> It was a title that was used just to describe the most dominant minister of the day, the one who controlled the cabinet and had the confidence of parliament – usually the First Lord of the Treasury but sometimes not.
> And if today one asked an alien looking down from space who was the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, that alien would assume it was Jeremy Hunt.
[1] https://davidallengreen.com/2022/10/a-prime-minister-in-name...
A real alien would realise that it was the Tufton Street gang.
The Tories have now had one PM resign in disgrace and then seemingly failed to set up an acceptable new cabinet. I see no reason why they should keep their mandate without renewed voter support.
I suppose the king could instruct Labour to try to form a minority cabinet, but that's beyond my understanding of the procedures of British parliamentary practice.
If you'd like to know more about the complex details of the role that the monarch could play in deciding the next PM (without an election), I recommend reading about the Lascelles Principles.[0]
You should particularly note one line from that article: "The convention was in abeyance from 2011 to 2022, ... these principles are thought to have been revived." (emphasis mine).
Basically, the UK's creaky, uncodified, thousand-year old constitution doesn't actually allow legal experts (much less the public) to know for sure whether these hugely consequential principles even exist any more.
Best option right now is an election, its really our only path to stability. But the Tories will hang on for as long as they can as they are expecting to be wiped out if they held an election right now.
For example... Anyone can gather 100 signatures asking for an election. Then the electoral commission will select 1000 people at random from the electoral register and ask them "Should the UK hold an immediate election?". And then if the majority of those responding say yes, then an election happens.
Unless the Conservatives decide that they don't want to be in power any more, there is no way to make an election happen.
To give an extreme answer: a general strike.[0]
The government has already shown that it will remove senior ministers in response to market turmoil, so this sets the precedent that something like a general strike (which would be hugely damaging to the economy) could be enough to remove Truss.
In the short term that might only lead to a new "caretaker" PM who will attempt to run things for the next couple of years, but it might also embolden those who organised the general strike to try again, and again, until an election was called.
[0] https://metro.co.uk/2022/10/09/what-is-a-general-strike-as-u...
A single party majority is not a healthy state of affairs because it basically bypasses parliamentarism. Good luck ever having even the possibility of a minority cabinet, and good luck triggering an election when the majority party misbehaves.
One of the procedures by which she can be replaced involves 'letters of no confidence' being sent to the '1922 committee'. There are a bunch of newspaper articles saying that committee has been having discreet meetings and talking to Truss yesterday.
Which is the political equivalent of getting invited to a same-day meeting with your boss and HR entitled 'private meeting'.
She's had a terrible week (and that's saying something given her premiership to date).
She had to sack the chancellor that enacted all of her campaign promises, bring in a new chancellor who has undone all of her campaign promises.
Some of the polls coming out suggest the Conservatives would be in 3rd place at a General Election behind the SNP.
The new Chancellor of the Exchequer is not under Truss's control, he's under the control of men in grey suits. If Truss doesn't control cabinet ministers, she isn't the Prime Minister.
We have no government; we need a General Election immediately. This is a very dangerous situation.
This would be a fantastic moment to stage a coup. And there are generals in-post who evidently favour something like that. But who knows - maybe it's already happened.
I think it's dangerous.
Interesting. Only 20% of the PCP voted for her, yet she's nominally PM. Reportedly many conservative MPs are considering crossing the floor. Others are trying to figure out how to get her to hand-over to someone else (who?) without another leadership election, and especially without letting the party members have any say.
How are the PCP supposed to keep her "under close supervision"?
