alternatehistory.com

Been having a massive ponder about this recently, and decided I'm going to ask the lovely members of this site this question. In your mind when is the latest that the relationship between the crown and Parliament can resemble something like these two scenarios:

· the monarch can call for fresh elections, can prorogue and dissolve Parliament as they wish,

· the monarch can appoint and dismiss the prime minister and cabinet ministers.

· government does not necessarily need to be the party with the largest number of seats in the house of commons, if the monarch thinks they will compromise national interest.

· The monarch cannot impose or collect new taxes without an Act of Parliament.

· The Monarch can suggest new laws to the Prime Minister, and can suspend cabinet if they feel cabinet is acting against the nation's interest. The monarch can also freely reject legislation put before them. And can introduce bills to Parliament.

· They can declare war with Parliament's approval, and can declare peace.

· They can sign treaties, and have those treaties change law, if they think it is worth while

· To add to this, in their role as head of the church, the monarch can appoint and dismiss clergymen and women, and can decide on doctrinal matters as they see fit.

Or this:

· Call Parliament every three years-Triennial Act

· Appoint ministers and prime minister-usually from party with majority in commons/lords

· Appoint new peers, within reason

· Veto legislation if considered against country’s interest

· Can suggest bills for debate to the PM and cabinet

· Head of armed forces, can declare war and peace, on advise of Prime Minister and government

· Head of the Church, and Honour System

Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Top