News Archives 1999 and before
Search By Date
2002 and 2003
2000 and 2001
1999:
December |
November |
October |
September |
August |
July |
June |
May |
April |
March |
February |
January |
1998:
December |
November |
October |
September |
August | July | June |
May | April |
March | 1997 (all)
New Affront By Hereditary Legislators.
The hereditary legislators recently expelled from parliament are to be allowed to continue to treat the legislature as their exclusive club. The remaining legislators-for-life have agreed that their erstwhile colleagues should be free to attend debates and use the restaurants and bars of the House of Lords. These are privileges which are denied to "commoners."
The right by birth of most hereditary peers to a seat in the legislature was recently ended in the first stage of the democratisation of the second chamber.
Royal Oath May Change.
The offensive oath of allegiance to queen Liz Windsor and her successors that members of parliament are asked to swear may at last be changed. The Leader of the House of Commons Margaret Beckett showed sympathy when Labour legislator David Winnick raised the idea recently. The initiative seems to have been prompted by the refusal of the two Sinn Fein MPs to take the oath. Consequently they have been barred from parliament. There had been little pressure for change before this because, unlike their Irish colleagues, British legislators who profess republican views have not forced the issue.
No Catholic Head of State Yet.
Legislators-for-life in the house of lords have rejected a bill which would have ended the nearly 300 year old ban on Catholics taking the throne. The 1701 Act of Settlement requires that the queen or king swear to uphold the Church of England and Church of Scotland. It also forbids the head of state from marrying a Catholic.
Scottish Court Rules For Separation of Executive and Judiciary.
Scotland's highest appeal court has ruled that the appointment of some judges by the chief prosecutor, known as the Lord Advocate, is in breach of the European human rights convention. The court found that the right to an impartial trial was jeopardised by the possible conflict of interest.
Legal experts now expect a challenge to the right of the Lord Chancellor to appoint judges in England. The Chancellor is a member of the government and a judge, but is also responsible for all judicial appointments in England and Wales.
Disgraced Lord Keeps Seat in Legislature.
Jeffrey Archer will be keeping his seat in the House of Lords, as a legislator-for-life although he has been disgraced by recent revelations about his 1987 action for libel. The Conservative Party has withdraw its whip, meaning that it does not recognised him as a member of its caucus. However, the writer of lowbrow fiction cannot be removed from the legislature.
Un-elected Legislators Claim New Legitimacy.
Conservative Party legislators-for-life are claiming a right to wreck government legislative proposals. Now that all but 92 hereditary legislators have been removed from the House of Lords the leader of the remaining Conservatives, the so-called Lord Strathclyde, has threatened to use the powers of the second chamber "with a ruthlessness (not) seen before." The Independent newspaper reported that Conservative sources say that the convention that the Lords did not block the election manifesto promises of the government party no longer applies. They say that this is so because their party no longer has an automatic majority in the un-elected chamber.
Hereditary Legislators Refuse to Go Gracefully.
According to press reports, a group of Conservative former hereditary legislators are talking about setting up a "shadow" House of Lords. The erstwhile legislators apparently believe that Britain cannot do without their wisdom. A consultation paper which is being circulated suggests that all the hereditary "Lords" get together regularly to scrutinise new legislative proposals and hear evidence from experts. The movers of this idea believe that this could persuade the real law makers to amend their legislation.
Hereditary Legislators Thrown Out.
The majority of Britain's hereditary legislators, over 1100 in number, had to leave parliament for good on 11 November. The House of Lords Reform Bill had been approved by the queen.
In the last debate before the so-called lords left the legislature the leader of the Conservative group, "Lord" Strathclyde, declared that those responsible should feel "embarrassment and shame."
When the House reconvenes it will consist of those lords who did not inherit their title and cannot pass it on to the next generation, an innovation from 1958. And 92 hereditary lords who have been reprieved until the next stage of reform, in a compromise agreed by the government to ease the passage of its bill. The Conservative leader in the Lords has threatened that the un-elected legislators will now use their powers "with a ruthlessness (not) seen before."
The recommendations of the commission on further reform of the House of Lords are expected in December. The decision by the government on what to do then will have to take into account the Human Rights Act which will soon become law. That Act incorporates the European human rights convention into British law. The convention requires "free elections at reasonable intervals to ensure the free expression of the people in the choice of the legislature."
Australians Vote to Keep Monarch - For Now.
November 1999. Fifty-four percent of Australians voted to keep the British queen Liz Windsor as head of state in a referendum on 6 November. The victory for monarchists was despite opinion polls showing that under ten percent of the population wanted their country to continue to be a monarchy. The republican vote was split, however, because the constitutional amendment on the ballot paper would have given the Australian parliament the right to appoint the new president. Many republicans voted "no" because they wanted a president elected by the people.
An opinion poll in the British Guaradian newspaper showed forty percent of Britons favouring an Australian republic and only thirty-four percent against.
Prime Minister Reprieves Hereditary Legislators.
November 1999. Prime Minister Tony Blair has appointed as legislators-for-life, ten hereditary legislators who were to have lost their seats in the reformed house of lords. They are in addition to the 92 who the government had already agreed could stay. The PM's justification for his action was that these peers were the first lords in their families and had not inherited their seats. Incredibly Blair also offered five members of the royal family the position of legislator-for-life. They declined the offer.
No Democracy for House of Lords.
October 1999. A leak from the commission which is to make recommendations to the government on stage two of the reform of the house of lords, suggests that only a minority 100 of the legislators should be popularly elected. The majority, 4-500 hundred in number, would be appointed by a committee. Sixteen of the twenty-six bishops of the Church of England who have an automatic right to a seat in the legislative chamber would keep it. The senior judges who act as legislators would also remain. So too might the current legislators-for-life. Prime Minister Tony Blair is reported to be opposed even to this limited step towards democracy for the second chamber.
Legislators-for-Life Vote To Remove Hereditary Legislators.
October 1999. On 26 October the House of Lords voted 221 to 81 to end the right to inherit a seat in the legislature. When the amended House of Lords Bill is passed by the House of Commons more than 800 years of indefensible aristocratic privilege will be in its last days. However, 92 hereditary so-called Lords, about half the number who have regularly taken part in parliamentary business, will keep their seats until the next stage of the second chamber reform, in a deal with the government. The Conservative Party front bench abstained from the vote.
State Clergy Expenses Exposed.
October 1999. A leaked Church of England report has revealed that one bishop of the state sponsored church has claimed £138,000 in annual expenses. Others claimed more than £100,000. The average mobile phone bill was £3,000. A spokesperson for the state clerics told one newspaper that criticism of this spending was "churlish."
Australian Republicans Under Attack In Neck And Neck Race.
October 1999. In the last few weeks before the 7 November referendum on ditching the monarchy support is equally divided between "yes" and "no" voters according to an opinion poll. This is despite Australians being overwhelmingly in favour of a republic. Many republicans seem set to vote "no" however, because they do not agree with the proposal that the new head of state be appointed by parliament. They want the people to elect the president. Only 10 percent of those planning to vote against a republic said they would do so because they liked having Queen Elizabeth as head of state.
As the poll date approached the Australian Republican Movement was threatened by a group calling itself the Australian Underground and Empire Loyalist Movement (the British Empire Loyalists were a fascist group). The threat was followed by the sabotaging of ARM's communications systems.
In Britain the "royal" family intervened on the side of the Australian monarchists. The Sydney Morning Herald reported that the family's web site had changed its description of the constitutional position of the "Queen" in Australia from "head of state" to "sovereign." This seems intended to aid Australian monarchists who claim that that country already has an Australian as head of state in the person of the governor-general who represents the "Queen." They see this as undermining the Republicans' "resident for president" slogan. Buckingham Palace said that the change to its web site-was "an appropriate amendment." The Sydney Herald saw the hand of monarchist Prime Minister John Howard behind the change. It linked it to the monarchist pretence that the role of the "Queen" is not a real cause for concern.
Cambridge Students Vote To Keep Bigot Duke.
October 1999. Representatives of Cambridge University students have voted down a call for the resignation as university chancellor of the Queen's wife, Philip Windsor (aka The Duke of Edinburg and Prince Philip). Students demanding the resignation said that Mr Windsor represented racism and contradicted everything the university stood for. A university newspaper had described him as a bigot and racist.
Hereditary Legislators-for-Life Rush to Keep Privileges.
October 1999. Dozens of the hereditary legislators who sit in the House of Lords have nominated themselves for the 90 seats that will be left for them when the rest are abolished. The election will be in late October and early November. Only other "Lords" will be able to vote. Forty-two of the seats are reserved for Conservative Party supporters, three for Liberal Democrats and two for Labour Party legislators.
Double Jeopardy Protection In Jeopardy.
October 1999. Protection against a second prosecution following acquittal by a jury is in jeopardy. The Law Commission, which recommends changes to legal practices, has raised the idea in a consultation paper. The Commission suggests that double prosecutions might be permitted only in a narrow range of cases. One of the conditions would be that the court authorising the second prosecution should be persuaded that there was a high degree of certainty that the accused would be convicted.
