Question: When was the last time royal assent was enacted?

Answer: 11 March 1708

The power of parliament to pass bills was often thwarted by monarchs. Charles I dissolved parliament in 1629, after it passed motions critical of and bills seeking to restrict his arbitrary exercise of power. During the eleven years of personal rule that followed, Charles performed legally dubious actions, such as raising taxes without parliament's approval. After the English Civil War, it was accepted that parliament should be summoned to meet regularly, but it was still commonplace for monarchs to refuse royal assent to bills. In 1678, Charles II withheld his assent from a bill "for preserving the Peace of the Kingdom by raising the Militia, and continuing them in Duty for Two and Forty Days," suggesting that he, not parliament, should control the militia. <hl> The last Stuart monarch, Anne, similarly withheld on 11 March 1708 , on the advice of her ministers, her assent from a bill for the settling of Militia in Scotland. <hl> No monarch has since withheld royal assent on a bill passed by the British parliament.

The power of parliament to pass bills was often thwarted by monarchs. Charles I dissolved parliament in 1629, after it passed motions critical of and bills seeking to restrict his arbitrary exercise of power. During the eleven years of personal rule that followed, Charles performed legally dubious actions, such as raising taxes without parliament's approval. After the English Civil War, it was accepted that parliament should be summoned to meet regularly, but it was still commonplace for monarchs to refuse royal assent to bills. In 1678, Charles II withheld his assent from a bill "for preserving the Peace of the Kingdom by raising the Militia, and continuing them in Duty for Two and Forty Days," suggesting that he, not parliament, should control the militia. The last Stuart monarch, Anne, similarly withheld on <hl> 11 March 1708 <hl>, on the advice of her ministers, her assent from a bill for the settling of Militia in Scotland. No monarch has since withheld royal assent on a bill passed by the British parliament.

The last Stuart monarch, Anne, similarly withheld on <hl> 11 March 1708 <hl> , on the advice of her ministers, her assent from a bill for the settling of Militia in Scotland.


Question: Who was the last monarch to use the royal assent in 1708?

The power of parliament to pass bills was often thwarted by monarchs. Charles I dissolved parliament in 1629, after it passed motions critical of and bills seeking to restrict his arbitrary exercise of power. During the eleven years of personal rule that followed, Charles performed legally dubious actions, such as raising taxes without parliament's approval. After the English Civil War, it was accepted that parliament should be summoned to meet regularly, but it was still commonplace for monarchs to refuse royal assent to bills. In 1678, Charles II withheld his assent from a bill "for preserving the Peace of the Kingdom by raising the Militia, and continuing them in Duty for Two and Forty Days," suggesting that he, not parliament, should control the militia. The last Stuart monarch, Anne, similarly withheld on 11 March 1708, on the advice of her ministers, her assent from a bill for the settling of Militia in Scotland. No monarch has since withheld royal assent on a bill passed by the British parliament.

Answer: Anne

The power of parliament to pass bills was often thwarted by monarchs. Charles I dissolved parliament in 1629, after it passed motions critical of and bills seeking to restrict his arbitrary exercise of power. During the eleven years of personal rule that followed, Charles performed legally dubious actions, such as raising taxes without parliament's approval. After the English Civil War, it was accepted that parliament should be summoned to meet regularly, but it was still commonplace for monarchs to refuse royal assent to bills. In 1678, Charles II withheld his assent from a bill "for preserving the Peace of the Kingdom by raising the Militia, and continuing them in Duty for Two and Forty Days," suggesting that he, not parliament, should control the militia. <hl> The last Stuart monarch, Anne , similarly withheld on 11 March 1708, on the advice of her ministers, her assent from a bill for the settling of Militia in Scotland. <hl> No monarch has since withheld royal assent on a bill passed by the British parliament.

