Letter June 2019 from our researcher to:
Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (House of Commons) - replied; Constitution Committee (Lords select committee) - replied;The Commons Library - replied.
Replies awaited: Privy Council, Cabinet Office.

original e-mail header: Incumbent party automatically to continue in government?

Reply please via e-mail

Lord President of the Council and
The Privy Council
Privy Council Office
Room G/04
1 Horse Guards Road
London

13th June 2019

Lord President, members of the Privy Council,

A question about our constitution of state.

Why should the incumbent party automatically be allowed to continue in government? The party (Conservative and Unionist) is in crisis and since 2016 in government they have failed to enact their central policies. An important reason for this weakness is that since 2017 the Conservative and Unionist party has no majority in our elected parliament the House of Commons: They lack the full support of the UK electorate.

Briefly we will outline further arguments and constructive suggestions for resolving the "brexit impasse".

Crucially, because they do not have a majority in our elected parliament the House of Commons, they have no constitutionally guaranteed right to rule, no automatic right to remain in government simply because they have lost leader May and hope to elect a more appealing leader and prime-ministerial candidate.

The Conservative Party over years (2010 onwards) in government has failed to resolve a major issue of our time, UK – EU relations. Why should such a party have the apparent right to continue in government when they have failed to deliver on this issue, are so divided, are about to select a leader who may well be less competent than the current one, a party for these and other reasons manifestly incapable of realising good and reconciling policy for the UK?

Theresa May was anointed as prime minister with the claim that her "confidence and supply" deal with the Democratic Unionists would enable her to carry out her policies. That has turned out to be unreliable. Several important divisions (votes) in the House of Commons have been lost, the party has proved itself to be incapable of obtaining majorities in Parliament. After their misjudged election of 2017, the Conservative party and Theresa May claimed that, despite their lack of a majority, they would provide stable government, This has has turned out to be wrong, a failed prediction.

Through their Commons MPs the Conservative party recently withdrew support from their party leader May who apparently resigned as leader and reportedly promised to resign as prime minister as soon as a replacement (presumably a new leader of her own party) can be appointed. So, clearly, the government of Prime Minister May was not stable.

Candidates to replace May as Tory leader were NOT (in contrast to May) elected to the House of Commons as party leader.

The appointment of Theresa May as prime minister was personal (ad hominem – sorry about gender). She had to make her case for forming a new government (to our quasi-presidial powers). Now after May has gone, another candidate or candidates for the job of prime minister must presumably present their proposal to conduct government in ways which have reasonable chances to solve the challenges facing the UK (us).

We have argued above (June 2019) that the Tory party must NOT automatically be allowed to continue in government. Now other party leaders should be invited to present their proposal to form a government. They would need to describe policy which could attract majorities in Parliament. For instance, the idea of accepting the EU – UK withdrawal agreement on the condition that a referendum be held which enables the electorate to decide on whether to accept this agreement. Creative ideas are called for, things which do not fit easily to our encrusted, mystifyingly uncodified and mainly ancient governance system and constitution of state. For instance, inter-party, task-oriented, provisional alliances could be formed in order to bring about minimally conflictual resolution-seeking solutions to public issues. Parliamentary majorities would be needed: Such could well be available in a genuine search for compromise, with motivation to find optimal solutions for all people concerned.

Your urgent attention to the above question would be much appreciated by many citizens of the UK.

Yours sincerely,

-------------------

Contact:

Wallace-Macpherson
e-mail: wm@iniref.org