Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Will the British Parliament prevent “Brexit”?In a Westminster system, why would the PM voluntarily dissolve a majority government?Does the United Kingdom, in practice, have other constitutional principles which limit the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty?What power does the Queen have in the event of a Hung Parliament?Why don't Sinn Féin take their seats in the UK parliament?What are the limits to the power of the City Remembrancer?Why doesn't the UK hold a second Brexit referendum to clarify what the public wants from Brexit?Have the UK Conservatives lost the working majority and if so, what does this mean?How has the division of power worked, between govt and parliament, in modern Britain?Why don't hard Brexiteers insist on a hard border to prevent illegal immigration after Brexit?

What do I do when my TA workload is more than expected?

How to make Illustrator type tool selection automatically adapt with text length

One-dimensional Japanese puzzle

Can the Right Ascension and Argument of Perigee of a spacecraft's orbit keep varying by themselves with time?

What was the last x86 CPU that did not have the x87 floating-point unit built in?

Using dividends to reduce short term capital gains?

Is there a writing software that you can sort scenes like slides in PowerPoint?

"... to apply for a visa" or "... and applied for a visa"?

Drawing vertical/oblique lines in Metrical tree (tikz-qtree, tipa)

Nested ellipses in tikzpicture: Chomsky hierarchy

Did the UK government pay "millions and millions of dollars" to try to snag Julian Assange?

60's-70's movie: home appliances revolting against the owners

What other Star Trek series did the main TNG cast show up in?

What does Linus Torvalds mean when he says that Git "never ever" tracks a file?

Single author papers against my advisor's will?

How to handle characters who are more educated than the author?

Was credit for the black hole image misappropriated?

The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551

Does Parliament need to approve the new Brexit delay to 31 October 2019?

Why did Peik Lin say, "I'm not an animal"?

What is the padding with red substance inside of steak packaging?

How to substitute curly brackets with round brackets in a grid of list

Can the DM override racial traits?

Windows 10: How to Lock (not sleep) laptop on lid close?



Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Will the British Parliament prevent “Brexit”?In a Westminster system, why would the PM voluntarily dissolve a majority government?Does the United Kingdom, in practice, have other constitutional principles which limit the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty?What power does the Queen have in the event of a Hung Parliament?Why don't Sinn Féin take their seats in the UK parliament?What are the limits to the power of the City Remembrancer?Why doesn't the UK hold a second Brexit referendum to clarify what the public wants from Brexit?Have the UK Conservatives lost the working majority and if so, what does this mean?How has the division of power worked, between govt and parliament, in modern Britain?Why don't hard Brexiteers insist on a hard border to prevent illegal immigration after Brexit?










2















Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?










share|improve this question




























    2















    Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



    What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



    Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?










    share|improve this question


























      2












      2








      2








      Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



      What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



      Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?










      share|improve this question
















      Does Parliament hold absolute power in the UK?



      What I mean by absolute power is: presumably they can make illegal or legal whatever they want. Even going so far as to disenfranchise their own electorate.



      Is this correct, or are there any checks on the power of Parliament?







      united-kingdom parliament






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 3 hours ago









      JJJ

      6,48522457




      6,48522457










      asked 5 hours ago









      BenBen

      3,2551539




      3,2551539




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3














          The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




          The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




          The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



          Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




          The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







          share|improve this answer




















          • 2





            Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

            – CoedRhyfelwr
            4 hours ago











          • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago












          • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

            – Ben
            4 hours ago












          • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago






          • 1





            @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

            – origimbo
            4 hours ago


















          2














          Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



          The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






          share|improve this answer























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "475"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader:
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            ,
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40542%2fdoes-parliament-hold-absolute-power-in-the-uk%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            3














            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







            share|improve this answer




















            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago












            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago












            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago















            3














            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







            share|improve this answer




















            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago












            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago












            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago













            3












            3








            3







            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.







            share|improve this answer















            The Fixed-term Parliaments Act means they have to respond to the electorate, eventually. In fact this provision has existed for a long time in various forms




            The Septennial Act 1715 provided that a parliament expired seven years after it had been summoned; this period was reduced to five years by the Parliament Act 1911.




            The House of Lords can exercise some restraint in terms constitutionality of laws, although given the lack of a single, written constitution in the UK that's a complicated exercise.



            Presumably the Queen can withhold Royal Assent on some completely insane law, but there isn't much in the way recent precedent.




            The last bill that was refused assent by the sovereign (on the advice of ministers) was the Scottish Militia Bill during Queen Anne's reign in 1708.








            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 4 hours ago

























            answered 4 hours ago









            FizzFizz

            15k23796




            15k23796







            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago












            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago












            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago












            • 2





              Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

              – CoedRhyfelwr
              4 hours ago











            • @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago












            • I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

              – Ben
              4 hours ago












            • @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

              – Fizz
              4 hours ago






            • 1





              @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

              – origimbo
              4 hours ago







            2




            2





            Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

            – CoedRhyfelwr
            4 hours ago





            Given parliament could simply repeal the FTPA (presuming royal assent), I don't really think that's much of a check on their power.

            – CoedRhyfelwr
            4 hours ago













            @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago






            @CoedRhyfelwr: It's a good question what would happen if the HoC passed a law declaring themselves MPs for life (either implicitly or explicitly). But as with all such hypotheticals, given the lack of a written constitution, we can only speculate.

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago














            I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

            – Ben
            4 hours ago






            I suppose my question revolves around disenfranchising their own electorate. In effect changing the rules of the game such that the electorate’s vote is diminished in some way, in future general elections. Presumably this is well within the power of the Parliament.

            – Ben
            4 hours ago














            @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago





            @Ben: do you mean like gerrymandering?

            – Fizz
            4 hours ago




            1




            1





            @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

            – origimbo
            4 hours ago





            @Ben Elections are indeed fundamentally controlled by legislation, along with bodies such as the Electoral commission, created by legislation. Indeed one of the current arguments against the ID trials being continued in the upcoming UK local elections is that it unfairly disenfranchises some voters.

            – origimbo
            4 hours ago











            2














            Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



            The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






            share|improve this answer



























              2














              Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



              The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






              share|improve this answer

























                2












                2








                2







                Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



                The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.






                share|improve this answer













                Another elephant in the room here is the European Convention on Human Rights, an international convention to which the UK is a party state. This effectively gives a supranational body, the European Court of Human Rights the power to pass judgement that a contracting state has breached provisions in the convention concerning human civil and political rights.



                The original treaty does let states leave (denounce the treaty), but only after a 5 year cooling off period. As with all international treaties, it's not entirely clear what would happen if a state just unilaterally stopped playing ball immediately, especially if it were willing to enter a period of North Korean style isolationism, but it is another element in play, beyond the various parties (and the two houses) of Parliament watching each other.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 3 hours ago









                origimboorigimbo

                13.8k23355




                13.8k23355



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid


                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f40542%2fdoes-parliament-hold-absolute-power-in-the-uk%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

                    格濟夫卡 參考資料 导航菜单51°3′40″N 34°2′21″E / 51.06111°N 34.03917°E / 51.06111; 34.03917ГезівкаПогода в селі 编辑或修订