Government Refuses to End Lawyers' Caste System.
October 1999. Keith Vaz, a minister in the Lord Chancellor's Department, or ministry of justice, has defended the system by which an elite of barristers, called "Queen's Counsel," are appointed by the government in a secret process. He also announced that senior judges would continue to be appointed through a similarly secret procedure. Mr Vaz compared the system favourably with the way in which law firms appoint partners.
The law society has called for the ending of the barristers' caste system and is boycotting the secret "soundings" through which judges and barristers are consulted on new appointments. It wishes to see it replaced by an open and objective procedure. A disproportionate number of judges and QCs have been educated at private schools and the Oxford and Cambridge universities. Only 8 of the 98 High Court judges are women. Ninety-nine percent of circuit judges are white.
According to an editorial in the Independent newspaper "the QC title represents confirmation that a lawyer has received the Establishment's blessing." The paper argued that the enormous financial rewards of appointment as a QC are a powerful inducement to aspiring barristers not to make themselves unpopular with the powerful.
Cambridge Students Want Queen's Husband Sacked.
October 1999. The students' council at the elite Cambridge University is to be asked to seek the dismissal of Philip Windsor (aka The Duke of Edinburgh) as the honorary chancellor of the university. The editor of the student newspaper Varsity was quoted in the Independent as saying that the "Duke's" recent racist remarks had brought student dissatisfaction to a head. David Peter declared that Mr Windsor was a living symbol of Britain's old boys' network.
New King For Germany.
September 1999. According to a lengthy "public notice" in a London newspaper a Karl Von Weitinberg has proclaimed himself King of "the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation!" Mr Von Weitinberg, who seems to have 19 forenames, also claims to be the "Prince" of various localities and "Lord" of others. The royal madness is contagious, it seems.
Lawyers' Privilege Attacked.
September 1999. The Law Society, which represents British solicitors, has announced that it will boycott the secret processes by which judges and Queens Counsel (senior barristers) are chosen. The Society said that the procedures amounted to "an old boys' network." It has resulted in the appointment of few solicitors as senior judges. Over half of those judges have been chosen from just 7 barristers' firms. Only four Queens Counsel, who are able to charge double the fees of other advocates, have been solicitors.
At present senior solicitors, barristers and judges are given the names of those being considered for promotion. They are asked their opinion but the appointments are made in secret by the Lord Chancellor, a government minister and judge.
The Law Society boycott is another blow to the system of rigid social stratification that has impeded Britain's progress.
Known Nazi Agent Was Honoured By British Queen.
September 1999. The British honours system has received another blow with the revelation that the writer "Sir" Pelham Grenville Wodehouse was a paid agent of the Nazis during World War II.
Intelligence service files recently opened to public scrutiny reveal that in 1946 the Director of Public Prosecutions believed that Wodehouse should be prosecuted for treason if he ever returned to Britain from exile. However, in 1975 the renowned writer of fiction was made a knight, one of the highest honours, by the British "Queen."
Honours for Sale Charge.
September 1999. Maurice Hatter, boss of a major electronics company, promised the Labour Party £1M in April this year. In May he knelt before "Queen" Elizabeth Windsor to be made one of her knights, becoming "Sir" Maurice. Mr Gavron, a publisher, gave £1/2M in June. The same month he was made a "life peer," to be bowed to as "Lord" Gavron. As such he is also an unelected legislator-for-life in Britain's Parliament.
The donations were revealed when an internal Labour Party report was leaked to the press. Conservative party representatives claimed that it was evidence that honours were being sold by the government. The Labour party denied the allegations and claimed that the party was not embarrassed by the revelations.
Royal Bum Scorns Britain.
September 1999. Edward Windsor, the son of "Queen" Elizabeth Windsor, known as the "Earl of Wessex," has been fiercely scorned by the British press for his allegation in a New York Times interview that successful people are hated in his home country.
Mr Windsor accepts a £140,000 annual hand-out from the British taxpayers for no other reason than being a member of the family. Press commentators pointed out that his TV production company has lost £1.7M since it was formed, despite Mr Windsor's unique access to the family.
Northern Ireland Police To Be Purged Of Monarchist Emblems.
August 1999. Press reports suggest that an enquiry into policing in Northern Ireland, to be published in September, will recommend that the police service there drastically curtail its close association with the British "royal family." If the recommendations are accepted the police will remove portraits of Elizabeth Windsor from public areas of police stations, the crown (as well as the harp) will be removed from the police badge and the police will be known as the Police Service of Northern Ireland instead of the Royal Ulster Constabulary.
The changes are part of broader proposals to make policing in Northern Ireland more inclusive. Only 8% of police officers are Catholics, while 42% of the population are. Monarchist symbols are particularly repugnant to nationalists who wish for a united republican Ireland.
Ballot For Hereditary Legislators.
August 1999. Arrangements have been announced for the first ever election of hereditary legislators! Most hereditary "Lords" will soon loose their seats in the legislature. However, 92 will be allowed to continue to abuse democracy by staying until the second stage of the reform of the House of Lords. These 92 are to be chosen this autumn by a ballot of all the hereditary "Lords." Candidates will be limited to a written electoral statement of 75 words. Many of the more than 750 hereditary legislators are reportedly confused by the very idea of having to justify their place in the government of Britain.
BBC Revealed As Government Tool.
August 1999. The claim of the tax payer funded BBC to be impartial in political matters has been undermined by the release of previously secret public records. They reveal that Prime Minister Winston Churchill was able to prevent the media giant from broadcasting discussion of nuclear warfare during a ten year period in the 1950s and 60s.
The Corporation resisted Churchill's requests but he was able to force it to back down. The Prime Minister claimed that he had prevented even "responsible discussion" of the subject. The BBC was asked to provide the scripts of programmes related to nuclear weapons before broadcast.
The BBC, which taxes every premise in Britain which has a TV or radio, has also until recently stifled discussion of alternatives to the British monarchy.
Another Royal Race Slur.
August 1999. Philip Windsor, Duke of the Scottish capital Edinburgh and husband of the British head of state, has been widely condemned for the latest in a series of racist remarks, which drew international attention. Following the protests Mr Windsor apologised for his suggestion that Indians were shoddy workers. In the past he has made racist comments about the people of Scotland, China, Hungary and New Guinea. However, few commentators noted that monarchy, which reserves the chief public office for the members of one family, is intrinsically racist.
Republican Hopes Bolstered in Australia.
August 1999. The changes of Australians voting in November for a republican constitution have been increased by a decision to focus the referendum question on Elizabeth Windsor, the British "Queen." The monarchist Prime Minister, John Howard, has agreed that Australians should be asked whether they want the "Queen" to be replaced by a president. Monarchists would have preferred no mention of the British monarch.
Legislators-for-Life Delay Democratisation.
July 1999. The arrogance of the hereditary legislators-for-life has reached a new height with two legal challenges to the bill that would remove all but 92 of them from the legislature. The "Lords" claim that the 1707 Treaty of Union between England and Scotland guarantees the right of a number of Scottish "Lords" to sit in the legislature no matter what Parliament or the people may wish. They also claim that if "Lords" have received a writ from the "Queen" summoning them to the legislature, the reform bill cannot prevent their attendance.
A panel of Law Lords, who are judges and legislators in one, will rule on these claims in October. This will delay the enactment of the bill and cost British taxpayers more than £100,000.
Free Speech Wins Over Church Privilege.
July 1999. The High Court has upheld the right of a dissenting Christian to preach in the street outside the Cathedral in Wakefield, Yorkshire. Alison Redmond-Bate had been convicted on a charge of obstructing the police. The conviction was upheld by the Crown Court.
In overturning the conviction Justice Sedley made an unusually strong defence of freedom of expression. "Free speech," he declared, "includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence."
Irish Republican MPs Allowed To Enter Houses of Parliament.
July 1999. Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness, members of Parliament for constituencies in Northern Ireland, have at last been allowed at least to enter the precincts of the Houses of Parliament. The two Sinn Fein members who were elected at the last general election had been banned from Parliament because of their refusal to swear an oath of allegiance to Ms Elizabeth Windsor. However, they are still forbidden to take part in the proceedings of the legislature to which they were elected.
Life Imprisonment Threat to Mentally Ill.
July 1999. The government has announced a plan to change the law to allow mentally ill people who doctors suspect may commit a violent act in the future to be imprisoned for life without trial. Britain has no constitutional protection against such an infringement of civil liberty.
Justice Minister To Again Act As Judge.
July 1999. So called Lord Irving, the Lord Chancellor or Justice Minister, has rejected calls for him not to sit as a judged in Britain's supreme court in the House of Lords. He has insisted on judging an appeal by two workers from Derry in northern Ireland who claim that they were unfairly dismissed from their jobs. The minister told a law conference in Scotland that there was no reason why he should not preside over the court in cases where "the interests of the executive are (not) directly engaged" and he has not "expressed concluded views on the issue" as a government minister."
Scottish Legislators' Republican Gesture.
