge swathes of our constitution are written.

To be able to point at Parliamentary procedure as an example seems strange to me in a literal sense as that convention is 'written' on/about more than most things in this country's history.

These conventions are remarkably well documented and yet uncodified resulting in them being open to change.

It's not doublespeak, because the words are too similar, but the misuse has an unedifying effect.

Britain has an Unwritten into Law Constitution is a bit of a mouthful. Britain has an Uncodified Constitution might make people reach for a dictionary. Britain has an unwritten constitution can mislead/misinform people.

In my opinion

 

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, Enda said:

The primary example that I am aware of was in 2010 when there was no formal mechanism for establishing a government.

Largely unwritten, largely unwritten.

Surely, the point of that is that the future is not prescribed in every detail taking in to account every possible outcome.

Who, prior to 2010 could have possibly forecast 2010?

Quote

My understanding is this led to the publication of the Cabinet Manual

Which is now written.

Quote

that this is unenforceable by the courts

Parliamentary sovereignty.

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, Enda said:

Which is not universally accepted by any standard.

This is a bit shit again. It doesn't even make sense.

Indeed your post then goes on to rather understand what people are getting at.

FFS, we all agree. Get on the tricycle.

[Seat68]

Damn this last page is bad and you should all feel bad. 

[Genie]

https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/27/pro-brexit-group-really-regrets-holding-second-referendum-poll-9035987/

Quote

A ‘pro-Brexit’ group’s attempt to engage its followers with a second referendum poll has hilariously backfired. Britain Bites Back decided to run a poll on Facebook in response to the Revoke Article 50 petition attracting more than five million signatures. They purportedly wanted to prove how ‘pointless that petition really is’ and assumed its fan base of supposed Leavers would back them up.

If another referendum was held today, how would you vote?’ they wrote. But it didn’t turn out as planned as thousands of voters said they would now choose to Remain, winning the poll by 90%

 

 

[peterms]

 

[HanoiVillan]