Report comment

'The interesting thing constitutionally' is that well-versed lawyers are saying here, apparently without qualms, that our unwritten constitution has allowed the divine right of the Monarch to morph into the unchallengeable power of Prime Ministers (this one elected by 48% of her electorate), always wielding the self-denying banner of 'democracy', to entirely disregard, as they have frequently done, what the people want and impose what they think best (usually for them and their likes). What's different from the power of those dictators (inc Stalin, Raynor) other than that brutality is not practised, because not needed?