July 1999, All members of the new Scottish parliament joined in a spontaneous singing of a verse from Robert Burns' republican "A man's a man for a' that" when Elizabeth Windsor (aka the Queen) formally opened the new legislature on 1 July. The ballad derides "Lords" who "strut and stare." According to press reports Charles and Philip Windsor, the son and husband of Ms Windsor, fiddled with their programmes while the legislators sang. The national anthem of Britain ("God Save the Queen"), which expresses anti-Scottish as well as royalist sentiments, was not played in the parliament building.
Anti-royal feeling was also expressed through the white roses worn by nationalist members of the parliament, in preference to the white heather sported by other legislators.
As a part of the Windsor family's effort not offend Scots who may opt for an independent republic of Scotland, Ms Windsor put aside much of the pomp that is usual on such occasions. And she chose to stay away from Scottish celebrations after the opening of the Parliament rather than mar the festivities by joining in. Nonetheless the Independent quoted the centrist Labour member of the Scottish parliament, Douglas Alexander as describing the opening as "a reproduction of obsolete feudal pageantry" rather than an expression of the democratic future.
Lords Pose As Defenders of Democracy.
July 1999. The "Duke of Buccleuch and Queensberry" (sic), a legislator-for-life in Britain's House of Lords, has warned of Orwellian dangers in the proposed ending of the hereditary Lords' right to inherit a seat in the legislature. He envisaged a government plot to extend the five year term of the House of Commons once the hereditary legislators have been removed. To guard against such defiance of the right of the people to choose and remove their legislators, he joined his fellow legislators-for-life in passing an amendment to the bill that will remove the hereditaries from the House. The amendment would prevent "life peers" who had recently been appointed by the government voting on any proposal to extend the term of office of MPs.
More Lords of Misrule.
June 1999. Thirty-six new legislators-for-life have been appointed. The twenty-two nominated by the Labour Party include party hacks and Labour-supporting actors, entrepreneurs and lawyers. Individuals who have donated money to the Labour Party are also amongst the new life peers. According to the Independent the list of new legislators gives "a clear hint to how the House of Lords may look after most of the hereditary peers have been removed."
In an effort to give an equal opportunities air to this exercise in privilege, the Labour Party included a Sikh and a black community activist among its nominations.
Two Conservative Party nominees were blocked. The publisher Conrad Black, who has dual Canadian and British nationality, failed to make it because Canadian law prevents him accepting a foreign title. Michael Ashcroft, wealthy Tory treasurer and financial backer, was blocked by the committee that scrutinises nominations. In a comment which highlighted the undemocratic nature of the second chamber of the legislature Mr Ashcroft complained that "Every treasurer of the party has gone to the Lords and I hope that I don't set a precedent by being the first who doesn't."
"Prince" Attacks Government.
June 1999. Charles Windsor, (a.k.a. Prince Charles) has broken the convention that bars members of the "royal" family from intervening in politics by challenging Prime Minister Tony Blair over genetically modified food. Mr Windsor entered the intense debate with an article in the tabloid Daily Mailthat described as "emotional blackmail" government claims that the food could help reduce world hunger. Mr Windsor and the Prime Minister are also reported to have argued fiercely in private about the subject.
The government has in recent days tried to calm fears aroused by often hysterical attacks on GM food. In his article the "prince," who owns organic farms, described the new developments in food science as "Orwellian" and "unethical." A spokesperson for the Soil Association who regularly meets Mr Windsor, told the press that the "prince" wanted to "turn the tide" against the food.
Although supporters of the British monarchy typically use its non-party political stance to defend it, the Prime Minister's office failed to criticise Mr Windsor for his intervention.
The "prince" is widely seen as sharing the general insipidness of the Windsor family that has often been attributed to its lack of genetic modification over the years.
Welsh Give "Queenie" A Mixed Welcome.
May 1999. The Manic Street Preachers rock band have refused to play in a show staged to celebrate the opening of the Welsh Assembly, Wales' new "parliament." The award winning band turned down the invitation to play in the televised show before a live audience of 14,000 because it was attended the "Queen" of Britain, her husband the "Duke of Edingburgh" and their son, who is known as the "Prince of Wales." Seventies stars Tom Jones, Shakin' Stevens and Bonnie Tyler did perform, however.
In another sign of the lessening of respect for the royals, children at the opening ceremony greeted Ms Windsor with the chant "Queen-ie, Queen-ie, Queen-ie." According to the Independent newspaper she "produced a gritted-teeth smile and looked as if she had swallowed a fly." The ceremony marking the restoration of some self-government after 600 years of English rule was deliberately devoid of pomp.
In a similar spirit the national anthem is not to be played within earshot of the Scottish Parliament when it is opened by Ms Windsor on 1 July. Instead it will be played as she leaves her palace at Holyrood. The British anthem is particularly offensive for Scots, republican or not because of this verse:
God grant that Marshall Wade
May by thy mighty aid
Victory bring.
May he sedition crush
And like a torrent rush
Rebellious Scots to crush
God save the Queen.
Class Divide Narrows.
May 1999. Fifty percent of the British see themselves as middle class, according to government figures. In 1979 only 35% did so. And according to research by the Fitch design consultancy, middle class Britons are much less inclined to mimic the tastes of the upper class. Such luxuries as chandeliers and family portraits are apparently out of favour. Only 7 percent of the 1,000 most wealthy people attended the elite private school Eaton. Ten years ago 25 percent had.
Motion's Devotion.
May 1999. Professor of creative writing Andrew Motion has accepted appointment as poet laureate after two republican poets had rejected the position. The Independent
reported him as saying "I think that I will want to honour the traditional responsibilities, to write poems about royal occasions and so on."
Help for Mentally Ill Monarchs.
May 1999. American scientists have found that cow enzymes may be able to alleviate the symptoms of porphyria, the mental illness that has particularly afflicted members of the in-bred European royal families. The illness was the inspiration for the movie the Madness of King George. The full extent of the "madness" within the royal families is not known.
More Restrictions on Jury Trial.
May 1999. About 20,000 people a year will lose the right to trial by jury if the British government has its way. Home Secretary Jack Straw believes that this traditional right wastes time and money. Lawyers' organisation are planning to join with human rights groups to oppose the change.
Lords Filibuster Reform.
May 1999. Conservative Lords have unnecessarily postponed the final day of debate on the committee stage of the bill which will end the right of hereditary Lords to seats-for-life in the legislature. Six days had been provided for debate of the five-clause bill. Now other business will have to put aside to make room for the final day. In response the government is threatening to back-out of an agreement to allow some hereditary Lords to stay in the legislature until the second stage of reform.
Republican Protests By Scottish MPs.
May 1999. Some members of the newly elected Scottish Parliament made clear their distaste for the oath of allegiance to Ms Elizabeth Windsor that they, like members of the Parliament in London, were forced to swear when they took their seats on 12 May. Alex Salmond, the leader of the Scottish National Party, qualified the oath with a statement that "Our primary loyalty is to the people of Scotland." And Tommy Sheridan, the only Scottish Socialist Party member of the Parliament, declared that "I make this oath under protest."
Reprieve For 92 Hereditary Legislators.
May 1999. The legislators-for-life in the House of Lords have accepted a deal with the government that will allow 92 hereditary "Lords" to remain when their comrades lose their seats. In return for the concession the "Lords" are expected not to be "unreasonable" in their opposition to passage of the law that will remove the great majority of the born-to-rule legislators. The "peers" voted 352 to 32 for the concession.
Labour To Back Unelected Second Chamber.
May 1999. According to press reports the Labour Party would like to see the House of Lords replaced by another legislative chamber that is not accountable to the people.
All the legislators would be appointed by a "commission" set up by the government. No party would be allowed an overall majority of seats.
The Labour Party fears that a reformed second chamber could act as a check on the government if it has the legitimacy that election would give. Labour members in both the House of Commons and the Lords have attached the idea of an appointed chamber. One hundred and fifty MPs from all three of the major parties have called for at least some members of the reformed chamber to be elected.
Lords Threaten Sit-In.
April 1999. Some hereditary legislators have claimed that they cannot legally be removed from the legislature. They say that the Bill to end their right to seats in Parliament is invalid and that they will ignore it. One "Lord" is reported to have said that "We can come back (after the law is passed) and say, 'Excuse me, we are ready to start again."
The "Lords" are relying on seventeenth century case law to thwart democracy.
Call To Side-Line Monarch.
April 1999. A think-tank that is supported by Prime Minister Tony Blair and Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, has called for the British Commonwealth to elect a president. At present the Commonwealth is headed by Elizabeth Windsor, the "Queen" of Britain.
A report by the Foreign Policy Centre says that Ms Windsor is popular in many Commonwealth countries. However, it claims that her effectiveness is limited by her inability to speak publicly on key issues. The president, who would be a politician, would not suffer from being restricted to the same ceremonial role.
The think-tank says that the president should supplement the "Queen," rather than replacing her. However, it also suggests that her son should not be allowed to follow her as ceremonial Commonwealth head when she dies.
Tory Support For Senate.
