Allo guv'na Actually funny and slightly embarrassing note, being from the US I once had to ask a British colleague what 'chuffed' meant. And I speak 3 languages.
It seems crazy to me that I can be PM of the UK but not in my own country of Australia. I mean I could become eligible for Australia but I would have to denounce any dual citizenship status my maternal grandmother conferred to me.
@@MissingRaptor The crazy part of the law that's stopping me from becoming a minister is to do with being beholden to the head of a foreign country. I can't sit in parliament because I might be swayed by the head of state of England..... The same bloody person I'd have to swear allegiance to anyway to sit in parliament.
@@PostImperfect Yeah it is bonkers when you're disqualified because your citizenships both recognise the same Person as head of state, but that's still the way it works.
@@jackvos8047 in fairness though if youre resident in the uk for tax purposes and live in australia thats not ideal is it? And why are you resident in the uk for tax purposes anyway? 🤔
I absolutely love your videos! They're always so well thought out, easy to follow, incredibly educational and so much fun to watch 😊 keep up the fantastic work!
Mr chairman, I nominate the right honorable J. Draper to become our next MP. (house: rerrerrerrerrer...). 😂 With the given corrections; Mr Speaker I nominate the honorable Ms. J. Draper to become our next PM. (The House: rerrerrerrerrer...).
@@Dave_Sisson Not quite right; ‘The Right Honourable’ is reserved for members of the Privy Council. This generally includes the highest members of both the government and the Opposition, and is held for life. You would also never name another MP in the House, that’s against the rules. That’s why they’re always “The Honourable Gentleman”, “the Right Honourable Lady”, “the Honourable Member for X”, “my Right Honourable friend”, or some combination
It's been 7 months since your last long video! I missed this so much! I'm so happy to see this. I also love your shorts. But I like proper videos so much better. I love everything about you, honestly ❤
You are correct. The "presidential election" is actually voting for "presidential electors," who actually vote for the president. Much in the same way there are edge cases as described in this video, there is the possibility for the electors of the presidential candidate's party not to to vote for their candidate (and vice versa), but these incidents of "faithless electors" are few and far between. There is growing opposition to the electoral college as many recent elections have gone to the party who lost the popular vote by considerable margins, but it would require a constitutional amendment to change the system, and so is very unlikely to come to pass.
@@bvd7517faithless electors don't seem to be a problem anymore, but the electoral college is still, just like the British electoral system (not just the bit described here), highly undemocratic
The german Bundeskanzler is also indirectly elected - the President proposes the candidats and the MPs (Bundestagsabgeordneten) vote. Usually they are the leaders of the major partyes, but not necessarily. Fun fact: you don´t even need to be a member of the Bundestag to be proposed as candidat :D
I would love to walk around London with J. Draper & a not-too-large group, listening to her talk about the history of this & that place as we walk along. That would be lovely.
Simple: be a legitimate descendant of Sophia, Electress of Hanover, and don't be a Catholic (since 2013, you can *marry* a Catholic though). Also if you're in the first six people in the line of succession, don't marry without the monarch's consent (required for those six in order to keep their place, before 2013, it was everybody in the line of succession). Note that the ban on Catholics (brought in with the 1701 Act of Settlement) doesn't bar people of any other faith, or you from marrying anyone of any other faith other than Catholicism, nor does it say you have to be a Protestant or even a member of the Church of England either (although it does say you have to "enter into communion with the Church of England" upon succeeding). Which is why you have members of several other royal families -those of Romania, Russia and Serbia/Yugoslavia, in the British line of succession that are Eastern Orthodox Christian, and are still in line. As it would be if they were Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Shintoist, or any other type of christianity-only marriage to a Catholic is banned.
Really enjoyed watching this! One minor clarification: Most of this is not because the UK is a monarchy, but because it is a parliamentary system - as opposed to a presidential system as in the case of the US or France. In my country of residence, Austria, the only person who can appoint a chancellor and their ministers is the (directly elected) president - whose role, apart from that, is largely ceremonial. In theory, the president could task a chancellor of their choosing with forming a government and then appoint that government. However, parliament could then immediately oust said government with a vote of no-confidence and the president would have to try again. Which is why usually two or more parties that together command a majority in parliament cut a deal to form a coalition government that is then just nodded off by the president. (That being said, there were two instances in the recent past when these powers of the president became relevant in practice: In 2017, the conservatives and the extreme right formed a government, but the president vetoed two particularly far-right ministers because in his view they would have harmed the country's reputation. The other instance was in 2019 after a number of successful no-confidence votes in parliament that resulted in a political stalemate as well as the ousting of the entire government. In this case, the president appointed a group consisting mainly of civil servants as an interim government for the time until the general elections.)
