The British House of Commons has voted in favor of legislation that would allow women to succeed to the throne on equal terms with men.

As the law stands now, a woman can only ascend the throne if she does not have any brothers. However, in 2011, David Cameron announced that the prime ministers of the sixteen Commonwealth Realms where Queen Elizabeth II is Head of State had agreed to let daughters inherit on an equal basis. From henceforth, the Crown would go to the eldest child, regardless of sex.

After lengthy negotiations with the various Commonwealth governments, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg introduced legislation to make the change official. But in addition to doing away with male-preference primogeniture, the Succession to the Crown Bill also makes other adjustments to the law of succession. Notably, members of the Royal Family will no longer be barred from succeeding to the Crown if they marry a Roman Catholic. Also, the requirement to seek the monarch’s consent before marrying will be limited to the first six people in the list of succession. Presently, every descendant of George II is supposed to obtain the sovereign’s permission to marry; if they fail to do so, their marriage is null and void. Under the new law, those who marry without the monarch’s consent will only forfeit their claim to the throne.

Before the Commons began their debate on the general principle behind the bill, MPs expressed frustration at the government’s proposed timetable for the law’s journey through Parliament.

“We spend hours debating the taxation of lorries and other such matters, which get a full day allocated for Second Reading, whereas the succession to the Crown is to be dealt with in a truncated Second Reading debate, a brief Committee stage, and then one day for the remaining stages,” said Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg. “That seems to me to be an insult to the nation, to our sovereign and, indeed, to Parliament.”

Rees-Mogg also argued that the Commons should be able to extend the scope of the bill. He pointed out that if an heir to the throne were to marry a Roman Catholic, he or she would be expected to promise to do everything in their power to see that their children were raised in the Roman Catholic faith. But the sovereign is also Supreme Governor of the Church of England, so they cannot be members of the Roman Catholic church. Rees-Mogg maintained that, if a Roman Catholic ascended the throne, it would be best to allow an Anglican regent to handle ecclesiastical matters.

“That is an entirely logical extension of what is proposed in the Bill and time ought to be allowed to debate it, because when we start these changes and decide that in this modern age we need to be more politically correct and allow Catholics to marry into the throne, we have to consider the consequence.”

But despite the misgivings of a number of MPs, the government’s timetable was ultimately agreed to by a voice vote. Since the opposition Labour Party also backed the timetable, there would be little chance of defeating it.

During the actual debate on the bill itself, the vast majority of speakers declared their support. However, some MPs questioned the government’s decision to require the first six heirs to the throne to obtain the monarch’s consent before marrying. “I simply do not understand why the monarch would want to retain the right to forbid somebody to marry and to declare their marriage null and void because consent was not granted,” said Labour MP Chris Bryant.

“On what basis would they refuse to grant consent—because someone involved was illegitimate, not wealthy enough, a commoner or an actress?” he continued.

But Clegg defended the government’s decision, saying that it was right for the monarch to have a say in the marriages of those who were most likely to inherit the Crown. “Having been in consultation with the royal household over a prolonged period, we feel that that strikes the right balance.”

Conservative MP Ben Wallace expressed concern about the bill’s effect on the Duchy of Lancaster. He claimed that the duchy would continue to be governed by male-preference primogeniture, so a female heir to the throne might not inherit its multi-million pound property portfolio. But Clegg dismissed his concerns, saying that the bill was only concerned with succession to the Crown and Parliament could deal with the issue of other titles later.

Several MPs also voiced concern that, although the bill allowed members of the Royal Family to marry Roman Catholics, Roman Catholics would still be prohibited from ascending the throne. But given the lack of political will to disestablish the Church of England, it seems likely that the religious requirement will remain for the foreseeable future.

After giving the bill a second reading, the House immediately resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole House to discuss the bill in detail. Although several backbench MPs moved amendments based on concerns raised during the second reading debate, the only amendment that was actually passed was a minor technical change moved by the government. But MPs will have another opportunity to propose amendments during the bill’s report stage on January 28.

The article MPs Back Succession Changes appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Letters between the Prince of Wales and the British government will remain secret after the Attorney General intervened to block a court order mandating their release.

Last month, a panel of judges ruled that seven government departments had to disclose correspondence they had received from Prince Charles. But Section 53 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 gives ministers a veto over such decisions. In a ten-page document that accompanied his decision , Dominic Grieve MP said that he was taking action to protect the political neutrality of the Crown.

One of the fundamental principles of Britain’s constitutional monarchy is that the sovereign must be politically neutral. By longstanding convention, the Queen only acts on the advice of the government of the day. However, she must be kept informed about the business of government, and she is free to share her views privately with ministers. The need to preserve the Crown’s neutrality is seen as so important that communications between the royal family and the government are treated as strictly confidential, although the Freedom of Information Act 2000 originally allowed certain documents to be disclosed if it was deemed to be in the public interest.