April 1999. The Conservative Party's constitutional commission has recommended that the House of Lords be replaced by a senate. It the party accepts the more democratic of the commission's two options, the Labour Party may find itself defending an approach to reform that is less radical that that of the party that has traditionally opposed constitutional change.
Under both options the bishops of the Church of England, who now have an automatic right to sit in the House of Lords, would lose their seats. However, the judges who make up Britain's highest court would keep their seats, with the dual role of law-writer and law-interpreter. The proposed senate would keep all the power that the House of Lords now has.
Under the more democratic proposal 480 seats would be filled by popular election. There would be 80 constituencies, each with 6 senators. Two seats in each constituency would become vacant each year. However, the Prime Minister would appoint 15 senators, who would serve as ministers in the government.
The alternative proposal allows for only a minority of 99 senators to be elected by the people. Ninety-nine more be elected by regional legislative assemblies. There would be 100 senators-for-life. And 150 would be appointed by a government commission.
Windsors Seek Deal to Hold Scotland.
April 1999. Fearful that an independent Scotland will be a republican Scotland, the British "royal" family is making new concessions to keep its realm intact. According to press reports they have had discussions with the Scottish National Party about giving up some of their powers in order that Elizabeth Windsor will continue to be the "Queen" of Scotland should its people vote for independence from Britain. The "Queen" seems to be willing to give up her power to dissolve the Scottish parliament and to accept the ending of the "royal" prerogative which gives the government authority to act without the consent of parliament.
Some leading members of the Scottish National Party are republicans. And the party is committed to holding a referendum on whether Scotland should become a republic if it breaks away from Britain. However, opinions polls suggest that a majority of Scots want to keep the "Queen."
In order to appease what the Independent described as "the Scot's notion of people as sovereign," Ms Windsor will forsake her crown and full robes when she opens the new Scottish parliament on 1 July. Instead of her usual horse-drawn closed carriage she will drive to the parliament building in an open carriage, a change apparently intended to bring her closer to her "subjects."
Ms Windsor can expect a less friendly welcome in Australia, which is to vote later this year on whether to become a republic. She has announced that she will not be visiting until well after the 6 November referendum on ditching the monarchy
Republican Poet Not To Be Laureate.
April 1999. Seamus Heaney, one of the front runners for British poet laureate, has announced that he would not accept the position. Mr Heaney is a republican and said that he would be unable to write the tributes to the monarch that the job requires. He is the second republican who has felt precluded from accepting this honour because of Britain's retention of the feudal institution of monarchy. Tony Harrison publicly rejected the position in February.
Support Increases for British Senate.
March 1999. Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs have joined the demands for a fully elected legislative chamber to replace the House of Lords and its legislators-for-life. A motion calling for that has been signed by 131 MPs. The senior party members who have declared their support include former Labour minister for the arts Mark Fisher and former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer Kenneth Clarke. Mr Clarke claimed that a third of back benchers were in favour of a senate type of second chamber, as were most Conservative front benchers. "Only the ballot box can provide the second chamber with sufficient legitimacy for it to perform a constitutional role" he declared.
Tabloids Turn on "Queen Mum."
March 1999. British tabloid newspapers have unexpectedly turned against Mary Windsor, the mother of the British "Queen." The oddly titled "Queen Mother" has for long been considered almost sacred by supporters of the monarchy. However, a report that she is in hock to her bank for £4 million (US$6.5M) caused even such a staunchly conservative newspaper as the Daily Mail to run a story with the headline "Pampered, privileged and such an affront to decency."
According to press reports the "Queen Mum" has expectations of a high style of life. Fifty personal staff, four lavishly furnished homes and a taste for the fanciest of dining out, soon exhaust the £643,000 (US$1M) welfare payment that she receives annually from British taxpayers.
Previous revelations that the most senior "royal" had been a supporter of apartheid in South Africa and had neglected relatives who were confined to psychiatric units did little to undermine popular adoration for her. It may be a sign of the weakening of the hold that the monarchy has on sections of the British people that her excesses have at last caused unfriendly outbursts from some of those most to be expected to uphold her special status.
Majority For End To Hereditary Legislators.
March 1999. On 16 March the elected House of Commons voted by 340 to 132 for a bill that will end the right of hereditary "Lords" to inherit seats in the legislature. The bill has yet to be approved by the House of Lords itself.
The Lords still seem intent on resisting to the last. Even the convention that they do not block legislation that has been promised in the ruling party's election manifesto is being cast aside. "Lord Pearson of Ranoch," an hereditary legislator-for-life, has declared that that sop to democracy does not apply when the survival of one of the last vestiges of feudalism is at stake.
Support for Senate from Conservatives.
March 1999. The Conservative Party may support a Senate composed of 360 regionally elected representatives to replace the House of Lords, according to press reports. This would be to go one better than the Labour Party which instigated the reform but which seems fearful of a second chamber with democratic legitimacy. The Conservatives are apparently also considering whether the second chamber should be able to initiative legislation and have greater power to examine subsidiary laws.
The Conservatives commitment to democracy seems not to be complete, however. Their Senate would still include some unelected legislators-for-life, namely bishops and senior judges. And Senators would hold their seats for 15 years.
Monarchy Does Not Pay.
February 1999. Elizabeth Windsor, the "Queen" of Britain, has been accused of trying to evade a minimum wage law that is soon to take effect. The richest woman in the world advertised for a gate keeper for her castle at Windsor, in Berkshire. For 130 days work a year the security officer would have received no pay, only accommodation. The job advertisement was withdrawn after a newspaper reporter asked questions.
Delay to Lords Reform.
February 1999. Conservative Party members of Parliament have tried to delay the democratisation of the legislature by proposing a large number of amendments to the House of Lords reform bill. One proposal made during the debate on the bill in committee is for hereditary legislators to continue to be allowed to speak in debates during the period before the final stage of reform but after their voting rights have been removed.
Meanwhile a revolt was simmering amongst Labour Party MPs. Thirty-four broke ranks to vote for a proposal to end the right of the Prime Minister to appoint non-heredity legislators to the House of Lords, thereby requiring a fully elected second chamber.
More Lords to Look at Lords.
February 1999. Two more hereditary legislators have joined "Lord" Wakeham on the "royal" commission that is to make recommendations on the reform of the undemocratic second chamber of the British legislature, the House of Lords. They are Douglas Hurd, a one-time Conservative foreign secretary and Brenda Dean, former head of a printing trade union.
Bill Morris, who heads the Labour Party affiliated transport and general union, and Labour MP Gerald Kaufman have also been appointed to the commission by Tony Blair.
Australian Justice Minister Supports Republic.
February 1999. Amanda Vanstone, the Australian Justice Minister, has come out for an Australian republic. She declared that Australia's constitution, which provides for the Queen of Britain to be head of state, discriminated against Australians. Australians no longer had a deep affection for the British monarchy, she said.
Australians will vote on whether their country should become a republic in a 6 November referendum. Opinion polls suggest that there is a good majority for the change. However, republicans are split over whether the president who would replace the Queen should be elected by the people or appointed by Parliament.
Debate on hereditary legislators begins.
February 1999. The government was accused of "class warfare" by one Conservative member of parliament, as the debate opened on the bill that will end the right of hereditary "Lords" to sit in parliament as legislators-for-life. However, the former Conservative Primer Minister, Edward Heath broke the Tories united front by supporting the removal of hereditary legislators. He called for the House of Lords to be replaced by an elected chamber, a reform that the government considers too radical.
The government also faced opposition from some of its own members of parliament. Tony Benn, MP warned that he and other Labour MPs would resist an anticipated deal with the Lords which would allow 90 or more hereditary legislators to stay in office until the full reform of the second chamber is implemented in the new century.
Clerics seek separation of church and state.
January 1999.
According to a report in the Independent newspaper a number of bishops of the Church of England want to end the privileged status of their denomination as the state or established church. The newspaper said that many clerics believe that there is already a "process of creeping disestablishment."
The pressure for change is apparently reflected in a proposal from a "think-tank" within the Church of England to involve others religions in the crowning of the next head of state or monarch.
Lords To Fight Democracy All the Way.
January 1999. Press reports suggest that the hereditary legislators in the House of Lords will resist a change in the law that will end their status as legislators. Their leader has said that there will be wrecking amendments to the government's imminent legislation. He threatened "trench warfare."
The government had hoped that a deal to keep 75 hereditary legislators until the final stage of reform would persuade most "Lords" to give up their fight against democratisation.
Anglicans Anxious About Democratic Reform.
January 1999. It has been revealed that last November the Church of England organised a meeting of senior officials of a number of British Christian churches to discuss its privileged position as the "established" church. The meeting was evidently a defensive move in response to the continuing movement towards democratic reform.
Many in the British churches would like a greater unity but progress towards that is complicated by the privileged status of the Church of England. However, that denomination has indicated that it is not willing to give up its anti-democratic privileges, which include seats in the legislature by right.
November Likely for Australian Referendum.
January 1999. Reports from Australia suggest that the referendum on becoming a republic will be held on 6 or 13 November this year. Australian republicans are set to put in a final effort for a "yes" vote. If successful Australia will become a republic, free of the British monarchy, on 1 January 2001.