The power of parliament to pass bills was often thwarted by monarchs. Charles I dissolved parliament in 1629, after it passed motions critical of and bills seeking to restrict his arbitrary exercise of power. During the eleven years of personal rule that followed, Charles performed legally dubious actions, such as raising taxes without parliament's approval. After the English Civil War, it was accepted that parliament should be summoned to meet regularly, but it was still commonplace for monarchs to refuse royal assent to bills. In 1678, Charles II withheld his assent from a bill "for preserving the Peace of the Kingdom by raising the Militia, and continuing them in Duty for Two and Forty Days," suggesting that he, not parliament, should control the militia. The last Stuart monarch, <hl> Anne <hl>, similarly withheld on 11 March 1708, on the advice of her ministers, her assent from a bill for the settling of Militia in Scotland. No monarch has since withheld royal assent on a bill passed by the British parliament.

The last Stuart monarch, <hl> Anne <hl> , similarly withheld on 11 March 1708, on the advice of her ministers, her assent from a bill for the settling of Militia in Scotland.


Question: During whose rule was power transferred more to parliament?

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

Answer: Hanoverian dynasty

<hl> During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty , power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. <hl> The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding <hl> Hanoverian dynasty <hl>, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding <hl> Hanoverian dynasty <hl> , power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government.


Question: Who was the first ruler during this dynasty?

Answer: George I

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. <hl> The first Hanoverian monarch, George I , relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. <hl> Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, <hl> George I <hl>, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

The first Hanoverian monarch, <hl> George I <hl> , relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs.


Question: In attempting to take back control, George III and George IV opposed which church movement?

Answer: Catholic Emancipation

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. <hl> Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. <hl> However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed <hl> Catholic Emancipation <hl> and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.


Question: Which monarch relied on his ministers more than any of his predecessors?

Answer: George I

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. <hl> The first Hanoverian monarch, George I , relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. <hl> Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, <hl> George I <hl>, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

The first Hanoverian monarch, <hl> George I <hl> , relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs.


Question: What did George III and George IV both oppose?

Answer: Catholic Emancipation

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. <hl> Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. <hl> However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed <hl> Catholic Emancipation <hl> and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.


Question: What rule did George III and George IV believe a Catholic emancipation bill would violate?

Answer: Coronation Oath

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. <hl> Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath , which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. <hl> However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the <hl> Coronation Oath <hl>, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the <hl> Coronation Oath <hl> , which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy.


Question: Which monarch granted assent reluctantly under the advise of his ministers?

Answer: George IV

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. <hl> Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and George IV both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. <hl> However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.

During the rule of the succeeding Hanoverian dynasty, power was gradually exercised more by parliament and the government. The first Hanoverian monarch, George I, relied on his ministers to a greater extent than did previous monarchs. Later Hanoverian monarchs attempted to restore royal control over legislation: George III and <hl> George IV <hl> both openly opposed Catholic Emancipation and asserted that to grant assent to a Catholic emancipation bill would violate the Coronation Oath, which required the sovereign to preserve and protect the established Church of England from Papal domination and would grant rights to individuals who were in league with a foreign power which did not recognise their legitimacy. However, George IV reluctantly granted his assent upon the advice of his ministers. Thus, as the concept of ministerial responsibility has evolved, the power to withhold royal assent has fallen into disuse, both in the United Kingdom and in the other Commonwealth realms.


Question: In Scotland, who is responsible for submitting a bill for royal assent?

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

Answer: Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. <hl> After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. <hl> Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the <hl> Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament <hl> submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:


Question: Which three publications are used to signify royal assent?

Answer: London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. <hl> Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes : <hl>

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the <hl> London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes <hl>:

Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the <hl> London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes <hl> :


Question: Under which Scotland Act sections is the royal assent governed?

Answer: 28, 32, and 33

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. <hl> The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. <hl> After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections <hl> 28, 32, and 33 <hl> of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:


Question: How many weeks pass before the monarch receives a bill from the Presiding Officer?

Answer: four-week period

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. <hl> After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period , during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. <hl> Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a <hl> four-week period <hl>, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a <hl> four-week period <hl> , during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality.


Question: Which entities have the capability to refer a bill to the Supreme Court?

Answer: Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. <hl> After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. <hl> Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the <hl> Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State <hl> for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:


Question: For what would a bill be submitted to the Supreme Court of Scotland?

