tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post5263882901387169108..comments2023-11-03T07:23:30.909-05:00Comments on The Monarchist 2.0: "The Queen as a Citizen of Europe"Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-73574062067273474322008-01-30T13:05:00.000-05:002008-01-30T13:05:00.000-05:00This is a problem that has been a long time coming...This is a problem that has been a long time coming. The EU element could be dealt with by Britain withdrawing from that organization, but of course that is a decision that will be made by the British people, and will be made on many other criteria as well. But beyond that, a decision may be needed soon on whether the monarchy is a British monarchy that happens to also be the head of state of the other Commonwealth realms, or whether the monarchy is a Commonwealth monarchy standing in equal relation to all realms. <BR/><BR/>Interestingly the novelist Nevil Shute foresaw this problem in his 1953 novel <I>In The Wet</I>, a future history set in 1980. His solution in that story was for the Queen to expatriate herself to Australia and Canada, appointing a Governor-General to reside in England. Thus the monarchy was transformed into a Commonwealth monarchy with all realms on equal footing.<BR/><BR/>Given political developments in Canada, and particularly Australia, that specific solution is probably a non-starter. However, another variant of that strategy may be practical. It would take the form of creating a microstate consisting of the various royal palaces and properties, and possibly the premises of the Archbishop of Canterbury. The monarch would rule this microstate, while remaining head of state of the UK, but represented formally in the UK by a Governor-General, as in the other realms. <BR/><BR/>The microstate would not be a member of the EU, but would have arrangements with the UK similar to those of the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. Thus the prospect of the EU imposing its political authority on the head of state of not only an EU member, the UK, but also the many non-EU states of which she is head of state, will vanish. Similarly the head of the worldwide Anglican Communion would be placed beyond EU authority, something most Anglicans outside of the EU would want see once they were made aware of the problematic nature that situation.<BR/><BR/>Obviously there are issues with such a solution, but it mght be considered as possibility.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08116644502748977445noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-62354111385135270402008-01-29T12:07:00.000-05:002008-01-29T12:07:00.000-05:00I agree, Feldon.I suppose it would be honest to sa...I agree, Feldon.<BR/><BR/>I suppose it would be honest to say I don't know for absolute certain about anywhere other than Canada, where the Act of Settlement is already a part of the constitution, quite separately from the parallel law in the UK.<BR/><BR/>Places like Australia and Papua New Guinea, however, do (by their own choice, of course) refer to the UK laws of succession for the line to their thrones. But, if the UK crown were abolished, the constitutions of the other countries would be unaffected, at least in as much as their monarchical structure. Would they not just become kingdoms without written laws governing succession, which they could just create on their own, parallel to Canada's existent Act of Settlement? Or would the provisions of the Act of Settlement not continue in conventional principal?<BR/><BR/>Regardless, I honestly believe that, thankfully, the EU will have no constitutional effect in any of Her Majesty's realms beyond the United Kingdom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-91592735567851295862008-01-29T03:27:00.000-05:002008-01-29T03:27:00.000-05:00I would assume that the Act of Settlement would be...I would assume that the Act of Settlement would be considered to be a part of Constitutional law in those other countries. Since the passage of the Statute of Westminster, any unilateral change on the part of the UK would just be considered not to have happened, and the monarchy in the other realms would continue to go on.<BR/><BR/><I>No Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom passed after the commencement of this Act shall extend or be deemed to extend, to a Dominion as part of the law of that Dominion, unless it is expressly declared in that Act that that Dominion has requested, and consented to, the enactment thereof.</I><BR/><BR/>I think that's pretty strong evidence (that and similar statements in other constitutional documents) that a unilateral UK abolition of the monarchy would, in effect, be null and void with respect to the other realms unless they consented.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05321133627941151860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-52013687157094496542008-01-28T16:57:00.000-05:002008-01-28T16:57:00.000-05:00In fact, if the UK Crown ceased to exist all-toget...<B><I>In fact, if the UK Crown ceased to exist all-together, Canada, Australia, Jamaica, and the rest, would all remain kingdoms as they are now.