In December the Australian Republican movement welcomed proposals by six eminent constitutional experts for public nomination of the head of state who will replace British monarchs. The submission to the Attorney General Darryl Williams put flesh on the model for public nomination agreed by the Constitutional Convention last year. Mr Williams indicated that he would be guided by the Convention decisions when he drafts the proposals that will be put to the Australian people in the referendum.
1500 Sacrificed to Save King.
January 1999. The Royal Navy of Britain left over 1500 naval and air crew to perish in the North Atlantic during World War II rather than risk the life of the "King" of Norway. That was the claim of Channel 4 TV programme shown this January.
The British aircraft carrier Glorious and two escorting destroyers were on course for Britain in 1939 when they were attacked and sunk by German cruisers. A radio message from Glorious reporting that it was under attack was received by another cruiser, the Devonshire, one hundred miles away. That cruiser was under instruction to keep radio silence because it was evacuating the "King" of Norway from that country. The best naval traditions were therefore ignored, the Devonshire continued on its way, failed to alert other ships to the attack and left the crews of the three attacked ships to fend for themselves.
Since the incident official sources have claimed that the message received by the Devonshire was too garbled to be acted on. The Channel 4 programme revealed that the message was understood and consequently the Devonshire prepared its armaments against an attack. The log in which the distress signal was recorded was removed and suppressed.
The "King" of Norway arrived safely in Britain. One thousand, five hundred and sixty-one navy and air force personnel lost their lives. Sixty-three were rescued two and a half days after the attack. Twenty-five of these later died of exposure.
Canadians Talking About Republic.
December 1998. British and Canadian press reports indicate that senior members of the government of Canada have begun to talk about jettisoning the British "Queen" as head of state. Prime Minister Jean Chretien has also discussed the idea with Prime Minister John Howard of Australia, another member of the British Commonwealth. That country is due to vote in 1999 on whether to become a republic.
Mr Chretien recently broke a taboo by referring in a TV interview to the republican feelings that have been spreading in Canada beyond the French Canadians of Quebec. For the first time a majority of Canadians outside Quebec have been shown by opinion polls to favour ditching the monarchy.
Canadians can still be required to swear an oath of allegiance to the British Windsor family. A Liberal member of parliament publicly refused to do so two years ago but other Canadians risk losing their jobs if they decline.
The requirement of a constitutional amendment supported by the federal government and each of the ten provincial governments will makes the freeing of Canada from the monarchy difficult in the short term. Prince Edward Island Prime Minister Pat Binns has said that he will veto such a proposal. The Prime Ministers of Ontario and Alberta have also expressed reservations.
Commonwealth Island on Road to Republic.
The Caribbean island of Barbados will soon discard the British "queen" as head of state, if the recommendations of a constitutional commission are accepted. The commission has recommended that the new non-executive head of state should be a Barbadian citizen chosen by an electoral college to serve a term of seven years.
The report was made after two years of consultation by the commission with Barbadians in Britain and North America as well as at home. The head of the commission said that the recommendation showed "a sense of maturity on the part of Barbados that it can function at the highest level."
Barbados gained independence from Britain in 1966 after more than 330 years as a British colony. It is likely to continue to be a member of the British Commonwealth which includes other Caribbean republics such as Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago and Dominica.
Tory Group Supports Election of Legislators.
December 1998. The Conservative Bow Group has called for the reformed second chamber of the British legislature to be elected. The government is believed to be against this idea, fearing that a second chamber with a democratic mandate might provide a more effective check to the executive than the so-called House of Commons.
It has also been announced that the "royal commission" that is to make recommendations on how the House of Lords should be reformed will itself be chaired by a "Lord.," "Lord Butler." Mr Butler is a former elite civil servant who was acceptable to the conservative party as well as to the government.
Government Said to Want Unelected Majority in Reformed House.
December 1998. According to press reports the British government wants the House of Lords, the second chamber of the legislature, replaced with a chamber in which fewer than a third of the legislators are directly elected. The majority would be elected by members of regional legislatures or be appointed, possibly from the existing non-hereditary Lords. The governing party was said to be afraid that a fully elected chamber would have enough democratic legitimacy to challenge the executive branch of government. The government's proposals are expected early in 1999.
Government Concedes to Hereditary Legislators
December 1998. The British government has agreed with leaders of the hereditary legislators in the House of Lords that 91 of them should keep their seats until the final shape of the reformed house is decided. It did this because of threats from the Lords that they would obstruct the government's programme of legislation in retaliation against its plan to end their right to sit in parliament.
The government had promised legislation during the current parliamentary session to remove all 750 hereditary peers, before a "royal commission" recommended the final shape of a reformed house. It now says that the compromise will allow it to form the "royal commission" in early 199 and possibly report within one year, instead of two.
The opposition Conservative Party was outraged by the deal, which was done behind its back. Supporters of democratic reform fear, however, that the compromise is an forewarning of further compromises ahead. Newspapers already report confidently of a second chamber that is only partly elected, although the "royal commission" has yet to be set up.
The government has confirmed that members of the "royal" family will also lose their seats in parliament.
|
Time Warp |
|
"What does the Guardian think it's doing trying to influence the people of this country to give up their royal family? It's a form of treachery for which in days past people could be hung."
Letter to The Guardian, August 1997
|
Hereditary Legislators Get Notice to Quit House.
November 1998. The intention of the government to end the right of hereditary "Lords" to a seat in the legislature was confirmed on 24 November. Notice was given in the "Queen's Speech" through which the government announces its programme of legislation for the following session of Parliament. There was a rumble of protest from the "Lords" who had gathered in their outlandish robes to hear the speech.
In a later interview Prime Minister Tony Blare claimed that his opposition to hereditary legislators did not mean that he opposed the monarchy. "We don't see the two as linked," he said, although both the "Lords" and the monarch inherit their places in the British system of government.
There were other indications, however, that the removal of the hereditary "Lords" will be but one step in the democratisation of British government. In an editorial comment the Independent newspaper proposed that in future the Prime Minister and not the Queen announce the government's legislative programme. At present the "Queen" describes the government as "her government."
With unusual frankness the newspaper commented that "Britain is ... not actually a democracy but a constitutional monarchy." It argued that if the government is to be understood to be the people's government and the laws the result of the democratic process, then the "Queen" should lose her role in the legislative process. "The public needs to know that the government is not hers but ours," declared the editorial. "Government should be responsible to the citizens .. of the country, not to the Queen and her subjects."
In the Guardian Jonathan Freedland, author of Bring Home the Revolution used stronger language. He wrote that the ceremony of the opening of Parliament made the blood of democrats boil. "Hereditary is still hard-wired into our constitution," he declared. The "Lords'" permanent hold on those red benches (says) that Britain is a nation where power lies not with the people but in the hands of a tiny elite blessed with aristocratic blood."
Illegitimate Legislators Block Undemocratic Law.
November 1998. The unelected legislators in the House of Laws have voted down for a fifth time a government proposal for proportional representation in European elections because it would allow electors to vote only for a "party list" of candidates. By a majority of 29 "Lords" from all parties voted to allow voters to vote for individual candidates, as in all other elections.
The government will attempt to get the bill passed in the new session of parliament. However, it is uncertain whether it will be able to do so in time for European elections if the Conservative Party resists.
The government claimed that the "Lords" were frustrating the will of the people, although its new law would limit the ability of the people to vote for the candidates of their choice. The "Lords" claimed to be defending democratic rights, although as unelected legislators they defy every democratic principle.
The government seems to believe that this defiance by the "Lords" will strengthen its case for ending the right to inherit seats in the legislature. Other supporters of democratic reform see a danger in using the Lords' opposition to a measure that would weaken the ability of voters to make their representatives accountable to them, as a stick with which to beat them.
Troubled Birthday for Welfare Prince.
November 1998. Charles Windsor (aka The Prince of Wales), took part in a re-enactment of the dole office scene from The Full Monty movie shortly before his 50th birthday. He was apparently oblivious to the ironic implications for a man who has had his hands in the pockets of the British taxpayers deeper and longer than even the most long-term unemployed citizen. Mr Windsor, was promoted to Major-General, Rear Admiral and Air Vice Marshal to mark his birthday!
Despite an extravagant birthday party and press coverage that shared front pages with the Iraq crisis, it could not have been quite the celebration that Mr Windsor would have liked. The Independent newspaper reported how "Prince's charm offensive rebounds" a few days before the birthday. It told how a public relations campaign carefully crafted to persuade the British people to feel more affection for Mr Windsor had "ground to a halt." The newspaper predicted that at least one of his advisers would be sacked.
The tax-funded British Broadcasting Corporation remained as loyal as ever, broadcasting a sycophantic edition of Panorama in the birthday week. And the conservative Daily Telegraph reported wide if unenthusiastic public support for the Rear Admiral. But on Channel 4 the Despatches programme reported on a 1,000 percent increase in the rent of one of Mr Windsor's tenants, the very much part-time nature of his public duties and his building of a warehouse on an important archaeological site.
It's no wonder that a man who once would have felt that his status made him invulnerable to criticism marked his fiftieth year by opening a home page on the Web. It's at http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk.
