The next few days will serve up plenty of reminders that this country does not have a written constitution. As the plotters decide how best to move against the Prime Minister, they will not be operating within any defined framework of rules to select a head of government. Rather, they will be muddling through. There will be much comment about the residual power of the monarch — notably, her ability to dissolve Parliament. But the Queen is wise enough to appreciate that for a modern monarch to exercise these prerogatives would be to ensure their rapid abolition.
It is tempting to say that the coming turbulence shows why the United Kingdom needs a written constitution. But there is no inherent logic in this siren argument. If there is to be a third Prime Minister during a parliamentary term — something that has not happened during the modern era — then that Prime Minister will have to prove he can command the confidence of the House.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in