For several centuries the British monarch had several powers (judiciary, legislative and executive).
Executive deals with everyday life of the country.
Legislative branch of government is the power to make laws.
Judiciary branch is the power to interprate and enforce laws.
But with the creation of an independent judiciary, the direct exercise of those prerogativesprogressively decreased. In particular the 18 19 century witnesses the eroding of the monarchs final real powers. That is to say that the actually governing thrue the other ministers until the British monarchy finally became the constitutional monarchy that we know today. (The king was suffering, so the powers of the monarchs progressively decreased years after years and the industry ofrevolution increased, so the power was given to parliament) The British queen personifies the state. In law, she is the head of the executive, she is part of parliament, she is the head of the judiciary, the commander who chief of the arm forces and the supreme governor of the church of England. She has a rôle to play in parliament. She is the head of the judiciary and she is also the supreme governor ofEngland (Temporal chief : the queen, spiritual chief : the archbishop of Canterbury). The monarchs free main rights have the rights to be consulted, to encourage and to warn. The powers of the queen seem to be very important but in practice the queen's powers are very limited nowadays. The sentence that is used is : « The queen reigns but does not rule » in other words she is the main figure of thestate but she does not rule.
The monarchy is therefore complicatedly useless. First of all the queen has the great advantage of stabilising and unify the country, because she is always there whereas the successive governments come and go depending on the tide of political fortune. There is three political parties (Conservative party, Caber party, Liberal democrats : quite small). MargaretTadcher, then Tony Blair … Governments change. The queen embodies the continuity of the country.
The queen is a person who embodies the cram and the cram is an institution, it is a person who is beyond the queen person, it's an impersonal legal concept : « Le roi est mort vive le roi ».
The queen's real prerogative powers are what remains today of those immunities and powers which were possessed bymedieval kings. The exercise of the royal prerogative power has not greatly diminished over the last prerogatives. The major difference is that whereas the monarch exercised those powers at his own discretion, she must exercise those powers now on the advice of her ministers, some of this powers are going to be exercised by the ministers themselves. It was at the queen's discretion to use thispowers or not. Now it's different, it is not at her own discretion but at the prime minister advice, so she has not really the choice. For a formal point of view, she has still the power but for the practise yes.
These royal prerogatives powers can be found in many fields of government. First of all the power is relating to parliament . The queen summons and dissolves the parliament usually at therequest of the prime minister. Each new parliamentary session is opened with a speech given from the throne. The speech is prepared by the prime minister of the day and it aims at outlining the program of her majesties government for the forthcoming. In a more important way, the queen is the one who transforms a bill (a project of law) in a law by giving the royal assent (she agrees : “La reyne leveult”). In theory she has the right to say no, but in practise it is impossible, the last queen to do that was Anne in 1707. For example, fox hunting (run after animals with horses = aristocracy) has been banned because it was a cruel sport. Regarding the role of queen, it is the queen who appoints the prime minister. By convention, the prime minister is always the leader of the political...