Throughout her sixty-year reign, Queen Elizabeth II has shown herself to be a model of political circumspection. She does not give interviews, and on the few occasions when she does not speak on ministerial advice, her remarks are scrupulously apolitical. There was a brief furor in 1986 when the Sunday Times claimed that some of Margaret Thatcher’s policies were causing the Queen ‘dismay,’ but the assertion was swiftly rubbished by the Palace.

Prince Charles, on the other hand, has gained a reputation for being rather more outspoken than his mother. He has not shied away from public comment on topics such as architecture and organic farming, and he is known to share his views with ministers from time to time. While his critics claim that he is exerting undue influence on the government, his defenders argue that, as the future king, he is entitled to discuss his views with ministers.

The present tussle started back in 2005 when Rob Evans, a journalist from the left-leaning Guardian newspaper, sought to use the Freedom of Information Act to force the disclosure of Prince Charles’ correspondence with several government departments. His request was opposed by the government, and he ended up having to fight it all the way to the Upper Tribunal of the Administrative Appeals Chamber.

Last month, the Tribunal ruled that the disclosure of the documents was in the public interest. In their ruling, the judges sought to draw a distinction between correspondence that allows Prince Charles to prepare himself for kingship and correspondence that advocates certain positions. While the former should remain confidential, the latter could be disclosed to the public.

But the Attorney General disagreed. “In my view, it is of very considerable practical benefit to the Prince of Wales’ preparations for kingship that he should engage in correspondence and engage in dialogue with ministers about matters falling within the business of their departments, because such correspondence will assist him in fulfilling his duties…as king,” Grieve said.

Grieve also pointed out that, although the letters could be “frank,” they did not cross the lines of constitutional propriety. But at the same time, their disclosure could make it harder for people to accept his political neutrality when he becomes king.

“The ability of the monarch to engage with the government of the day, whatever its political colour, and maintain political neutrality is a cornerstone of the UK’s constitutional framework,” Grieve concluded.

Rob Evans, the journalist who originally asked for the letters to be disclosed, condemned the Attorney General’s decision, claiming that “the public has a right to see these letters” in order to gauge Prince Charles’ influence on government policy.

The anti-monarchy group Republic chimed in as well. “The Attorney General’s decision is all about protecting Charles and the Royal family from scrutiny, putting his demands above the rights of the British people,” said Graham Smith, the group’s chief executive.

“Dominic Grieve has made it clear today that no citizen should ever bother trying to find out what the royals are doing behind closed doors: the government will never let the light in.”

In the future, it will be impossible to use the Freedom of Information Act to sneak a peek at royal correspondence. Under changes to the law that took effect last year, the Queen, Prince Charles, and the Duke of Cambridge now enjoy a blanket exemption from the act.

Image Courtesy of   The Great Photographicon

The article Prince Charles’ Letters to Remain Secret appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Over 1,000 boats took to the Thames for a grand pageant to mark the second day of Queen Elizabeth II’s Diamond Jubilee celebrations.

An estimated 1.2 million people thronged the banks to get a glimpse of the 86-year-old monarch and her family as they progressed down the river.

The event began when the Queen and her husband, the Duke of Edinburgh, arrived at Chelsea Pier, where they were met by the Prince of Wales in his capacity as Patron of the Thames Diamond Jubilee Pageant, along with his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall. After reviewing a Guard of Honor of Chelsea Pensioners, the royal party boarded a tender from HMY Britannia, which took them to the royal barge.

The craft that would carry the royal family was the MV Spirit of Chartwell, a 210-foot hotel barge usually used for luxury cruises along the Thames. The Spirit of Chartwell was heavily modified for the occasion so that she might resemble historic royal barges from the 16th and 17th centuries. The barge’s sides were adorned with red drapes, and the bow was decorated with a crown and the royal cypher. Also on board were extensive horticultural arrangements featuring flowers from the Queen’s gardens. Designed by Rachel de Thame, star of BBC Two’s Gardeners World, they followed a red, gold, and purple color scheme.

The Queen and her husband took in the day’s events from two lavish thrones placed under a canopy on the barge’s top deck. She was accompanied by other senior members of the royal family, including the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince Harry.

Pageant participants were grouped by type, and the groups were separated by ‘herald barges’ carrying bands that played a diverse assortment of music. The bands ranged from the Academy of Ancient Music and the London Philharmonic Orchestra to the Shree Muktajeevan Pipe Band and Dhol Ensemble and Rhythm on the River. Among the pieces played was a new composition based on the original titles of Handel’s “Water Music.”

The boats taking part in the procession were equally diverse, and included rowboats, sailboats, steamboats, as well as an array of historic ships, including Dunkirk little ships and a Maori war canoe. One of the highlights was the Gloriana, an 94-foot vessel built specially for the occasion in the style of 18th century royal barges. Powered by 18 oarsmen, the Gloriana was the brainchild of Lord Sterling, who organized the Queen’s Golden Jubilee celebrations in 2002.