Thank you for a brilliant concise and entertaining post. I noticed you didn’t mention any IQ test or even a basic arithmetic test for UK MPs or even PMs. But based on the last few years, it seems obvious that there is none.
It would be quite tricky to put a restriction on who can be PM, as the monarch (in theory) has an absolute free choice on who they appoint to the role.
@@arfived4 Sometimes I wish that were true. Here in Australia, we’ve occasionally been forced to notice that our state governors and Governor-General actually have more power than the monarch (or even the US President) because the conventions that limit a viceroy’s ability to act alone (without the Executive Council) can be (and have been) simply ignored.
For those who don't know, the Shadow Cabinet is made up of 'shadow' ministers from the main opposition party, who act as that party's spokespeople on particular matters, for instance the Shadow Chancellor is the opposition's spokesperson on Treasury matters.
It gets *really* fun when you start getting into really particular weeds of things too! My favourite is how if it ends in a hung parliament and the largest party isn't able to form a coalition to command the majority of the house, the second largest party is given the chance. This means you can become PM only coming second, potentially with only 164 seats! (164+162 vs 324) Or how in the case of Alec Douglas-Home, he was PM without a seat in either house for 20 days after renouncing his peerage but before he won the by-election. Or heck, minority governments! Who even needs a majority if you can convince enough people to not vote your government out? Great video, I love the visuals! And I'm glad the frog realised his dreams of becoming prime minister
Does the leader of a potential coalition government get a fancy interim title until they finish hashing out the coalition and become PM? I ask because here in Denmark, whomever is most likely to form a coalition, based on the monarch's private conversations with every party leader and independent MP, gets the title "Kongelig Undersøger", literally "Royal Examiner", while coalition negotiations are ongoing. Royal examiner sounds like a royal cosplaying Sherlock Holmes, or someone who puts the king on a lift to check the undercarriage for wear and tear.
Awww just an Australian over here that has recently started seeing your content on my RU-vid feed. Just watching “London 2000 years of history” on Brit Box and there you are 😮👏😃
The official title is First Lord of the Treasury. The term Prime Minister was originally used as an insult. Robert Walpole was the first to be called Prime Minister.
Thank you for the great content,your channel is essential viewing on a rainy Saturday/Monday morning along with coffee and cake.Thanks Costa👍. As a fellow user of the Rode N T 1 mic I think that you may be able to do without the pop shield at the distance you normally speak at .Its a great sensitive condenser and I only need it within a foot or so😄 .Have my own original song channel that nobody watches🙄🤔🎸 Keep doing what your doing and you will be a star very soon.T.V beckons I'm sure but it will be our loss on you tube.Thanks again .😃
Ms. Draper, I just started watching your series, having followed your Pygmalion vlog. You have a wonderful voice and way of presenting. I can only imagine the amount of preparation these videos require. Your series is quality over quantity which one can truly appreciate after being bombarded by the the latter so often on You Tube. I wish you great success, Cheers, Fredrick "Rik" Spector
Wait... The U.K. does not have a formal constitution? That's wild. If it comes up as a subject of interest for you, I'd love to know more about the history of labor, as in unions, strikes, organization etc.
@@thysonsacclaim Nothing is binding. The unwritten constitution can be 'rewritten' to keep up with the times. We're not stuck in 1791 unlike a certain country I could mention.
@@Poliss95 you can say The US. It is more interesting to me as an idea, as legal and civic convention for the last 90 odd years has been founding the nation state in a constitutional document. That the UK, being The UK, site of several foundational documents of statecraft does not have one surprises me.
@@albertgreene313 The United States is a federation while the United Kingdom is a devolved government within a unitary state. Furthermore, the UK has Parliamentary Sovereignty which holds that the legislative is supreme over the executive and judicial branches. Parliament can change or repeal Acts which make up the uncodified constitution. The judicial branch does not have the power to strike down any primary legislation passed by the legislative branch. The United States, however, has Separation of Powers where the executive, legislative, and judicial branches are co-equal and the Constitution is supreme. The judicial branch has the power to strike down laws passed by the legislative branch that it rules is unconstitutional. The three separate branches alone cannot amend the U.S. Constitution. Amendments can only be made by two-thirds majority vote of both chambers of Congress plus ratification by three-fourths (38) of the state legislatures.
On these criteria, I am a mouth-droppingly amazed that some of our members of parliament qualify to be party members, let alone be elected to the post. As it's been said* about America, ”politics isn't broken, it's fixed". I think it was Geoffrey Pyke** who decided that what Britain REALLY needed was Better People; a bit of a pity that we'd have to get current people to agree to replace themselves with said Better People. Bah. I'm off to bed with Aldous Huxley and a mug of cocoa. *Katherine Gehl. TED Talk **Another story. Pykrete, the concept ship Habakku and the idea of iceberg aircraft carriers. Fascinating.
