Queen's Consent - Cases Where Consent Has Not Been Given

Cases Where Consent Has Not Been Given

In 1999, Queen Elizabeth II, acting on the advice of the Government, refused to signify her consent to Parliament debating the Military Action Against Iraq (Parliamentary Approval) Bill, which sought to transfer from the Sovereign to Parliament the power to authorize military strikes against Iraq. Due to the Crown's refusal to consent to the Bill's debate, it was automatically dropped. This Bill would have removed from the Prime Minister the power to declare war by the use of the Sovereign's prerogative power, and so Prime Minister Tony Blair advised the Queen to refuse consent.

In 1998, the Palace of Westminster (Removal of Crown Immunity) Bill could not be debated because Queen's consent had not been given.

In 1990, the Reform of the House of Lords Bill could not be debated because Queen's consent had not been given.

These cases show that Queen's Consent is a valuable tool for the Government of the day where backbench Members of Parliament (including members of the same party as the Government) have sought to have Private Members' Bills debated and voted on in Parliament that the Prime Minister and the Cabinet feel would be awkward or embarrassing for the Government, or might lead to a significant number of backbench Members belonging to the same party as the Government voting against the Cabinet's views, undermining the Government's authority. In such a situation, the Government can advise the Queen to refuse consent to debate a Bill that affects her prerogatives.

Read more about this topic:  Queen's Consent

Famous quotes containing the words cases and/or consent:

    I have always felt that the real purpose of government is to enhance the lives of people and that a leader can best do that by restraining government in most cases instead of enlarging it at every opportunity.
    Gerald R. Ford (b. 1913)

    In making the great experiment of governing people by consent rather than by coercion, it is not sufficient that the party in power should have a majority. It is just as necessary that the party in power should never outrage the minority.
    Walter Lippmann (1889–1974)