Another Royal Denial.
London Weekend Television is standing by a claim that a senior aide to the "royal" family told it that Charles Windsor (aka the Prince of Wales) wants his mother to resign as head of state or "Queen" so that he can take over. Mr Windsor issued a statement describing the allegation to be made in a TV documentary as "ludicrous" and "outrageous." This is the second recent public statement in defence of his reputation by the man due to become head of state on the death of his mother. In it he referred to his mother impersonally as "Her Majesty" and "The Queen."
The LWT TV documentary will claim that Mr Windsor feels that he is better able to "modernise" the monarchy than is his mother. His plans apparently include a reduction in the number of members of his super-rich family who are supported by British tax payers. He would also like to use a sleight of hand to disguise the cost of the monarchy. The present payments it receives from tax revenue would end. But the family would regain the income from the "Crown Estates," which for 200 years have been in public control.
|
Time Warp |
|
"It is not monarchy which is a lottery, but republicanism. An American journalist told me recently that not only could she not predict who the next US president might be, she couldn't even name the candidates. Britain's next head of state, on the other hand, has been trained for his future role from birth. I know which system I prefer."
Letter to The Independent, May 1998.
|
Nurses Urged to Break With Royals.
October 1998. British nurses and midwives have been urged to end their association with the "royal" family. The call came from Jane Salvage, editor in chief of the Nursing Times, the leading nursing publication. Ms Salvage said that the royal link "suggests fusty tradition and boring, graphics/buttoned-up respectability." She called on the nurses' professional organisations, or colleges, to "discard the trappings of a discredited establishment."
The Royal College of Nursing was given a "charter" which allows it to use "royal" in its name in 1928. The Royal College of Midwives got its charter in 1947. Ms Salvage claimed that support for the ending of this arrangement revealed in a recent consultation exercise by the RCN has been excluded from the published version of the College's report. She pointed out that although most nurses work in the national health service, members of the "royal" family prefer not to use that service. Nor does the family reflect the ethnic diversity of nurses, who have worked hard for their achievements, rather than inheriting them, she said.
This criticism of the "royal" family from such a source is probably without precedent in Britain. It seems to confirm that opposition to undemocratic governmental institutions is less easily cowed than once was the case.
Drive to Prevent Democratisation of Legislature Begins.
October 1998. Former Conservative Party Prime Minister John Major has called for the second chamber of the legislature not to be a fully democratic one when the present system of seats for Lords is replaced. Major proposed that a proportion of the legislators should be "Lords" elected for a single term of ten years. The remainder would also be "Lords" but would be appointed rather than elected. Appointment would be open only to an elite of such figures as university chief officers, generals, retired civil servants, and Nobel Prize winners. The one time Prime Minister said that these unelected and unaccountable legislators should have even greater powers than the current "Lords." He added that his party would obstruct reform of the legislature if its wishes were not followed.
Moore to Think the Unthinkable
October 1998. According to the Independent newspaper Michael Moore the American TV show and movie maker will fantasise about sex with Elizabeth Windsor (aka Queen Elizabeth II) in one of his new TV projects. Moore, who is loved in Britain for his satires of American society, was said to find the British monarchy ridiculous.
Puffs For Prince
October 1998. A campaign by supporters of the monarchy to bolster the public image of Charles Windsor (aka the Prince of Wales) and so prolong the life of the monarchy, was renewed in October with paeans in three national newspapers to the man due to become "King." Former London Times editor Andrew Neil alleged in the Independent that "Some powerful people in our society have decided that this (that Mr Windsor is deserving of the "throne") is what we should now think, to their advantage if not necessarily to ours."
A sign of the increasing need of the monarchy to fight for survival is that Mr Windsor seems to have co-operated with the writers of the puffs.
Lords reform announced.
October 1998. On 14 October 1998 the British government made the formal announcement that it would introduce a bill in the next session of Parliament to remove the hereditary "Lords" from the legislature. A "royal commission" will be set up to decide on the final form of the reformed chamber. Prominent members of the "Lords" confirmed that they would resist democratisation.
Life peers, those who cannot hand on their titles to their children, Bishops and some members of the "royal" family will keep their seats, at least for the time being.
The "royal commission" will be required to take into account the devolution of government in Britain, Britain's legislative relationship with the European Union and possible changes in the voting system. Although it is free to propose a wholly elected legislative chamber it is not certain that it will go for this option. Some supporters of reform believe that a chamber in which some legislators were not elected by the people would be tolerable.
Opponents of the removal of the hereditary peers have demanded that no change be made until the commission has recommended the final constitution of the second chamber. In response the Prime Minister has promised not to use his right to nominate "life peers," or Lords who not entitled to pass on their peerage when they die, to create a "rubber stamp" chamber.
Their was widespread support for the idea of reform but also many doubts about an interim second chamber that might be subject to control by the governing party. The conservative Daily Telegraph claimed that a class prejudice against those who have attended elite private schools is behind the democratic reforms. This was no better than racial hatred it claimed. Only 20 of the 600 or so hereditary peers are women. About one-half of the men attended Eaton school. Their defenders claim that they bring a wider variety of experience than would elected legislators.
Lordly Labourites Oppose Democratisation.
October 1998. Labour Party members who sit in the House of Lords are reported to be joining Conservative Party Lords in defending the prolongation of the system under which many of them inherit a seat in the legislature for life.
The Labour government is going to set up a commission to make recommendations about how the upper house of parliament should be reformed. It may be some years before it makes a report. In the meantime the government intends to end the most grossly undemocratic aspect of the Lords by abolishing the hereditary seats.
One Labour Lord was reported in the London Independent to have said that abolishing the hereditary seats now would be wrong because it would pre-empt the report of the commission. He put forward the incredible prospect that democratisation of the legislature would not be recommended and seats would continue to be handed on from parent to child. The same Lord claimed that there was no hurry about democratisation the legislature and threatened that other legislation would be obstructed if the government did not give way. Another Labour Lord and supporter of the monarchy was quoted as saying that ending hereditary rights in the legislature would put a question mark over the similarly hereditary monarchy, apparently believing that that made a good argument for leaving the Lords alone. Other Lords have complained that they may not be allowed to use the legislative building as a club house when the reform has been made.
The opponents of democratisation are using the excuse that a House of Lords without hereditary legislators will less democratic because the remaining Lords will all have been appointed by the present and past governments. The government, which has a mandate from the electorate to remove the hereditary legislators, does intend to ensure that a majority of the legislators remaining when the hereditary ones go should be its supporters. However, this is hardly less democratic than the present arrangement which gives a large majority in the Lords to the Conservative Party despite the decisive rejection of it at the last general election.
The commission will not be allowed to recommend that members of the "royal" Windsor family lose their right to seats in the legislature.
In a related development some Lords criticised a proposal that the Lord Chancellor, a minister in the government, should dress for work in a lounge suit instead of the robes, wig and breeches he now wears. The minister will lose dignity, they claimed, if he stops dressing as if ready for a children's fancy dress party.
Late News: The Lord Chancellor has denied that he intends to stop wearing fancy dress at work. He will in fact continue to wear a wig, gown, waistcoat and top hat on many occasions. On important occasions he will also wear breeches, tights and buckled shoes.
Prince Doubts Royal Honesty.
October 1998. Andrew Windsor (aka Prince Andrew) has told newspaper reporters that the "royal" family's record makes it difficult for him to persuade the news media that he is telling the truth. "The difficulty is trying to convince you that you are being told the truth," Mr Windsor said during a visit to Malta, "because for the past twenty years you probably have not been. It's like the Russians." Next day he seems to have had second thoughts about the wisdom of his words. In a formal statement he denied that his family had deliberately mislead the press in the past.
An incident involving Anne Windsor (aka Princess Anne) a few days before her brother spoke, suggests that there may be no need for the family to withhold information: the news media will do it for them. Ms Windsor blew up when asked by a British Broadcasting Corp. reporter about her work for charity. The BBC chose not to broadcast this display of bad temper by the tax-payer supported "royal." And most newspapers decided not to report her comments either. In the words of John Walsh of the London Independent "When it comes to mangling the news, the Buckingham Palace press office has nothing on the cautious, forelock-tugging British" news media.
Royal Support for Apartheid Revealed.
October 1998. The recently published diaries of one-time member of Parliament Woodrow Wyatt have revealed that Elizabeth Windsor Snr., the mother of the Queen of England, was a strong supporter of apartheid in South Africa. The so-called "Queen Mother" has until now been depicted by supporters of the monarchy as a model member of the troubled "royal" family, delightful in old age and deserving of the highest esteem.
According to Woodrow Wyatt, Ms Windsor was also an enthusiastic supporter of the right wing former Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. He wrote that he was told that the supposedly bipartisan "royal" family was in the habit of giving toasts to Margaret Thatcher at their dinner table.
Australian Labour Party Committed to Republic.
September 1998. Australian Labour Party leader Kim Beazley has confirmed his party's support for an Australian republic if it wins a majority in the general election on 3 October. He is reported to be looking forward to the new president of Australia opening the Olympics in Sydney in 2000. A referendum on whether Australia should free itself from the British monarchy is due next year.
