www.theguardian.com
No, they did not remove that power. VERY, VERY recently the PM requested of her to Dissolve Parliament. Of course Now it has to be justified, and go through a court of Judges, but she can do it.
Queen Elizabeth II's role in the Commonwealth is to be the one who says "here's who is running the country".
Nope, Parliament had made a law that says that the queen can't dissolve Parliament. At least last I've checked.
You are mistaken. The Queen dissolved the Parliament as recently as 2019.
metro.co.uk
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
That's odd because I distinctly remember Parliament instituting a law that basically gutted her ability to dissolve Parliament to the point that it's effectively useless. Something about the House of Windsor (aka the monarchy) can't remove those from the House of Commons from their seats...You are mistaken. The Queen dissolved the Parliament as recently as 2019.
Boris Johnson visits the Queen before formally kick starting election
The Prime Minister arrived at Buckingham Palace just after 10am.
She also retains the power to Prorogue (That is, prevent Parliament from meeting) when she wishes, which she also did in 2019, to considerable controversy as this was instrumental in helping along Brexit.
2019 British prorogation controversy - Wikipedia
I suspect you're thinking of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act of 2011, but that did not limit the monarch but rather the Prime Minister.
Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 - Wikipedia
You're likely thinking of individuals. Her Majesty can't say "I don't like you, get out". There is a law somewhere about that, but for the love of god I cannot remember it's name.
IIRC an MP is also not allowed resign their seat. Getting rid of an unwanted MP pretty much requires asking the Queen to give said MP a job or title which disqualifies them from the Commons.
Yeah, but it's understandable, seeing as the British Nobility class was practically gutted, with most of the families dying off before the 1950's. Personally I feel as if the King should have begun giving war Heroes with proper knowledge seats on the House of Lords and ennobling them. But back then thinking wasn't a whole lot of a thing, and we saw what that led up to.Thing is, it sounds like the continuation of the rest of the laws that gutted both the House of Lords and House of Windsor (aka the monarchy) and reinvesting their power into the House of Commons.
That's because she has no power. If the Queen actually tried to govern, she definitely would be favoring one faction over another, and would inevitably attract rancor from whatever the other side is. Political parties are just a type of faction, and factions exist in every type of government out there. Even totalitarian states like the Nazis and Stalinist Russia were rife with factionalism.
Brunei's significance comes from being a petrostate, this is obviously not something a real country can learn anything from.
We've seen this with dead monarchies all the time. Dong Zhuo. Cao Cao. The shoguns. Ricimer. All of these people formally were deferential to their sovereign, and requested the sovereign's permission to do many things. But everyone knew who held the real power.
Except Baathist Iraq, that was a good way to die...
And yet Brexit may well have failed had she not Prorogued Parliament at a critical moment. What a lack of power that was.
Pretty much all nation's significance comes from their available resources. If the US government had only the land area and natural resources of Costa Rica do you think it would be the global hegemon still?
Most monarchies existed before MAD was a thing, and had issues with things like paying Danegelds to stave off raiders or paying Jannisaries to keep themselves from being palace-coup'd.
