Excellent news! The best I’ve heard in a while. I’m happy I was wrong!

Now, the UK just has to last another 3-1/2 years. (I don’t see much chance for early elections. I think Labour will cling to power as long as it can.)

Right. Called…..by the prime minister. But what happens if he just doesn’t do it? My understanding is…..nothing. No one else can do it, and no one can force him to do it.

The parliament can replace him, but the parliament is the body that chose him in the first place. The king can dissolve the parliament, but only at the request of the prime minister. The PM has to initiate the action. So if he just doesn’t do it, then what?

Good question, and the answer is, British law covers that situation. More specifically, the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, clause 4, specifies that it happens *automatically* if the five year term limit is reached without the Government (I.e., the Prime Minister) calling an election by that time:

4. Automatic dissolution of Parliament after five years

If it has not been dissolved earlier, a Parliament dissolves at the beginning of the day that is the fifth anniversary of the day on which it first met.

The last election occurred on July 4, 2024; and the new Parliament first met on July 9, so that’s when the clock started for this current Parliament.

Obviously, though, it is vastly more likely that an election will be held sooner than that. The 2022 law gives the Prime Minister that discretion, and that means a sitting Government has the advantage of picking an election date which is most favorable to it, or at least, as it perceives it, To be sure, however, given the overwhelming unpopularity of Starmer’s government, the real question is going to be, “what is the *least bad* date we could pick?”

This is a little weird to us Yanks, since constitutionally all of our terms of office are fixed.

I think we have all made the same mistake at least once.
MrZ is very nice about it.

Dave Walden: No problem really, though I am curious as to why the comment was posted multiple times. It didn’t go into moderation, so it should have appeared quickly. Did it not?

After leading humanity from the mud via its initial stirrings of freedom’s tenets, Britain then surrendered freedom’s chalice to America. America, in turn, further extricated mankind from the mud toward the stars into what significant portions of humanity now take for granted.

I am afraid Britain will perhaps continue to remind all who are paying attention that without the moral-political legacy necessary for what I call “freedom’s bounty,” a return to the mud is inescapable. Let’s hope a political – if not moral, renewal can occur in Britain.

Meanwhile, we had best mind our business here at home. Failing to properly do so, timeless “mud” awaits all – in spite of the possibility that some of us may soon reside elsewhere. If so, I am reminded that “the moon is a harsh mistress!”

The UK and China are both Lefty nations –but China at least is going all Hugo Drax on spaceflight at least.

Technically the Labour can wait until 2029 to call an election, as it stands now. They still have a sizable majority (though they will badly lose one notable seat in a by election in a week). But there are ways that could accelerate. It is a massively unpopular government, and generally perceived to be a dead man walking.

A terrible space regulatory body and a moribund space industry is the least of Britain’s problems right now, sad to say.

Right. Called…..by the prime minister. But what happens if he just doesn’t do it? My understanding is…..nothing. No one else can do it, and no one can force him to do it.

The parliament can replace him, but the parliament is the body that chose him in the first place. The king can dissolve the parliament, but only at the request of the prime minister. The PM has to initiate the action. So if he just doesn’t do it, then what?

”My worry here is related to the overall contempt the left has for the law in all cases. If it doesn’t fit their needs, they ignore it…once in power and in control, they don’t have to back off any more.”

Right. And right now the Labour Party is in power and will be until it initiates an action to remove itself from power. So to stay in power indefinitely, it just has to do…..nothing.

That’s what I heard anyway. Am I wrong? Perhaps one of our British readers could enlighten us.

mkent: My understanding of present British parliamentary law is that an election must be called by the end of each five year term. It can be called earlier, but must be called after five years.

My worry here is related to the overall contempt the left has for the law in all cases. If it doesn’t fit their needs, they ignore it. When others stand up to them, they like bullies always back off, but once in power and in control, they don’t have to back off any more. That has been the pattern in every case where such people gain power through democratic means, in Germany, in Russia, in Venezuela, in South Africa, in numerous other examples in South America and Africa, and now possibly in Great Britain.

I’m afraid I share Robert’s pessimism here. First of all, at the rate the UK is destroying itself there may not be much left to save by the time late 2029 comes around. Second, parliament reigns supreme in Britain’s democratic system. Even the king rules at the pleasure of parliament.

The prime minister *should* call for elections by fall 2029 at the latest, but my understanding of Britain’s system is that if he doesn’t, no one else can force the issue. So the PM doesn’t even have to do anything to remain in power indefinitely. When the time for elections comes he just has to not call for them. The parliament can replace the prime minister, but if he has the backing of the parliament (and the Labour Party has an absolute majority there), the PM is in the clear.

It would seem to be a glaring hole in the system, but their system, like our Constitution, is fit only for a moral and religious people. I think few here would use those terms to describe the current Labour Party.

Can’t blame Trump on that one.

Dick Eagleson: You are assuming there WILL be a next election. The Labor party has been doing all it can to postpone and even cancel elections. They are communists. It is in their blood to cancel votes when they know they will lose bad.

“North Korea with Islamic Characteristics” – now there’s a dystopian vision.

I wouldn’t say, though, that “few Brits” are concerned. Recent polling and by-elections suggest the collapse of Labour and the probable victory of Reform in the next elections. The suspense is in whether there will be anything left of the UK by the time said elections eventuate. Chairman Starmer continues his Quisling ways.

Is that like selling shares in the Titanic?

The UK is well on its way to becoming a failed, Third World totalitarian state, and this appears to be entirely by design. For whatever reasons, The Powers That Be there seem to despise their own history, culture, and civilization, and they apparently mean to destroy what’s left of their country root and branch, just as the radical left wishes to do in this country. Should they succeed, what will then obtain will be a sinister amalgam of current day North Korea and Iran — “North Korea with Islamic Characteristics” — something darker and more evil than even George Orwell could have imagined.

The astonishing thing is that so few Brits — let alone their “leaders” — seem to be at all concerned about this.