Limited Lords Reform On Cards.
September 1998. Nominations to a seat in the second chamber of the British legislature may in future be subject to approval by an independent scrutinizer, according to press reports. It has also been reported that the nominations may be made by a bipartisan commission. Previously those "Lords" who are entitled to a seat in the legislature without election, and who have not inherited it from their parents, were directly appointed by the Prime Minister.
The changes seem designed to counter increasing criticism that the procedure for appointing these legislators is corrupt as well as undemocratic. Conservative Party supporters have used this as a central part of their battle to block government plans to end the right of hereditary "Lords" to sit in parliament.
The full democratisation of the British parliament seems still to be far off, however. Leaks from the government committee responsible for formulating reforms, suggest that only two-thirds of the members of the second chamber will be elected. Even that change is likely to be delayed until after the general election in 2002.
Desperately Seeking Approval..
September 1998. The visit of Elizabeth Windsor (aka the Queen of England) to the Brunei in the West Pacific will demonstrate the "royal" family's new democratic approach. Or so a spokesperson has been reported in British newspapers as saying. Unfortunately Brunei is not a democracy and although Ms Windsor will meet its hereditary ruler, she will not be pausing to meet any of the immigrants who do the dirty work in the "sultanate."
Bill To Abolish Hereditary Legislators.
September 1998. Press reports say that the Prime Minister's Cabinet has agreed that the next session of Parliament should be asked to end the right of hereditary "Lords" to a seat in the House of Lords, the second chamber of the legislature. Those "Lords" who did not inherit their titles would keep their seats, however. And full democratisation of the second chamber has apparently been put off until after the next general election in four years time. A promised freedom of information act has also been postponed for at least another year.
Think Tank Says Monarch Should Be Elected.
September 1998. The British think tank Demos has proposed that there be a referendum to decide whether Charles Windsor (aka the Prince of Wales) should succeed his mother at head of state. If he failed to win a majority there would be another poll to decide whether the next in line member of his family, known as Prince William, should become King. Only if both were rejected would the replacement of the monarchy with a democratic institution be considered.
Government ministers rejected the proposal, which was also seen as bizarre by many republicans. However, the government representatives also ruled out recommendations that the monarchy should lose its political powers. The only change seemingly under consideration by the government is a reduction in the 7.5% annual pay rise to one closer to the annual rate of inflation.
Scotland Rejects Fairy Tale Approach to Government.
September 1998. A bipartisan group making plans for the new Scottish Parliament is expected to recommend a modern and straightforward approach to its procedures. The dressing-up and play-acting that obscure the democratic functions of the British parliament seem likely to be rejected. Members will address each other as Mr or Ms, rather than as "the honourable member." Although the "Queen" will make the opening speech she is not expected to wear the crown or ermine robes.
Seats in Parliament for Sale.
September 1998. Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin
business group, has claimed that while the Conservative Party was governing Britain he was regularly given hints by fund raisers that he could be given an official "honour" if he gave cash to that party. Honours can include the right to put "Sir" or "Lord" before your name. "Lords" appointed in this way have a seat for life in the British legislature.
Branson also claimed that his bid to run the British national lottery was turned down because he refused to give money to the party. The Conservative Party denied that it would ever accept a donation in return for a favour.
Spencer Anniversary Disappoints Devotees.
August 1998. The anniversary of the death of Diana Spencer (aka the Princess of Wales) brought a deluge of stories in the British press. In the words of the Washington Post, the newspapers again went into "all-out wretched excess mode." The crises in Russian and world financial markets took second place in the judgement of the British press to memories of Ms Spencer.
The response of that section of the British population that has idolised Ms Spencer was more restrained than many commentators had expected, however. A parade along the route of the funeral procession drew only 300 Dianistas, instead of the 15,000 expected by the organisers. The various shrines to the so-called "Princess" drew only small crowds, according to press reports. The police found that the crush barriers they had made ready were not needed. And services at Westminster Abbey, the scene of the funeral service, were less well attended than on other Sundays.
Independent Calls for "Republican Constitution".
August 1998. The London Independent newspaper has called in an editorial for the British people to demand "the final separation of the monarch from political power." The leading article admitted that to have to ask the permission of the "Queen" before a new law can be enacted or an election called is "demeaning." It emphatically rejected the claim often made in defence of the monarchy that it is "the essential glue of our unwritten constitution."
The Independent stopped short of calling for the abolition of the monarchy, however. Instead it proposed what it called a "republican monarchy!" The "Queen" would continue as head of state, to be followed by her descendants. "An aura of unifying impartiality," the newspaper suggested, would be more easily retained this way.
Oddly for a newspaper that is usually firm in its criticism of all manifestations of racism, the Independent did not try to explain how an essentially racist institution like the monarchy, which denies access to the nation's highest public office to non-white Britons, could be unifying in multi-racial Britain.
Public Relations Drive Pays Dividends for Family.
August 1998. Opinion polls suggest that an intense public relations campaign by Britain's super-rich "royal" family has helped bolster its sagging popularity. The percentage believing that the monarchy would survive for another generation has risen from 38% to 54% over the year since the death of Diana Spencer (a.k.a. the Princess of Wales). Only 18% of those surveyed believed that the monarchy was bad for Britain.
This increased in popularity may be bad news for Britain. But it seems to owe much to the family's hiring of new "spin doctors" and pollsters. Never before have the family been so reliant on the tools previously thought essential only to politicians and big business. The automatic respect that they have in the past expected seems to have gone, giving hope that a majority of Britons will at last see the folly of hereditary right.
Labour Party Group Support For Republic.
August 1998. A referendum on the abolition of the British monarchy and a legislature that is fully elected will be called for by a new Labour Party pressure group to be launched next month. The group, which calls itself Second Term, will be urging the party to make radical reforms to the constitution. It wants the Labour Party to think now about what it will do in its second term of government.
Second Term is on the right of the party and claims to represent new and younger members. It also wants Britain to adopt a proportional representation system for electing legislators.
Poll Shows Support for Changes to Monarchy.
August 1998. A Harris poll for the London Independent has shown 81% of Britons wanting further changes to Britain's monarchy. Only 4% wanted the pace of changed slowed. They survey did not ask whether a democratic system should replace the monarchy or how Britons felt about being taxed to support the super-rich royal family.
An astonishing 17% of those polled said that the death of Diana Spencer (a.k.a. Princess Di) had changed the way that they think about life. Apparently many monarchists are still receiving counselling twelve months after Ms Spencer died in a car crash in France.
Lordly Legislator Was Traitor, Government Files Reveal.
August 1998. Government files declassified this month reveal that British aristocrat William Forbes-Sempill (a.k.a. Lord Sempill ) was suspected by British intelligence agencies of passing classified information to the Japanese government in World War II. The suspicions were not made public and the "Lord" kept his seat in the legislature until he died in 1965.
Republicanism may not be discussed..
Two reports in mid-August have shown how discussion of the democratic alternative to monarchy has been and still is suppressed in Britain.
The British Broadcasting Corporation published its 1948 guide for producers and writers. This revealed that the Corporation had banned all derogatory comments about the British constitution and Parliament, in addition to forbiding vulgar humour. The revelation was another blow to the BBC's claim that it is politically neutral. The Corporation is funded by a tax on everyone in Britain who wishes to listen to the radio or watch TV.
On the same day that the 50-year old guide was made public, the ruling Labour Party was reported by the press to have forbidden public discussion at its annual national conference of proposals from some members for the abolition of the monarchy and of the House of Lords.
Unelected legislators not declaring interests.
Some members of the House of Lords, the unelected chamber in Britain's legislature, have not been declaring business and other interests, according to the Independent newspaper. The regulations that require members of the elected House of Commons to register their interests do not apply to the "Lords," many of whom inherited their seats from their parents. They have a voluntary system, with no penalties for failing to comply.
Some "Lords" have registered interests but have not declared them when speaking in debate, said the newspaper. According to the Independent "Lord" Brabazon of Tara (sic), who is a Conservative Party spokesperson on transport, has spoken in debate without declaring his transport interests. He has registered those interests, however. Other "Lords" have not registered their business interests. Mr Brabazon told the newspaper that in fact interests that he had not declared had not been relevant to the debate.
The Independent predicted demands for the "Lords" to be regulated in the same way as the democratic legislators of the House of Commons.
"Lords" spit on democracy.
July 1998.
The unelected second chamber of the British parliament has voted 290 to 122 to reject a change to the law already agreed by the elected chamber. The clause in a law and order bill would have made the age of consent for gays the same at that for heterosexuals. The government has accepted the defeat rather than risk the loss of the entire bill.
Those who voted to overturn the decision of the elected legislators included bishops of the Church of England, large numbers of supporters of the minority Conservative Party and some "Lords" who were appointed to their seats in the legislature by the Labour Party. In fact, "Lords" who were appointed to their seats showed no less contempt for democracy than those who inherited their place in the government of Britain. Some claimed that they were entitled to vote as they had because they believed that the majority of British people agreed with their opinions on this subject.