“I became enamoured with the idea of building something timeless and got inspiration from Canaletto’s paintings that showed the great barges of the 18th Century and decided to build one,” he told the BBC.

The Gloriana was financed entirely through donations and will be given to the Queen as a present to mark the occasion.

Image Courtesy of dutourdumonde / Shutterstock.com

The article Queen’s Diamond Jubilee: River Pageant on the Thames appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Queen Elizabeth II kicked off her Diamond Jubilee celebrations by attending Epsom Derby with other members of the royal family.

The Queen received a rapturous welcome as the royal motorcade made its way onto the course, and she was greeted by Katherine Jenkins’ rendition of the National Anthem as she emerged from her car. In addition to her husband, she was also joined by several of her relatives, including the Duke of York, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, and Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie.

The Queen is a keen horsewoman, and the Epsom Derby is one of the highlights of her year. In past years, she has had a horse in the race, and it is said that winning the Derby is one of her fondest ambitions. She has already won the 1,000 Guineas, the 2,000 Guineas, the Oaks, and the St. Leger. Last year, her horse Carleton House came in third.

“She’s incredibly knowledgeable. Her knowledge of thoroughbreds and breeding goes way back,” said Anthony Cane, chairman of Epsom Downs Racecourse.

Epsom had a carnival atmosphere this year, with a dramatic parachute fall by the British Army’s Red Devils taking place shortly before she arrived. Spectators were treated to a performance by Ashleigh Butler and her dog, the winners of Britain’s Got Talent. There were also stiltwalkers dressed as guardsmen, complete with trademark red tunics and bearskin hats.

Today’s race is traditionally called the Coronation Cup, but it has been renamed the Diamond Jubilee Coronation Cup. After the race, the Queen presented the trophy to trainer Aiden O’Brien. His horse, St. Nicholas Abbey, also won last year.

Elsewhere in Britain, the start of the Jubilee was marked by a 41-gun salute in London, and 21-gun salutes in Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast. On Sunday, the Queen will take part in a pageant on the Thames that will see over 1,000 boats sailing down river. On Monday, there will be a picnic for 10,000 members of the public at Buckingham Palace, followed by a pop concert featuring such luminous names as Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Tom Jones, Sir Elton John, Robbie Williams, and Stevie Wonder. Come nightfall, 2,012 beacons will be lit across the country. The Jubilee celebrations will conclude on Tuesday with a Service of Thanksgiving at St. Paul’s Cathedral, after which the Queen will attend a reception in her honor hosted by the Lord Mayor of London at Mansion House. Meanwhile, millions of her subjects will take part in street parties and other local events.

The article Queen Elizabeth II Starts Jubilee Festivities at Epsom Derby appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Every so often, the British media will run a story about how the government of the day is considering amending the laws governing the succession to the Throne. Nothing is ever done, however, and the story quickly fades from view. But David Cameron may be bucking the trend, for he has finally set in motion the ponderous process of changing the law.

At issue is the fact that the current law is perceived by many as discriminatory. Men take precedence over women. If William and Kate have a daughter, she can only inherit the Throne if her parents never have a son. Such gender discrimination is increasingly hard to justify, and there is widespread support for allowing women to succeed on equal terms.

Cameron also wants to end the prohibition against marrying Roman Catholics. The Act of Succession 1701 states that, if a person who is in the line of succession marries a Roman Catholic, they automatically forfeit their right to the Crown. On the surface, this looks like a straightforward issue of religious discrimination.

Critics have pointed out that the prohibition does not apply to a person who marries a Presbyterian, a Muslim, or even an atheist, and they see it as something of an anomaly that Roman Catholics are singled out in this manner. However, allowing a person who is married to a Roman Catholic to ascend the Throne could have unforeseen consequences because of the Roman Catholic Church’s rules regarding ‘mixed’ marriages.

Typically, if a Roman Catholic marries a non-Roman Catholic, the non-Roman Catholic person must agree to let any children be raised as Roman Catholics. This would be problematic because a Roman Catholic cannot ascend the Throne because of the monarch’s role as Supreme Governor of the Church of England.

Although supporters of succesion-law reform argue that, because the monarch’s role in the Church is mostly ceremonial, there is no problem with a Roman Catholic becoming the titular Supreme Governor of the Church of England. The Church of England continues to oppose such a move. Since there is little political will to disestablish the Church of England, Cameron’s reforms can only go so far.

Because the British monarch is also the monarch of fifteen other countries within the Commonwealth of Nations, any change to the succession law will require the unanimous agreement of those other countries. Cameron has written to the Queen’s other Prime Ministers to obtain their support for the changes, and it is likely the matter will be discussed further at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Perth later this month.
Zoran Karapancev / Shutterstock.com

The article David Cameron Eyes Royal Succession Shakeup appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.