Answer: review of its legality

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. <hl> After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for review of its legality . <hl> Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

Royal assent is the final stage in the legislative process for acts of the Scottish parliament. The process is governed by sections 28, 32, and 33 of the Scotland Act 1998. After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for <hl> review of its legality <hl>. Royal assent is signified by letters patent under the Great Seal of Scotland in the following form which is set out in The Scottish Parliament (Letters Patent and Proclamations) Order 1999 (SI 1999/737) and of which notice is published in the London, Edinburgh, and Belfast Gazettes:

After a bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament submits it to the monarch for royal assent after a four-week period, during which the Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General or the Secretary of State for Scotland may refer the bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (prior to 1 October 2009, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council) for <hl> review of its legality <hl> .


Question: What was the name of the method by which Wales passed legislation in the 2000's?

Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.

Answer: Measures

<hl> Measures , which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. <hl> Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.

<hl> Measures <hl>, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.

<hl> Measures <hl> , which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council.


Question: After a four-week period, who could refer a proposed measure to the Supreme Court?

Answer: Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General

Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. <hl> Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence. <hl>

Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the <hl> Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General <hl> could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.


Question: What were "measures" in Wales?

Answer: the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011

<hl> Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011 , were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. <hl> Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.

Measures, which were <hl> the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011 <hl>, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.

Measures, which were <hl> the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011 <hl> , were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council.


Question: During which years were measures used in order to pass legislation in Wales?

Answer: 2006 and 2011

<hl> Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011 , were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. <hl> Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.

Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between <hl> 2006 and 2011 <hl>, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.

Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between <hl> 2006 and 2011 <hl> , were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council.


Question: In Wales, who had the capability of submitting a bill to the Supreme Court?

Answer: Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General

Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. <hl> Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence. <hl>

Measures, which were the means by which the National Assembly for Wales passed legislation between 2006 and 2011, were assented to by the Queen by means of an Order in Council. Section 102 of the Government of Wales Act 2006 required the Clerk to the Assembly to present measures passed by the assembly after a four-week period during which the <hl> Counsel General for Wales or the Attorney General <hl> could refer the proposed measure to the Supreme Court for a decision as to whether the measure was within the assembly's legislative competence.


Question: The sovereign grants assent by which order?

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Answer: Order in Council

<hl> Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council . <hl> Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by <hl> Order in Council <hl>. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by <hl> Order in Council <hl> .


Question: Who advises the sovereign in this decision?

Answer: Lord Chancellor

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. <hl> Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor . <hl> A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the <hl> Lord Chancellor <hl>. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the <hl> Lord Chancellor <hl> .


Question: Which recent petition for reforms to the constitution led to assent being refused?

Answer: Chief Pleas of Sark

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. <hl> A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark . <hl> (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the <hl> Chief Pleas of Sark <hl>. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the <hl> Chief Pleas of Sark <hl> .


Question: Who advises a bill to be granted or refused?

Answer: Lord Chancellor

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. <hl> Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor . <hl> A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the <hl> Lord Chancellor <hl>. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the <hl> Lord Chancellor <hl> .


Question: When was an Order in Counil passed that laid out new rules for consideration of petitions against the royal assent?

Answer: 13 July 2011

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. <hl> An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent. <hl>

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of <hl> 13 July 2011 <hl> established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.


Question: In what year did the Lord Chancellor refuse to present a law concerning constituational reform for assent?

Answer: 2007

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. <hl> A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007 , concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. <hl> (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in <hl> 2007 <hl>, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in <hl> 2007 <hl> , concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark.


Question: What was the subject of the bill that the Lord Chancellor refused to present for royal assent in 2007?

Answer: reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. <hl> A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark . <hl> (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

Instead, the monarch directly grants royal assent by Order in Council. Assent is granted or refused on the advice of the Lord Chancellor. A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning <hl> reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark <hl>. (A revised version of the proposed reforms was subsequently given assent.) In 2011, campaigners against a law that sought to reduce the number of senators in the states of Jersey petitioned the Privy Council to advise the Queen to refuse royal assent. An Order in Council of 13 July 2011 established new rules for the consideration of petitions against granting royal assent.

