British Prime Minister vs. the Monarh

 

Never did, never was. The Monarch has the power to dismiss the prime Minister and Governement and call on someone else o form a government. In practice this would force a general election which would be based on this action. The result would depend on what the government was up to!

 

Note also that even if an act is passed by both Houses of Parliament it requires the Monarch's consent before it becomes law. Be aware that this is the people's last defence agains the tyranny of Parliament. Consider the position if a Prime Minister decided to pass an act which kept them in power indeterminately without any elections. Technically perfectly possible and was not so long ago advocated by a government minister (since retired and now sets himself up as a paragon of democracy!). His party has the good sense to reject this. They still lost the election but won back a few years later 

 

In practice problems are sorted out before hand. Remember it is the Monarch's government that is in power. Any general election merely elects Parliament. The Monarch can ask anyone they like to form a government. In fact the Monarch always asks the person who can command a majority.

 

There is tremendous support for them especially for Her Majesty whose dedication cannot be faulted.

 

Given the possible alternatives and the politicians we have I have no doubts as to which I prefer.

 

As I said earlier the Monarchy is our last defence against the tyranny of Parliament

 

Never even considered that likely nor would I think that anyone else would consider it

 

Although the Civil War greatly weakened the monarchy, it was the Glorious Revolution followed by the Act of Settlement, Bill of Rights and Parliment choosing on the Hanovarian succesion that finally established Parlimentary supremecy over the monarch.

 

Note only the then Monarch was executed after a trial. That move was by no means popular with the country at large.

 

Oliver Cromwell's appearance/fundamentalism  is/was irrelevant. After he died his successors were getting into such a mess that the restoration was virtually inevitable

 

But Parliment has the power legally to choose who should by monarch.  If when the present Queen dies Parliment wanted e.g. you to be the next king then they make it so, regardless of Charles'  claim.

 

If you read the Bill of rights you will see that the monarch's de jure as well as de facto powers are  limited.

 

 

Precisely - A New ACT OF PARLIMENT - thus parliment can change the succession.  Parliment changed the succession in 1688, again in 1701 and again 1937.  Parliment decides who will be monarch.