</I></B><BR/><BR/>But what would happen to the Act of Settlement? If the UK Crown ceased to exist, what would govern the continuity of the crowns in the other realms. By what mechanism? <BR/><BR/>If the UK Crown ceased to exist, so it would indeed everywhere else. We could not possibly remain as kingdoms without patriating the crown, and the legislation governing how the sovereign is chosen in each of our realms.Tweedsmuirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15545576307045851283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-18294691763001439092008-01-28T16:10:00.000-05:002008-01-28T16:10:00.000-05:00England is the Mother of Parliaments The Crowned H...England is the Mother of Parliaments<BR/><BR/> The Crowned Heads of Europe<BR/><BR/> God Save The Queen<BR/> Long May She Reign Over Us<BR/><BR/>------<BR/><BR/> Queen's death key to Australian republic: former campaigner<BR/><BR/>Mon Jan 28, 2:19 AM ET<BR/><BR/> SYDNEY (AFP) - Australia will likely only break its ties with the British monarchy and become a republic when Queen Elizabeth II dies, the former leader of the campaign for a republic said Monday. <BR/><BR/> Malcolm Turnbull, now a conservative politician, said he did not believe the time was ripe for Australia to shake off a tradition spanning more than two centuries.<BR/><BR/> "I know this is not very consoling to many republicans, and this doesn't give me any joy to say it," the former chairman of the Australian Republican Movement told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.<BR/><BR/> "But my own judgement is that the next time when you would have your best prospects would be at the end of the Queen's reign -- so when she dies, or abdicates."<BR/><BR/> Turnbull was head of the Australian Republican Movement for seven years until 2000 and led its campaign to remove the Queen as head of state, which was defeated in a 1999 national referendum.<BR/><BR/> Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is formally Queen of Australia despite the country's independence from Britain.Mauricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00469738927699939734noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-85722409514026335382008-01-28T13:08:00.000-05:002008-01-28T13:08:00.000-05:00Though I have concern for Her Majesty's sovereignt...Though I have concern for Her Majesty's sovereignty over the United Kingdom, I have to disagree that any EU domination there would have effect on her reign as sovereign of any of her fifteen other realms.<BR/><BR/>Contrary to what Mr. Benwell states, by ending the monarch's ability to legislate for one state as sovereign of another, the Statute of Westminster did indeed create different constitutional Crowns, though they be united in personal union through one monarch, and thereby into one "crown." That unitary crown under which all the realms are united may well be often called the "British Crown," but it isn't the same thing as the Crown of the United Kingdom, and any EU laws affecting the latter, as dismal as they might be, will have no effect on the former. In fact, if the UK Crown ceased to exist all-together, Canada, Australia, Jamaica, and the rest, would all remain kingdoms as they are now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-52812145289009638642008-01-28T12:07:00.000-05:002008-01-28T12:07:00.000-05:00This is what happens when the Government of the da...This is what happens when the Government of the day in the UK sees its primary need as being to ingratiate itself with the Europeans. No Prime Minister will look out for Her Majesty when he is busy guarding his back against back-stabbing in Europe's chanbers. Nor do many of them see the EU through the prism of being Her Prime Minister. The fools actually think they are Head of State!<BR/><BR/>Woe for this ancient land when our Queen is so shabbily treated by those who should be serving her better.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-83819551469206501252008-01-28T11:22:00.000-05:002008-01-28T11:22:00.000-05:00Heaven defend us from the EU. We are living throug...Heaven defend us from the EU. We are living through a chapter in our history that will be lively, humorous and revolting, when it is at last told.mrcawphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01762566258901538306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-50786847175603075252008-01-27T20:52:00.000-05:002008-01-27T20:52:00.000-05:00Patriating the monarchy would indeed get around th...Patriating the monarchy would indeed get around this issue, since we would no longer be associated with the British Crown and the British Monarch.<BR/><BR/>What I want to know is where is this Association of Commonwealth Realms that Philip Benwell talks about? And what can we do to assist it?Beaverbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957034620891207177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-59501186588386167072008-01-27T16:23:00.000-05:002008-01-27T16:23:00.000-05:00Would patriating the Monarchy in Canada get around...Would patriating the Monarchy in Canada get around this particular problem?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-67266216242775413432008-01-27T11:29:00.000-05:002008-01-27T11:29:00.000-05:00"It is interesting to note that, following the ena..."It is interesting to note that, following the enactment of the Treaty of Maastricht, persons within the Church of England sought advice from Buckingham Palace regarding the status of their Oath of Allegiance to The Queen and were advised that the matter has been referred to Union authorities in Brussels resulting in the comment that the Oath could stand 'for the present'!"<BR/><BR/>I'm not even an Anglican and this is terrifying. Will Brussels be appointing the next Archbishop of Canterbury? Or even the Pope? Will there be an EU delegate during the concave?Kiplinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04838567321326673782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3390382704873671828.post-24394030452198389262008-01-27T07:08:00.000-05:002008-01-27T07:08:00.000-05:00Well put Mr Benwell, the very idea that a Sovereig...Well put Mr Benwell, the very idea that a Sovereign can be a citizen is ridiculous anyway, let alone a citizen of the EU. As his Majesty Charles I said "A subject and a sovereign are clean different things"David Byershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16964387756766124214noreply@blogger.com