A recent example when assent was refused (or, more correctly, when the Lord Chancellor declined to present the law for assent) was in 2007, concerning <hl> reforms to the constitution of the Chief Pleas of Sark <hl> .


Question: Under ancient custom, an Act of Tynwald didn't go into effect until decreed at which location?

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.

Answer: Tynwald Hill at St John's

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. <hl> By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). <hl> Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on <hl> Tynwald Hill at St John's <hl> on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.


Question: Promulgation of an Act of Tynwald originally consisted of reading it in English and which other language?

Answer: Manx

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). <hl> Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx ; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. <hl> This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and <hl> Manx <hl>; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.

Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and <hl> Manx <hl> ; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient.


Question: Nowadays, only the short title and what else are read?

Answer: summary of the long title

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. <hl> This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read. <hl>

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a <hl> summary of the long title <hl> have been read.


Question: How much of the proposed act must be currently read aloud on St John's Day?

Answer: only the short title and a summary of the long title

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. <hl> This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read. <hl>

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, <hl> only the short title and a summary of the long title <hl> have been read.


Question: On what day does St John's Day occur?

Answer: (24 June)

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. <hl> By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June) , but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). <hl> Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day <hl> (24 June) <hl>, but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.

By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day <hl> (24 June) <hl> , but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday).


Question: Where is the open-air sitting of Tynwald usually held?

Answer: Tynwald Hill at St John's

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. <hl> By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on Tynwald Hill at St John's on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). <hl> Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.

Royal assent is not sufficient to give legal effect to an Act of Tynwald. By ancient custom, an act did not come into force until it had been promulgated at an open-air sitting of Tynwald, usually held on <hl> Tynwald Hill at St John's <hl> on St John's Day (24 June), but, since the adoption of the Gregorian calendar in 1753, on 5 July (or on the following Monday if 5 July is a Saturday or Sunday). Promulgation originally consisted of the reading of the Act in English and Manx; but, after 1865 the reading of the title of the act and a summary of each section were sufficient. This was reduced in 1895 to the titles and a memorandum of the object and purport of the act, and, since 1988, only the short title and a summary of the long title have been read.


Question: Since 1993, which body has had power to enact measures?

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Answer: Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod

<hl> Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". <hl> If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the <hl> Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod <hl> has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.


Question: This body makes provisions in respect to matters concerning whom?

Answer: Church of England in the Island

<hl> Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island ". <hl> If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the <hl> Church of England in the Island <hl>". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the <hl> Church of England in the Island <hl> ".


Question: Up until 1994, royal assent was given by whom?

Answer: Order in Council

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. <hl> Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council , as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. <hl> A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by <hl> Order in Council <hl>, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Before 1994, royal assent was granted by <hl> Order in Council <hl> , as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor.


Question: Which position now has the power to grant royal assent?

Answer: lieutenant governor

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. <hl> Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor . <hl> A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the <hl> lieutenant governor <hl>. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the <hl> lieutenant governor <hl> .


Question: Before what year was royal assent approved by Order in Council?

Answer: 1994

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. <hl> Before 1994 , royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. <hl> A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before <hl> 1994 <hl>, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Before <hl> 1994 <hl> , royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor.


Question: Who currently holds the power to grant royal assent to measures?

Answer: the lieutenant governor

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. <hl> Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor . <hl> A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". Between 1979 and 1993, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to <hl> the lieutenant governor <hl>. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to <hl> the lieutenant governor <hl> .


Question: During which years did the Synod have power to enact measures?

Answer: Between 1979 and 1993

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". <hl> Between 1979 and 1993 , the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. <hl> Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

Since 1993, the Sodor and Man Diocesan Synod has had power to enact measures making provision "with respect to any matter concerning the Church of England in the Island". If approved by Tynwald, a measure "shall have the force and effect of an Act of Tynwald upon the Royal Assent thereto being announced to Tynwald". <hl> Between 1979 and 1993 <hl>, the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod. Before 1994, royal assent was granted by Order in Council, as for a bill, but the power to grant royal assent to measures has now been delegated to the lieutenant governor. A Measure does not require promulgation.

