THE Queen is said to have sought counsel from her aides on the
circumstances under which she could sack a Prime Minister for the first time in her 67-year reign.
Sources told the i newspaper the monarch sought constitutional clarity ahead of last Tuesday’s bombshell Supreme Court ruling that Boris Johnson’s proroguing of Parliament was “unlawful”.
Buckingham Palace said it did not comment on rumours.
It is not thought any conversations were in relation to active attempts by the Queen to dismiss the Prime Minister, but rather to gain an understanding over her exact position legally should she be approached by opposition MPs at any point, if Mr Johnson refused to step down after losing a vote of no confidence.
READ MORE: Police left injured by assaults rockets by one-third
It comes after further reports that Mr Johnson telephoned the Queen
to personally apologise for the embarrassment caused by the ruling he had acted unlawfully when he advised the monarch to suspend Parliament for five weeks – advice which she was obliged to accept.
As Head of State, the Queen has always remained strictly neutral in regards to politics and is unable to vote or stand for election, so the relationship with her Prime Ministers is regarded as vital.
She gives the PM a regular weekly audience during their term in office and if either the Queen or the PM are not able to meet, then they will speak by telephone.
Under the British constitution, the Queen has a number of personal discretionary powers which includes the right to appoint the prime minister and other ministers.
A House of Commons select committee clarified in 2003 that these powers also include a right for the sovereign to act contrary to, or even without, ministerial advice in a “grave constitutional crisis”.
Princess Elizabeth became Queen at 26 and during her 67-year reign, 14 Prime Ministers have served.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel