Constitutional monarchy

The Queen’s success rested on her firm understanding of the principles of constitutional monarchy in a democratic state. She took seriously her leading role in the great occasions of each year and of her reign.

Every year saw her distribution on Maundy Thursday in spring, her Remembrance day acts so we do not forget all those who gave their lives in war, Trooping the  colour in summer and her unifying Christmas message. There was the annual  rhythm of the sporting events she liked to attend and time spent in Balmoral and Norfolk outside London.

The reign brought us royal weddings and state funerals, Jubilee celebrations and one off events from the Olympics to World Cup competitions where she  would play her part.She hosted Heads of State visiting from abroad and travelled to many countries as our leading Ambassador.

She opened Parliament and set out the government’s plans in the Queen’s speech from the throne. Written in neutral language it is heard in silence by all parties. MPs then return to the Commons to debate it, support or criticise it, putting living politics into the measured plain prose of the original.

Her success in avoiding political controversy was absolute. She did not find herself in papers based on leaks of partisan or one sided views she was alleged to have let slip in private because she did not allow herself such views. In conversation she was brilliant at being interested in whoever she spoke to without letting slip a viewpoint of her own that some would disagree with and think too political. She did ask the occasional question that made the news, as when she asked why the economic experts had not foreseen the coming economic crash in 2008. She spoke for most of the country when she asked that.

 

121 Comments

  1. Mark
    September 10, 2022

    It is a pity she did not ask the same question about our present energy crisis. It might have forced rather more public discussion of the underlying causes.

    1. Hope
      September 10, 2022

      Charles has already blotted his copy book. Spider letters to ministers, audiences with ministers, speeches on political climate change rot- his predictions proven utterly false, WEF extremism.

      The Queen will be missed as a perfect example for a head of state. Sadly her son over decades never learned his lessons from her conduct. So I do not hold out much hope from him. As for his wife, no thank you.

      1. Donna
        September 11, 2022

        Correct. He may keep quiet in public now …. but he won’t in private. He has been a partisan prince all his life; he cannot simply announce that he no longer is and expect us to believe it.

    2. Nottingham Lad Himself
      September 10, 2022

      It’s a pity that the ERG did not have more respect for her, instead of blustering her into consenting to an unlawful prorogation of Parliament, certainly.

      1. Peter2
        September 10, 2022

        You really are obcessed with the ERG NHL.
        Parliament voted.
        Not the ERG

        1. Mickey Taking
          September 11, 2022

          Martin may not be at the front of the protesters but never short of protest.

      2. Lifelogic
        September 11, 2022

        Well it was not “unlawful” until spider woman and the rest of the supreme court invented new law and decided it was.

    3. ukretired123
      September 10, 2022

      @Mark
      Spot on, why did all the new age “experts” & Energy Ministers since Ed Miliband not understand ” Mind the gap ” and happily posed blowing up proven reliable Power Stations like foolish Nicola Sturgeon for cheap votes.

  2. agricola
    September 10, 2022

    Yes she set an example in the conduct of monarchy in a democratic society that was impecable. One that her son gives every impression he will follow.
    Her question on the failure of economics to foresee anything economic of a useful nature perfectly reflected the views of many of her subjects.

    1. Lifelogic
      September 10, 2022

      Alas we already know Charles’s daft, deluded, wrong headed, unscientific & patently grossly hypocritical views on things like climate alarmism, quack medicine, organic food production
 We cannot unlearn this.

      1. Lifelogic
        September 10, 2022

        400 Doctors and Professionals Declare International Medical Crisis Due to Covid Vaccine Injuries and Deaths see the Dailysceptic.org. The Statistic certainly seem to support this yet still vaccination even of the young who were never at any risk anyway continue? So why?

        1. Iago
          September 10, 2022

          The authority to inject five to eleven year old children with the so-called vaccines against Covid 19 was allowed to lapse on September 1st with no publicity.
          The declaration with its reasoning is frightening. Everyone should read it.

          1. Lifelogic
            September 11, 2022

            +1

      2. Hope
        September 10, 2022

        LL,
        +1
        Charles preached his views very loudly for decades and we are now expected he will behave differently at 73years!

        Perhaps he should have learned to keep quiet about 20 years ago when succession planning was already underway?

      3. Mickey Taking
        September 11, 2022

        I’d like an explanation on how his car runs on cheese and wine, I hope it works on rotten cheese and sour undrinkable plonk! Otherwise what a waste.

        1. Lifelogic
          September 11, 2022

          There can be little doubt that running the Aston off waste wine and cheese products and the expensive adaptations produces far more co2 and pollution than using petrol and cost far more too.

  3. Peter Wood
    September 10, 2022

    Good Morning,
    I would like to see the Monarch state his views on certain issue, for example the United Kingdom and our ‘constitution’.

    Your last paragraph, why economists didn’t spot the coming recession, could be asked again, and here’s a probable answer:
    Bailey also cast doubt on when, or whether, the Bank would start to sell the bonds it purchased under quantitative easing, in a process known as quantitative tightening (QT).

    Bailey said QT was “not intended, for obvious reasons, to cause a disruption to the market. The programme, which has been predictable and has a gradual element, is all conditioned on the logic that we need to behave in a way that avoids disruption”.

    With the government about to sell more debt to fund its support package, the Bank appears keen to avoid pushing debt yields even higher by contributing the supply of bonds to the market.

    While the Bank has raised rates to 1.75%, it is far behind where the market believes it should be, and it appears this will remain the case.
    Translation — Bailry would rather do nothing, as usual, because it’s probably too late anyway.

    1. Mitchel
      September 10, 2022

      There’s a decent article on zerohedge.com today(10/9):

      “Abandoning Sound Money leads to Tyranny and Ruin.”

      It certainly does!And sound money is the very opposite of what we have in the USA,UK and increasingly Europe.

      1. Peter Wood
        September 10, 2022

        Quite so, every now and then ZeroHedge has some excellent articles. It’s my go-to website when I want to be scared!

      2. Lifelogic
        September 10, 2022

        +1 Sunak and Bailey very much to blame! Spending the loot appallingly too.

  4. Mark B
    September 10, 2022

    Good morning.

    She hosted Heads of State visiting from abroad and travelled to many countries as our leading Ambassador.

    To me this is the most successful role the Monarchy has performed. They are non-political and can form long standing relations and bonds with other heads of state outside the political cycle of the UK – Continuity UK !

    Sadly with her passing, and a new PM, the UK has lost much needed experience. The Queen when coming to the Throne had Sir Winston Churchill with his vast knowledge, experience and gravity to rely on. We currently have neither. I would argue that, never before have our institutions and their collective wealth of knowledge and experience been so greatly needed, and that includes people like our kind host.

    The late Queen will undoubtedly be missed much more than we all realise. There will be a time of readjustment but as we have experienced throughout our history, we will endure.

    1. George Brooks.
      September 10, 2022

      Don’t be too gloomy or despondent, Mark B. The Queen was only 26 and we had come through 6 years of war and Churchill was in his 80s. Now we have a King of 73 and a PM in her late forties with plenty of experience to draw on. Furthermore, our King has a Consort who is a very wise and shrewd lady who will be of enormous support.

      This time last week our PM could never have imagined what would confront her from Thursday on this week. She has responded admirably and is no doubt working all hours behind the scenes to keep her programme on track. Stand back and give her a chance.

      1. Peter2
        September 10, 2022

        Well said George.
        I completely agree with you.

        1. Sharon
          September 10, 2022

          Peter2 Me too!

        2. Hope
          September 10, 2022

          Truss was appointed from Wokery- Cameron’s A list- therefore her appointed quota woke cabinet is no surprise. This is following the left wing notion/agenda which demonstrates to me she has caved in to that agenda and shows a distinct lack of leadership.

          Can anyone say how she has changed their lives for the better while she has been in one of the highest offices of state? Any changes to N.Ireland protocol? Condones Johnson’s behaviour? Lockdown that ruined people’s lives and the economy? Supports war with Russia? Thinks Russia should be forced out of Crimea? Promoted Kwertang from BEIS to chancellor who was meant to lead on energy! Remind me how did our nation get to this point on energy- certainly not Russia.

      2. Ian Wragg
        September 10, 2022

        100% agree George. Ignore the naysayers.

      3. Lifelogic
        September 10, 2022

        Well Camilla seem to be sensible enough I agree but her education seems to be one O-level then finishing school in Switzerland and then six months studying French at The University of London Institute in Paris according to Wiki.

        1. Mickey Taking
          September 11, 2022

          Like with Carrie we rely on safe educated broad formation of views and support for those in positions of influence. But in doesn’t always work well.

      4. IanT
        September 10, 2022

        Yes, for goodness sake let’s give people a chance.

    2. Mitchel
      September 10, 2022

      That endurance would be more secure if we took the example of,say,Austria and how she carved out an affluent position for herself despite a vastly reduced standing in the world following the end of the Habsburg Empire.The UK still carries a pretentious imperial superstructure which is enormously expensive(and financed by debauching the currency) and leads to misadventures overseas.

  5. Ed M
    September 10, 2022

    She made a mistake over Diana’s funeral. But quickly learned her mistake and quickly rectified it (sign of humility). Hardly putting a foot wrong over 70 years. The monarch is ultimately here to serve the country not the other way around. She adapted the monarchy since Diana’s funeral so that it became more modern (and intersting and more warm / human / fun / in touch but still serious / dignified) to serve modern Britain. The monarchy became more popular as a result. And she now even more popular overall than Diana. The Queen contributed billions to the economy by the Royal brand she embodied and shaped. Psychologically, she brought calm to the country in hard times. And exemplified, wonderfully the best of our Judaeo-Christian / Greco-Roman values which the the country and Western world need so badly right now.
    Amazing legacy of patriotism.

    1. Mitchel
      September 10, 2022

      You keep wittering on about “Greco-Roman values”;would you like to tell us what they were/are?

      And if you look at the Roman Empire and the Greek/Alexandrian empires that preceded it,you will see that they were mediterranean and predominantly eastern empires-that’s where the wealth and the biggest cities of the time were.The west is largely a Germanic construct,see Charlemagne,with assistance from the Roman Pope-the main survivor from the disintegration of the western empire.

      1. Ed M
        September 10, 2022

        I don’t just mean Greco-Roman (but of the pagan cultures . civilisations, mainly the Greco-Roman).

        By Greco-Roman, I mean. The best of Greek Culture / Civilisation:

        1) Democracy 2) Philosophical way of thinking (Aristotle and Plato). 3) Literature and the idea of Heroism (i.e. Odysseus, Jason of the Argonauts and so on) 4) Love of competitive sport i.e. The Olympic Games 5) Concepts of beautiful architecture

        By Greco-Roman, I mean, the best of Roman Culture / Civilisation:

        1) Stoicism 2) Rule of Law 3) The importance of national structures / engineering projects 4) Patriotism 5) The importance of military training (

        But I also believe we’ve benefitted greatly from other pagan cultures and civilisations and religions and philosophies. But Greco-Roman has been huge in the West.

        Something like that

        1. Ed M
          September 10, 2022

          But pagan cultures / civilisations that are tempered by our Judaeo-Christians values / spirit (I mean not everything about the Romans was good – far from – but a lot was).

      2. Ed M
        September 10, 2022

        I’m wittering on because the modern world is watering down / dumbing down these great values that helped to make / made this country great!

      3. Ed M
        September 10, 2022

        Perhaps for me the greatest concept from our Greco-Roman heritage is that of the HERO.

        The monsters in the Greek myths aren’t meant to be taken literally. They are meant to represent first and foremost certain monsters in ourselves that we have to do battle with through life. So for example, the Cyclops is the danger of looking at things in a very one-dimensional way. The Sirens, for example, represent the danger of excessive femininity in a man. And so on. That we have to have the heroic courage to enter into ourselves and fight these monsters in ourselves (instead of over-externalising or projecting these onto to others). And it’s an adventurous journey of self-improvement.

        To a degree, they also represent monstrous behaviour we have to encounter from others in the world. And also that life itself is a journey of discovery overall.

        This all applies to boys, on rites of passage to grow into proper, mature men. But also for people in general at any age in their lives.

        But overall it’s about an internal struggle or battle to conquer the monsters in ourselves and allow virtue in us, represented by things such as the Golden Fleece to be freed and to flourish. Something like that. This is only just one part of ‘Greco-Roman’ but it’s huge. Our nation, culture and civilisation depends on people fighting these monsters in themselves and bringing forth the golden fleeces!

    2. Mike Wilson
      September 10, 2022

      And exemplified, wonderfully the best of our Judaeo-Christian / Greco-Roman values which the the country and Western world need so badly right now.

      Hmmm, these Judaeo-Christian values of which you (often) speak. Do they include:

      Love thy neighbour as thyself?

      Leviticus 19:18
      You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the LORD. (NKJV)
      When the rich young man asked Jesus Christ what good deed he must do to have eternal life, Jesus ended his summary of the all commandments with “love your neighbour as yourself:”

      And:

      Mark 10:25, KJV: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

      Now, I assume you believe all this stuff. So, not much chance of heaven for one of the richest people in the world?

      1. Ed M
        September 11, 2022

        It’s an age-old heresy, which you are falling into, to think that wealth is necessarily evil.
        ‘Rich’ here means someone 1) who idolises wealth over God 2) and / or acquires wealth immorally 3) and / or spends it or uses it immorally including being selfish in not being generous towards others with if. NOT about the amount of wealth. At end of day it is down to the conscience of each person whether they are idolising money and / or acquiring it immorally and / or using it well once they have it.

      2. Ed M
        September 11, 2022

        So the synthesis between what is best about pagan religions / philosophies / cultures is a wonderful thing!
        St Paul was a Roman Citizen and a Greek scholar.
        Cyrus the Great, described as anointed or holy in the Old Testament, was a pagan – a Persian, fire-eating Zorastrian – like the Three Wise Men!

      3. Ed M
        September 11, 2022

        Lastly, Dickens’ Christmas Carol is a BRILLIANT Christian tale. Scrooge’s problem isn’t that he is wealthy but that he is a stingy old b—–d with it! And that he over-focuses on wealth at the cost of his relationship to his family and friends and at the cost of living a balanced, healthy life with a healty interest in the finer things of like outside the acquisition of wealth. And for all this he above all commits idolatry because money is his god and where he refuses to love others with it (for loving God is also about loving neighbour – or others).

        1. Mickey Taking
          September 11, 2022

          So perhaps Dickens might be a better guide than Greco-Roman heritage?

          1. Ed M
            September 11, 2022

            There’s lots of value to be garnered from both!
            The Romans also founded many old towns and settlements in England. Besides the Roman baths in Bath where I remember having a great tea with my Mum and Dad a long time ago!

          2. Ed M
            September 11, 2022

            Lastly, Dickens loved the ancient Greek Homer. And even more the wonderful Arabian Nights (Arab culture) ..

        2. Ed M
          September 11, 2022

          Lastly, who paid for the building of magnificent Westminster Abbey. It wasn’t the poor (in wealth) monks but the monarch and knights and merchants and tradesmen and so on.

      4. Ed M
        September 11, 2022

        Lastly, it could also be that Christ was calling him to a life of poverty like St Francis of Assisi (or a nun in a convent or whatever) just as He calls married men to a life to aquire wealth for their family and others, including paying taxes. And / or that Christ was testing him with temporary poverty to break some harmful addiction to money the man might have had. The key here is to follow God’s will which can also be impacted by our particular gifts or talents that we are born with or aquire.

  6. Peter
    September 10, 2022

    The Queen was a figurehead who stayed out of politics – a remarkable achievement over the course of seventy years.

    Her popularity was boosted by becoming the monarch at a young age. Media coverage of her life was immense and by and large favourable.

  7. DOM
    September 10, 2022

    We are considerably less free today than we have ever been. This political attack on our most sacred freedoms has been strategically engineered with malicious intent. What is the point of a Constitutional Monarchy whose primary purpose is to defend the people’s rights from political harm when it fails to do precisely that?

    I am no republican. The idea for example of Cameron, Brown, May, Starmer, Blair or Khan as President of the UK is so hideous that I would suggest most would commit Hari Kari if ever such a circumstance ever materialised. But, we need a defence of individual freedoms right now and that defence isn’t coming from the odious political or bureaucratic class.

    If Charles tries to use his influence to drag this nation into a WEF inspired ‘Green utopia’ he’ll destroy the monarchy and our people

    1. Dave Andrews
      September 10, 2022

      His Majesty’s carbon footprint is more than forty times the average Englishman, so rumours of his green credentials have been vastly overestimated.

      1. Mickey Taking
        September 11, 2022

        But it is do as I say, not do as I do.

    2. Lifelogic
      September 10, 2022

      “If” Charles tries to use his influence to drag this nation into a WEF inspired ‘Green utopia’ he’ll destroy the monarchy and our people!

      He surely has already and will continue to do? We cannot un-learn what we know of his facile, deluded views. Not only that But P. William is almost equally deluded and hypocritical. This while they fly around on their private jets, helicopters and Aston Martin’s lecturing other about their week’s break in Spain.

      “Just 96 months to save world”, says Prince Charles this about 14 years ago since then what has been the Prince Charles personal travel and energy bills bills £20 million perhaps?

      1. Sir Joe Soap
        September 10, 2022

        I think he’ll see the need for balance in a headlong rush away from fossil fuels which risks Armageddon from dictatorships which continue with them, towards a more balanced approach where our technology leads to improved costs which leads to economic uptake.

        1. Lifelogic
          September 10, 2022

          Let us hope so.

      2. Donna
        September 11, 2022

        It would be useful if the Government sent him on an overseas trip – to Sri Lanka. So he can see for himself the consequences of following his (and the UN/WEF’s) “Green utopia.”

        1. Lifelogic
          September 11, 2022

          +1

    3. Hope
      September 10, 2022

      +1 exactly. A busy body abusing his power to gain influence for which he should not intervene.

    4. Mike Wilson
      September 10, 2022

      If Charles tries to use his influence to drag this nation into a WEF inspired ‘Green utopia’ he’ll destroy the monarchy and our people

      Why do you think that? Are you under the illusion that a silent majority agree with what seems to be the majority view on here that anything relating to climate and ‘Net Zero’ is ‘greencrap’?

      If you are under that illusion, I think you are very wrong. I would guess that maybe as much as 75% of people are worried (rightly, or wrongly) about ‘man-made climate change’ and think the government is doing too little about it. I would even venture the opinion that most people agree with Charles’ position on this and that he is right and governments are too slow.

      I wonder why you think most people agree with your position. Is it because this site is a bit of an echo chamber for such views?

    5. Mickey Taking
      September 11, 2022

      The idea and tolerance of monarchy was held together brilliantly by such a fine example of what it can be by our Queen Elizabeth. Her rule somehow balanced the extremes and blatant mistakes made by politicians regularly over the decades. It remains to be seen whether Charles can swallow his beliefs and follow such fine examples of his mother. The alternative is a descending value monarchy, and a wider dismissal of its pomp and pageantry which part way fools the unwary into a belief that UK is something it isn’t. Good luck – you will need it.

    6. glen cullen
      September 11, 2022

      I fear for our freedom, our freedom of speech, for our development of democracy
      We shouldn’t being afraid of discussing our constitutional monarchy evolving into a republic without fear of being called a traitor or anti-british
      I see we’re following a 1950s BBC template and script to maintain the government status quo
.we need to constantly evolve or burn like Rome, and I don’t mean evolving into a world government – let aim for democracy first

  8. Philip P.
    September 10, 2022

    An exemplary record over so many years, of neutrality on contentious issues that divided opinion in the country, which let’s hope her successor will follow. There was however one exception. 26th February 2021: ‘It’s obviously difficult for people if they’ve never had a vaccine… but they ought to think about other people rather than themselves.’ Here the Queen was poorly advised by her officials. It is now widely acknowledged, a year or so later, that the Covid vaccine does not protect against infection, and does not protect against spread. Its only value is precisely that it reduces the risk of serious illness and death to oneself. So it’s a personal decision to be taken, and nothing to do with the selfish motive that was very regrettably implied.

    1. Lifelogic
      September 10, 2022

      Even the “protects against serious illness” is highly questionable if you look at the statistics. Certainly for the young and children (who were never at any sig. risk anyway) the vaccines have done more harm than good statistically.

      Also by killing and damaging many young victims they have caused far more loss of quality life years. We currently have significant excess non covid deaths so what is the breakdown vaccinated or not and the causes. It does not seem to be made public – so why is this I wonder? If it showed what the government wanted it to show it surely would be published. The USA does now seem to be rowing back on Children’s covid vaccines at long last!

    2. Lifelogic
      September 10, 2022

      +1

    3. MFD
      September 10, 2022

      If it even does that Philip P, I believe its only use is to line the pockets of big pharma and their sheep!

  9. Shirley M
    September 10, 2022

    Our Queen was exceptional, but she will be a hard act to follow. I doubt Charles will as anywhere near as popular as the Queen, as he is already making controversial remarks regarding the environment. He is entitled to his views, but he is not entitled to use his position to push those views onto us and the world. He could well be the last monarch unless he treads very carefully.

    1. Hope
      September 10, 2022

      The Queen undoubtedly had her views but kept them to herself. A lesson Charles has never learned.

      1. Lifelogic
        September 10, 2022

        Prince Philip (I have it on good authority) was a climate realist.

    2. Mickey Taking
      September 11, 2022

      I can imagine William looking on might be thinking ‘what sort of a family life and what horrendous expectations await me?’. He must hope and encourage that Charles’ seeming intention is to trim down the hangers-on, I mean extended relations, living an unwanted public life in exchange for extreme comfort. ‘Celebrities’ crave it, but the Royal Family have to grin and bear it.

  10. Ian Wragg
    September 10, 2022

    She was a very clever and astute lady. Charles has a big job to follow where she left off.
    There is no place for his preaching on his misguided environmental hobby hordes.
    The Monarcjy is in a precarious position so he would do well to learn from the great lady.
    Rest in Peace your majesty.

    1. Ian Wragg
      September 10, 2022

      Just a reminder that life carries on and today coal is generating more than windmills. 3.4% vi’s 2.7%.
      Perhaps you could pass this nougat on to JRM and explain despite his views and vigour, windmills don’t work without wind. (or subsidy).

      1. MFD
        September 10, 2022

        Well said Ian.

      2. dixie
        September 11, 2022

        And yet according to gridwatch the contributions from various sources looks to vary through the day.
        At 08:50 coal (2%) is generating less than wind (5%) and solar (5%).
        All three are dwarfed by nuclear (19%) and CCGT (57%)

  11. formula57
    September 10, 2022

    Would it be correct though to suppose that the constitution can demand of the monarch more serious work than cutting ribbons and accepting bunches of flowers while not revealing personal views?

    When the constitution does make serious demands, the way the monarchy has evolved creates the risk that either those will be shirked or if adhered to give rise to vehement and widespread outcry.

  12. Iain Moore
    September 10, 2022

    The most important role for the Monarchy is to occupy the top position and deny it to the ambitions and megalomanic desires of politicians. The Prime Minister may accrue most of the powers of the Executive but he/she will always have to bend their knee to someone else, it neatly reminds them of their limits.

    1. Ian Wragg
      September 10, 2022

      Very astute comment. Who checks the checkers.

    2. Mike Wilson
      September 10, 2022

      but he/she will always have to bend their knee to someone else

      In what, real, sense? A Prime Minister can declare war. A Prime Minister can call a General Election. A Prime Minister can get laws passed and if Royal Assent were ever withheld …

      It’s an antiquated institution with no place in the modern world.

  13. MPC
    September 10, 2022

    A charming and appropriate tribute. The queen’s awareness of the need for political neutrality was a reflection of her intelligence and self discipline. The avoidance of political bias on the monarchy’s part, and on the part of others such as the Church of England, is now a thing of the past. It somehow symbolises the continuing decline in our way of life, and the distancing of the elites from the lives of ordinary citizens.

  14. Wanderer
    September 10, 2022

    I don’t have high hopes for her successor. Already a political animal.

    Slightly off topic, but why is half the country shutting down? From the Monetary Policy Committee delaying meeting for a week (aren’t we in an economic emergency?) to the the next rate rise to school sports events purportedly being cancelled etc. Flags at half mast by all means, but a lot of this stuff seems pretty excessive, meaningless, and more about those exercising their power to ban or postpone things.

    The late very much lamented Monarch would surely not have approved of much of this. She was after all, of the generation which created the “keep calm and carry on” slogan.

    1. majorfrustration
      September 10, 2022

      Agree – seems the country enjoys revisiting a form of lockdown.

    2. Lifelogic
      September 10, 2022

      Agreed – numerous things cancelled for no good reason at all. I would not have thought the late Queen would have wanted this at all. She was a the show must go on person surely.

      1. Mickey Taking
        September 11, 2022

        Even Horse racing was halted!

    3. Sir Joe Soap
      September 10, 2022

      Now there’s another Bank Holiday to be paid for by whom? Another random 0.3% knocked off GDP. Churchill’s funeral was held on a Saturday and King George’s didn’t warrant a Bank holiday so why now? It would be better to show our respects to Queen Elizabeth by working hard, as she did.

      1. a-tracy
        September 11, 2022

        I had hoped the funeral would be on a Sunday, it will be hard for SMEs to accommodate a 5% loss of turnover this month, all the costs associated also have to be paid including increasing energy bills.

        I suggest government cancel one of their conference days if not the whole week to crack on with business at hand, and decide how they are going to help business to go for this growth they desire when they just cut away a day that we can’t make up elsewhere.

  15. Roy Grainger
    September 10, 2022

    “She did not find herself in papers based on leaks of partisan or one sided views she was alleged to have let slip in private because she did not allow herself such views.”

    But Cameron persuaded her to make public comments deliberately able to be interpreted as being opposed to Scottish independence during the 2014 referendum. I expect Charles will follow this precedent of making private and public comments which can be interpreted as being in support of his own political positions. Try implementing the Rwanda policy and see what he says.

    1. formula57
      September 10, 2022

      @ Roy Grainger “But Cameron persuaded her to make public comments deliberately able to be interpreted as being opposed to Scottish independence during the 2014 referendum”.

      Shocking, but perhaps less so than when Chamberlain persuaded her father to make a public show of standing with him on the balcony, deliberately able (and meant) to be interpreted as being in favour of the appeasement policy during the 1938 Munich crisis.

      Much nicer to go along with the pretence that the monarchy is wholly separate from political life.

    2. Lifelogic
      September 10, 2022

      +1

      “King Charles to be Defender of the Faith but also a defender of faiths” says the Guardian – How can you defend all the “faiths” when so many of them patently contradict and seriously conflict with each other? Doubtless he will continue to try to defend the climate alarmist faith/religion though – in his grossly hypocritical do as I say not as I do manner.

      1. Mike Wilson
        September 10, 2022

        If you are going to defend one load of nonsense, you might as well defend all nonsense.

  16. Mike Stallard
    September 10, 2022

    King Charles III has been bred more carefully than the finest pedigree dog, the most expensive racehorse. He has been brought up, since his birth, to be a servant of the people under God. It is, literally, in his DNA, just like his mother’s.
    So continuity and confidence are not misplaced.
    God save the King!

    1. Donna
      September 11, 2022

      That was in the days before they understood the weaknesses that can be (and frequently are) bred into pedigree dogs over generations of in-breeding. There are many examples of genetic weaknesses within the Royal Houses of Europe, including ours, since they were all very closely related.

      We are lucky that Prince William is the result of a wider gene-pool and Prince George even more so.

      1. Mickey Taking
        September 11, 2022

        Correct.

  17. ChrisS
    September 10, 2022

    If ever there was to be a demonstration of how a modern state should be run, we have just demonstrated it to the world.

    For a change of both sovereign and government to have taken place so seamlessly within a single week is unprecedented and will probably not be repeated. Yet it has taken place without a hint of protest or difficulty and has not raised so much as an eyebrow, so well has it been conducted.

    With institutions so strong and a people so fiercely proud of our achievements and history, it is not surprising that these isles have survived unconquered for more than 1,000 years.

    Long may it continue. God save the King.

    1. Denis Cooper
      September 10, 2022

      Spot on.

    2. Peter2
      September 10, 2022

      Great post ChrisS

  18. glen cullen
    September 10, 2022

    Are you suggesting that our new King will not speak out in favour of the green revolution and the programme if net-zero

  19. DOM
    September 10, 2022

    I know woke ideology will undermine Monarchy. In this regard John’s party sneaky embrace of this most pernicious and divisive Marxist ideology is utterly unacceptable. Even now in the week of our Queen’s passing we have US based and UK based pro-Biden and pro-Starmer forces playing the race card against her time as our Head of State, invoking the colonial argument to demand reparations and quite simply trying to demonise the Queen, her family and this nation’s people.

    Even Daniel Hannan’s starting to attack diversity insurrection tactics

    The Tory party must reject and indeed publicly condemn woke, diversity and CRT politics or else I cannot see a way back for our Constitutional Monarchy

  20. acorn
    September 10, 2022

    The 20th and 21st Century Monarchy, has made an excellent job of anchoring Britain permanently in the 19th Century. Its finest hour in 1815 (Waterloo), led to it ruling most of the world for the rest of that century. It’s been down hill since then. The next few years look like repeating aspects of the grim conditions, of that Victorian era if you are not in the Elite club.

    “After Waterloo, Britain faced a bright future, and there was an awareness of that. In 1940, on the other hand, Churchill knew that victory would depend on America, and that the price for that would be high, marking another drop downwards in a continuous spiral of imperial decline. Britain in 1945 was essentially bankrupt, whereas in 1815 it had subsidised its allies, and was the world’s financial hegemon.” (https://www.military-history.org/).

    1. Mitchel
      September 10, 2022

      Britain didn’t rule “most of the world for the rest of that century”.If you don’t rule Eurasia you have absolutely no claim or ability to rule most of the world-the essence of geopolitics,both then and now,hence the Great Game,hence Ukraine.

    2. No Longer Anonymous
      September 10, 2022

      Acorn – Indeed. A job without conditions, without pension, without good salary or certainty is seen as the ‘modern’ approach to working.

      I’m afraid quite the reverse is true. A job without conditions, without pension, without good salary or certainty was the norm throughout human history until recent decades.

      I’m realistic about modernisation btw… my only objection to it is that they call it “modernisation” ! A euphemism for Uberisation.

      Lifelogic seems to advocate Uber drivers on minimum wages and conditions working in uber-expensive London rather than black cab drivers earning a self-supporting wage there.

      He fails to understand that:

      A) Uber drivers and their huge families are subsidised with state handouts

      B) the reason that his black cab seems expensive is not that the drivers are overpaid but that his income has not kept pace with the true standard of living.

      C) His excellent point the other day (that the government has reduced his ÂŁ4m pot to ÂŁ1m by stealth taxes) explains why black cabs seem so expensive to him – that filched money has been used to subsidise his Uber drivers (among others) !!!

      When Tories start talking about ‘modernisation’ cling on to your wallets.

      1. No Longer Anonymous
        September 10, 2022

        Should read “..not kept pace with the true *cost* of living”

  21. Sharon
    September 10, 2022

    I have my fingers firmly crossed for King Charles. I forced myself to listen to his speech yesterday and was pleasantly surprised. I am cautiously optimistic that he (to the best of his abilities) will rise to the occasion. He alluded to his charities and other interests needing to be done by others. I believe he’s willing to step up to the mark and try and fill his late mother’s shoes.

    He has The Princess Royal and The Queen Consort, Camilla at his side
both are dedicated and sensible royals.

    The death of her Majesty has shocked even republicans as to how upset they feel at her passing. I hope this will refresh us as a nation, bringing us to greater unity.

    We have Liz Truss and her team
 today I am feeling cautiously optimistic for the future of the country. It’ll be an uphill battle, but I feel we are better placed to succeed.

    Let’s pray I’m right.

  22. a-tracy
    September 10, 2022

    This by far for me is a standout benefit of our system. Paying tribute to the Queen in Parliament earlier today, former Prime Minister Theresa May joked it was the only meeting she knew “would not be briefed out to the media
These were not meetings with a high and mighty monarch, but a conversation with a woman of experience and knowledge and immense wisdom. What made those audiences so special was the understanding the Queen had of issues which came from the work she put into her red boxes, combined with her years of experience.”

    The Queen had only a short time, from the age of 11 to 25, to prepare for her future role, and what a superb job she did with the constant support and help from Prince Phillip. The vast majority of us are supremely grateful to her and her husband. King Charles has had 70 years of training from his Mother, Father and Grandmother for this role I don’t think he should be underestimated.

  23. No Longer Anonymous
    September 10, 2022

    She occupied neutral territory and it was the opinions she kept out rather than those she kept in that held dark forces at bay.

    She was the greatest obstruction to Blairism in so far as she could be. The Tories certainly weren’t !

    The removal of the Royal yacht Britannia was particularly spiteful and counter productive for the good of the nation and our projection of the ultimate version of soft power. With Britannia she could, therefore, be a visitor rather than a guest and also invite influential people into British territory in remote locations. Yet aid going to despots was viewed as better vfm.

    I am not hopeful of our King. He has already shown his partisanship on energy policy and he will not suffer from his own ideas.

  24. Mike Wilson
    September 10, 2022

    Why do we need a monarchy?

    And please don’t say ‘ because we don’t want President Blair’.

    If you think there is a need for an apolitical head of state, why must that be decided by the accident of birth that a hereditary monarchy involves. What is the role of this ‘Head of State’? To host foreign dignitaries? Surely anyone with a bit of personality and life experience could do that. Surely when the top man of France visits, he should meet his equivalent? Not some apolitical figure who lives in one of many palaces etc.

    The whole slavish devotion to ‘Royalty’ baffles me.

    1. Margaretbj.
      September 10, 2022

      I think you know why people need an anchor .Goverments change,politics change ,some need an example of how to be (not learning from their own) .I certainly don’t perceive myself as a slave,yet most are slaves to money.We need it.We don’t need a monarchy but if you look at world wide tributes it certainly doesn’t do us harm. Elizabeth wasn’t schooled in universities but her emotional intelligence and ability to keep on learning and using the information she gathered (for information is what some confuse for intelligence) cannot be surpassed.Charles will do well as he has love in his speeches and evolves rather than being glued to his salad days. I have thought many a time if the state didn’t pay for the monarchy would we be better off.Citizens would not see anything.The grey suits would simply scrap with double speak.

    2. Richard II
      September 10, 2022

      I’m sorry, Mike, but I think it’s very much because we don’t want a President Blair! Or a President Cameron! I want someone to represent this country to the rest of the world who does not have a background in one political party or another. What’s the alternative, if not a politician? I guess it would be some worthy person appointed by… who? A committee? And who would appoint that committee? You get into very tricky ground once you start to consider how an alternative would work (which I see you don’t, Mike). Even for someone like me, not at all a royalist and totally uninterested in royal doings, hereditary constitutional monarchy seems to be the least worst option. We accepted and liked the Queen (at least most of us did) for one thing because there was no argument about her suitability.

      1. Mike Wilson
        September 11, 2022

        And if the hereditary principle produces someone completely unsuitable for the ‘role’? But they don’t step down? If they like the perks but not the hand-shaking? Would rather be out shooting than meeting the elected Prime Minister. Hang around nightclubs and party with their mates in Ibiza? What would you have happen then?

        If you completely removed the monarchy from the political system – no meetings with the PM, no need for ‘Royal Assent’ etc. – so they were just a quaint relic from the past whose job it was to put on the ribbons and sashes and entertain foreign heads of state, I could go along with that.

        That said, it illustrates the rottenness of the whole system. When one elected head of state visits another they should have meetings in a place of business – an office – and they should stay in a hotel. All this pomp and circumstance costs a fortune and is a waste of public money.

        1. Richard II
          September 11, 2022

          The heir to the throne is trained for the role for many years. Nothing’s in perfect but there’s more chance like that of a suitable person occupying it than if some state bureaucrat was found for the job.

        2. Mickey Taking
          September 11, 2022

          Mike you could consider our political system has ‘produced someone completely unsuitable for the ‘role’? several times in a row?

        3. Mark
          September 11, 2022

          The last time extreme prejudice was used to remove a king was 1649. Since then we have seen the Bloodless Revolution, the rule of King George handled by regency and the abdication of Edward VIII. We have evolved ways of dealing with unsuitable monarchs that do not involve chopping off their heads. There is no reason to suspect that were it to prove necessary we would do so again.

    3. margaret
      September 10, 2022

      sp government

    4. a-tracy
      September 11, 2022

      Mike, would you prefer someone from the other dynasties like the Oxbridge PPE classes and who chooses them? Or the power families Benn’s, the Miliband’s, amazing isn’t it just how much work Blairs son is given through the State system of funding to set up a powerful training company.

      Political dynasties exist alongside Royal dynasties. At least this way we know years in advance what we are going to get, they are trained all their lives for that particular job not parachuted in with a months notice. We also know the French President as most other heads of State liked to meet our Queen. In this country we have been encouraged for the past three decades mainly through our education system (now driven by socialist doctrine) not to be proud of our heritage, especially the English. If I were King Charles this is something I’d concentrate on resolving.

      You say we would get to vote and choose but thats not true is it, we don’t have a primary for our political representative and when America chose wrong, an independent person, that person is destroyed by the system, the traitors and turncoats inside the White House. We don’t get a choice we get to rubber stamp what the political class put in front of us, we don’t truly get a say, never have done. They wouldn’t even let the public decide the name of a sea vessel they wanted Boaty McBoat Face thats the one that was picked and the public were behind it but the organisers dismissed their choice. We’ve been told for six years the public made the wrong choice over Brexit it was the ‘thick’ people that got it wrong. So don’t talk to us about voters rights.

  25. acorn
    September 10, 2022

    Having a Head of State and family that is merely an ornamental foreign tourist attraction, may well have been a profitable export. Whether Charles will have a similar level of attraction, time will tell.

    The downside of the above has been proven under the Boris administration. The HoC has proved useless at holding his “Executive” to account. His Cabinet has continually been scoring goals from offside positions. A popularly elected and active Head of State, would have refereed the game in favour of democracy; like happens in Republics. The Speaker of the HoC has similarly proved useless.

    Having watched some of today’s Charlie comic opera, I think Gilbert and Sutherland would have put in a lot more chirpy singalongs for the audience. But at least, we got to see a lot more public sector employees in funny costumes, that you never knew existed but are paying for.

    1. Peter2
      September 10, 2022

      You dont get any political problems in republican countries with Presidents do you acorn.
      Hilarious.

    2. mancunius
      September 11, 2022

      Ah yes, republican presidents like the French politician who treats parliament like a flock of sheep, or the Italian ex-politician who appointed as PM – in the name of ‘unity’ – a globalist banker that no Italian voted for. Then we have the German SPD President whose pro-Russian energy policies have made him unwelcome in the Ukraine. An EU Head of State forbidden to visit a prospective EU country: surely a first.
      We can also cite the Green Party/Socialist President of Austria who has carried his left-wing politics quite openly into the presidency, openly criticizing one of Austria’s main parties with the clear aim of reducing its electoral popularity.
      No no, we are better off without all that pretendy-presiding.

      1. R.Grange
        September 11, 2022

        That German SPD Chancellor preferred to be made welcome in Germany than in a country at the other end of Europe.

        1. mancunius
          September 11, 2022

          Scarecely ‘the other end of Europe’ – it’s a shorter distance between the German and Ukrainian borders than between Berlin and Brussels. And there is only one intervening country – Poland.

      2. Richard iI
        September 11, 2022

        Precisely

      3. a-tracy
        September 11, 2022

        “Pretendy-Presiding” is a perfect summation.

    3. rose
      September 12, 2022

      It is well worth paying to separate the pomp from the power. Besides, George III swapped the revenues from the Crown Estates for the Civil List. The Treasury gets billions from that and grudgingly gives back the Monarchy millions.

  26. ukretired123
    September 10, 2022

    “Charles insists he is ‘not that stupid’ to carry on meddling as King”.
    He will be biting his tongue and counting to ten many times but his blood pressure will go through the roof as he will be unable to contain himself after a lifetime of quips like his papa , unlike his self-disciplined mama.
    He will be an easy target for MSM to wind up, knowing his deep beliefs and track record of controversial subjects.

  27. Richard1
    September 10, 2022

    Excellent speech in the HoC Sir John

  28. mancunius
    September 11, 2022

    I gather from commentary elsewhere that the Monarch has now relinquished all remaining prerogatives. I had thought that on repealing the 2011 Fixed-Term Parliament Act the Queen would have had her (at least nominal) right to dissolve Parliament and appoint a PM restored. It seems that is not so – or are the commentators mistaken?
    As far as I can see, this means that should remainer MPs and Lords take Parliament hostage as they did in 2019, there would still be no way out of the impasse, unless the Supreme Court were to reverse its decision on prorogation.
    Effectively, the monarch can no longer help the country by knocking politicians’ heads together, as George V did in 1931.

  29. rose
    September 11, 2022

    Didn’t she also ask “Why can’t we just leave?”

Comments are closed.