<hl> Between 1979 and 1993 <hl> , the Synod had similar powers, but limited to the extension to the Isle of Man of measures of the General Synod.


Question: In the Canadian federal government, who is typically responsible for deciding wether to give assent?

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

Answer: the Governor General of Canada

<hl> If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. <hl> It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

If <hl> the Governor General of Canada <hl> is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.


Question: Which positions from the Canadian Supreme Court may also give assent if need be?

Answer: Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice

<hl> If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. <hl> It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the <hl> Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice <hl> of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.


Question: Who has the capability of granting assent if the Governer General of Canada cannot?

Answer: the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada

<hl> If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada . <hl> It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either <hl> the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada <hl>. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either <hl> the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada <hl> .


Question: How many methods are available to grant assent in Canada?

Answer: Two

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. <hl> Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. <hl> However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. <hl> Two <hl> methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.


Question: If each house of parliament is notified seperately, what regulation applies?

Answer: both houses must be notified on the same day

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. <hl> However, though both houses must be notified on the same day , notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker. <hl>

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though <hl> both houses must be notified on the same day <hl>, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

However, though <hl> both houses must be notified on the same day <hl> , notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.


Question: How can the House of Commons be notified of assent if it is not in session?

Answer: publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. <hl> However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons , whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker. <hl>

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of <hl> publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons <hl>, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.

However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of <hl> publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons <hl> , whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker.


Question: In contrast to the House of Commons, how must the Senate be notified of assent?

Answer: governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. <hl> However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker . <hl>

If the Governor General of Canada is unable to give assent, it can be done by either the Deputy of the Governor General of Canada—the Chief Justice of Canada—or another justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. It is not actually necessary for the governor general to sign a bill passed by a legislature, the signature being merely an attestation. In each case, the parliament must be apprised of the granting of assent before the bill is considered to have become law. Two methods are available: the sovereign's representatives may grant assent in the presence of both houses of parliament; alternatively, each house may be notified separately, usually by the speaker of that house. However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the <hl> governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker <hl>.

However, though both houses must be notified on the same day, notice to the House of Commons while it is not in session may be given by way of publishing a special issue of the Journals of the House of Commons, whereas the Senate must be sitting and the <hl> governor general's letter read aloud by the speaker <hl> .


Question: Which year was royal assent last withheld in the UK?

While royal assent has not been withheld in the United Kingdom since 1708, it has often been withheld in British colonies and former colonies by governors acting on royal instructions. In the United States Declaration of Independence, colonists complained that George III "has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good [and] has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them." Even after colonies such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, and Newfoundland were granted responsible government, the British government continued to sometimes advise governors-general on the granting of assent; assent was also occasionally reserved to allow the British government to examine a bill before advising the governor-general.

Answer: 1708

<hl> While royal assent has not been withheld in the United Kingdom since 1708 , it has often been withheld in British colonies and former colonies by governors acting on royal instructions. <hl> In the United States Declaration of Independence, colonists complained that George III "has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good [and] has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them." Even after colonies such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, and Newfoundland were granted responsible government, the British government continued to sometimes advise governors-general on the granting of assent; assent was also occasionally reserved to allow the British government to examine a bill before advising the governor-general.

While royal assent has not been withheld in the United Kingdom since <hl> 1708 <hl>, it has often been withheld in British colonies and former colonies by governors acting on royal instructions. In the United States Declaration of Independence, colonists complained that George III "has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good [and] has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them." Even after colonies such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, and Newfoundland were granted responsible government, the British government continued to sometimes advise governors-general on the granting of assent; assent was also occasionally reserved to allow the British government to examine a bill before advising the governor-general.

While royal assent has not been withheld in the United Kingdom since <hl> 1708 <hl> , it has often been withheld in British colonies and former colonies by governors acting on royal instructions.