In India just name changes but procedure is roughly same, house of commons changes into parliament and King/queen into president, all though our president surly have less powers(usually) than monarchy of UK.
Thank you so much for uploading again, i’ve missed your videos i’m a 16 year old who moved from england at a young age but i still want to learn about where i’m from and you do that. just wanted to say this don’t know why.
Step 1: Be born into wealth. Step 2: Get educated at Eton. Step 3: Do PPE at Oxbridge (preferably Oxford - 2:1 ratio). Step 4: Do something silly so that party officials have some dirt on you (e.g. something involving a pig). Step 5: Do some busy work at a job that was organised by friends of your parents. Step 6: Become an MP. Step 7: Party officials that have dirt on you will ease your passage through the ranks so that they and their backers can siphon off funds from the public purse, because they own you. Once PM you can a) crash the economy (Truss), b) sleep-walk into Brexit (Cameron), c) everything wrong (Johnson) or d) be left holding a bucket of sh!t (Sunak). With any luck, this will be the last Conservative government in UK history.
Bit of a misnomer to say that the UK doesn't have a consitution. What the UK lacks is a single document referred to as the constitution. Rather, the constitution is composed of the laws, statutes and conventions that the UK has generated throughout the centuries, from Magna Carta to the Human Rights Act.
In Canada you don't have to have a formal coalition with another party to form government. There have been several minority governments. Including the last two.
I was just sitting here thinking to myself "man, I really gotta start thinking about my career..." and immediately read this title. i'll take that as a sign, thank you.
The president isn’t directly elected in the US either. We have the electoral college. And while US rules are considerably less baroque, let’s face it, our systems were instituted by propertied classes to ensure that “those who own the country ought to govern it.” (John Jay, American statesman)
In Australia we have a similar system, except there are two additional steps. 1: to be elected to the House of Representatives (equivalent to the House of Commons), your election has to be declared by Anthony Green (Chief Electoral Statistion for the ABC). 2: To win an election you require the blessing of Rupurt Murdoch (who controls the majority of newspapers, and a lion's share of the rest of the media). Without that it is very difficult. We have had one PM Elected against the will of News Corp this side of the millennium.
honestly i feel like the rate we've been getting through priministers if you just turned up at 10 downing street and say HELLO I'D LIKE TO BE PRIMINISTER there's a good chance they'll probably say well come right in!
a nice informative little civics lecture, still find it hilarious that Tory is actually an Irish word in origin There's an old 19thC limerick about it all "There's an Irish word for vagabond, highwayman and thief, It's four letters long, short, pithy and brief It's T - O -R - Y Now doesn't that bugger belief!"
Fun fact about the silly UK constitution. Erskine May's "Parliamentary Practice" is a book which describes the unwritten rules of the UK constitution. It is from 1844. It is now essentially just considered part of the constitution ... because how else are we meant to decide how things work if we don't bloody write them down. Also I laughed at tooting being silly enough to be last on the list of constituency names. Having lived near tooting for the vast majority of my life it doesn't seem that silly to me. But it is. It really is.
The Algorithm put you in my recommendations a couple of weeks ago, and I'm so glad it did! I've watched nearly all of your RU-vid content now, and am really happy to see a new video from you. You're at the top of my growing list of must-watch creators. By choice, RU-vid is the only social media platform I have anything to do with, though I know lots of the creators I really enjoy are all over the others. Thanks for still being here. I wish I had the funds to join your Patreon, but I simply don't. So, thanks, too, so much to those who do!
2:32 More on Salisbury. He was the main reason that France and the UK didn’t go to war over the scramble of Africa in 1898. It was known as the Fashoda Incident that was caused in large part due to Kaiser Wilhelm II’s actions in modern day Sudan. So, because of Salisbury’s actions in 1898, he saved Anglo-French relations and without it, maybe the UK and Germany would mellow relations far more than they even did historically in 1912, leading to a rebalancing of alliances in Europe.
The Nolan Principles section for the Conservative party ideology had my howling. Complete, polar opposite to the Tories. Integrity and honesty, Jesus wept you can't make it up.
In theory: the monarch can choose whoever they want to be the Prime Minister. In practice, and in reality they 'choose': *Whoever is the leader of the party that has the most seats in the House of Commons. *Somebody sitting in the House of Commons. *Someone who isn't in the military, civil service or any office 'holding profit under the Crown'. *Anyone who the previous, retiring Prime Minister has 'advised' (ie, instructed) the monarch to appoint as the next Prime Minister , and who will be the person elected as the next leader of their party.
Am I the only one laughing my ass off at all the Aviary Attorney characters? Cocorico as chancellor of the exchequer was pretty on point. Cant imagine Baron Rorgueil as labor though, definitely a tory.. but then, they are all french.