A comment in the Independent newspaper illustrated just how far Britain has to go in its understanding of what democracy requires. "It cannot be argued that the debate was illegitimate," said an editorial published the next day. "It was not wrong that the Upper House should have debated, and even delayed, the issue."
"Lords" Defeat Democracy.
July 1998. The un-elected and partly hereditary second chamber of the legislature has won a partial victory over the elected chamber by forcing it to compromise on a bill concerned with student fees. The "Lords" agreed to let the bill pass into law but only on the condition that the government set up an independent enquiry into the issues.
"Prince" Defeated By Architects.
July 1998. The campaign against modern architecture by Charles Windsor (a.k.a. The Prince of Wales) has been lost, according to The New Yorker. The American weekly reported that his architecture institute is held in contempt and tottering, while the architects whose work he has criticised are widely admired. It claimed that those responsible for managing the image of the man due to inherit his mum's head of state job, believe that battling against adventurous and imaginative architecture does nothing to improve his stodgy persona.
In Britain Mr Windsor has been criticised for the graceless way in which he has behaved at the formal opening ceremonies for new buildings with modern architecture. He recently "opened" the bold British Airways office complex, built of steel, stone and glass, at Heathrow Airport. According to press reports the "Prince of Wales" spoke not one word of praise for the building. However, those visiting the offices during the ceremony were told how they must dress to please "His Highness."
They may be bad, but they're not mad.
July 1998. Suspicions that the Family has a history of insanity have been discounted by a Paladin Pictures production on Britain's Channel 4 TV. The "madness of King George" was in fact a result of a hereditary disease porphyria caused by a faulty gene, according to scientists and historians who appeared on the programme. The disease can cause strange behaviour, including uninhibited erotic acts, however.
The programme reported that members of the Family have been screened for the faulty gene in recent years. This followed the discovery that a junior Family member who died in an air crash had had porphyria. According to the programme the realisation that the gene was not extinct sent a shiver of fear through the Family. The programme concluded with the claim that "the curse of King George" could strike again at any time.
Call to end Church of England privilege.
July 1998. The Independent newspaper has made an unequivocal call for an end to the special status of the Church of England, otherwise known as the Anglican Church. The status of state church entitles the Anglicans to seats in the legislature without the necessity of standing for election by the people.
The Independentasserted that "there is no more anachronistic relationship in Britain today than that between the Church of England and the state." However, leading figures in the ruling Labour Party have in the past defended the privileged status of that Church.
Less than 2% of the population attend Church of England services.
Lords confront elected legislators.
July 1998. For the first time in 30 years the un-elected legislators in the House of Lords have on three occasions rejected legislation passed by the elected chamber of the legislature. The "Lords" voted 309 to 108 against government proposals on student fees.
The vote ups the ante in the fight by the Lords to keep hereditary privilege in Britain's system of government. The Labour Party intends to remove hereditary Lords from the legislature but has announced no plans to end the privileges of those Lords who do not have the right to pass on their title.
The government has indicated that it will try to overturn the Lords' vote.
American dream.
July 1998. The start of the new month was marked by two events that illuminated British attitudes towards American ideas of democracy.
In Britain Bring Home the Revolution - How Britain Can Live the American Dream, written by journalist Jonathan Freedland, was published. According to a Labour Member of Parliament reviewing the book it "conveys a boundless enthusiasm" for American democracy at a time when "anti-Americanism is the new socialism of fools."
Meanwhile the British government was represented in Ottawa, Canada at an inter-governmental conference which had the objective of blocking the influence of American popular culture. Half of the governments invited decline to be represented and no consensus was reached at the meeting. The conference had been organised by the Canadian government, which has failed to restrain Canadians' preference for American movies and magazines.
Family takes over £75 million from taxpayers' pockets.
June 1998. Public spending on the super-rich "royal" family was £75 million (US$120) in 1997, according to official figures published this month. That sum includes the £30 (US$48) cost to the taxpayers of expensive security for family members and their many homes.
Taxpayers forked out £17,300,000 (US$27,680,000) for the family's travel, including £700, 000 (US$1,120,000) on their own railway train. The bills presented for payment included the £2,565 (US$4104) cost of a family member flying to a golf tournament and £2,938 (US$4,700) for Charles Windsor to fly to London for a movie.
The only good news was that the family had tried to appease growing public dissatisfaction by reducing its bill by 10%.
However, in the current year the Family are expected to take £19.5M (US$31M)from the British people for their transport. Of that £1.9M (US$3.4M) will be spent on their personal railway train.
Republican success in Northern Ireland.
June 1998. The republican parties, the SDLP and Sinn Fein, took 42 of the 108 seats in the new Northern Ireland Assembly. Seamus Mallon of the SDLP is the Deputy First Minister in the new regional government.
British government to police Internet.
June 1998. First reports have appeared of British government plans to restrict freedom of expression on the Internet. The reports suggest that a panel would hear complaints of defamation or breach of copyright. This would allow people unhappy with the content of a web site to have it censored without having to prove in court that the law had been broken.
Barrister privilege to go.
June 1998. Another crack has appeared in the stratification of British society. The Government has announced that it intends to end the rule that prevents 90% of British lawyers from presenting their client's cases in the higher courts. Only a small elite of barristers and solicitor-advocates are currently allowed to appear in these courts. Those excluded at present include lawyers on the payroll of government agencies and private companies, as well as most solicitors who look after the affairs of private clients
This rule has often meant that the lawyer who has intimate knowledge of her or his client's case is barred from speaking on their behalf in court. In addition the client has to pay for two lawyers instead of one. British people have, in fact, often been denied the right to decide who should represent them in court.
Barristers also received some advice from their ombudsperson: "Speak to your client!" It seems that many of these dandies of the legal profession have preferred not to talk to their clients. Not only do they often know nothing of the case until the day before they are due in court. But even then they have ignored the person they represent, preferring to talk only to the solicitor who has been handling the case.
Labour's Lords.
June 1998. The Labour government has created 18 new Lords who will sit in the unelected house of the British legislature. They include the general secretary of the Labour Party and two Labour members of the European Parliament. Among the 4 Liberal Democrats made a Lord was Andew Phillips, the chairperson of the Citizenship Foundation. (Note. There is no connection between The Centre for Citizenship and The Citizenship Foundation apart from this hypertext link!)
A few days before the Guardian newspaper published an unusually powerful denunciation of the House of Lords by one of its writers, Jonathan Freedland. He called on those who are admired by liberals and progressives to reject a Lordship if one were offered to them. The unelected chamber was, he said, simply illegitimate. Jonathan Freedland also offered a startling solution to the conundrum that has been puzzling many British people: what to put in place of an hereditary right and patronage? Democratic election!
Meanwhile the Demos think tank, that earlier this year proposed selection to the second legislative chamber by lottery, published a report on the family. Among the new Demos novelties: children to be given a vote from birth, administered by their mothers; children to have the right to veto parental divorces or abortions.
Islands Persuaded to Adopt Human Rights.
June 1998. The Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, semi-detached dependencies of Britain, have been "persuaded" by the British government that they should incorporate the European Convention of Human Rights into their laws. In Jersey recently a Senator was expelled from the legislature after pointing out conflicts of interest arising from new laws. In Sark there can be delays in the courts for as long as 10 years.
Calls for new national anthem.
June 1998. "The Master of the Queen's Music" and Andrew Lloyd Webber , the impresario, have called for a new national anthem to replace the monarchist "God Save the Queen."
The Prince v the people on food science.
June 1998. Charles Windsor (a.k.a. the Prince of Wales) told the conservative Daily Telegraph newspaper that genetically engineered foods should not be allowed in Britain. Genetic engineering "takes mankind (sic) into realms that belong to God" he declared. On the same day it was reported that the people of Switzerland had voted overwhelmingly against a ban on genetically altered plants.
The Independent newspaper commented that Charles should "keep quiet." It said that the only relevance that the monarchy might still have was as "a symbol of the nation." The expression of opinions on controversial subjects could put that at risk during a time of royal instability, the paper implied.
Satellite TV channel warned over American shows.
June 1998. Government media minister Chris Smith has warned Rupert Murdoch's Sky for showing too many American TV shows. European Union regulations require broadcasters to show European programmes for at least 50% of air time. Some Sky channels have fallen under 40%, mostly because of popular US programmes. There is no constitutional protection of freedom of expression that would prevent the government dictating programming.
Tom Sutcliffe of the Indeptendent newspaper commented critically on this protectionist regulation that "a national culture that needs legislation to stay alive isn't worth having." He questioned the claim that only the inferior parts of American programming would be lost to Europeans. His headline was "Don't kill American trash TV, manure nourishes rare blooms."
Conservative Party threatens to prevent abolition of hereditary legislators.
June 1998. The leader of the unelected Conservative legislators who sit in the House of Lords has threatened to block a new law to take power away from those legislators who have inherited their seats in the "upper" house of Parliament. The new law is likely to be proposed in the autumn. The Conservatives claim that they are not opposed to the ending of hereditary rights but would rather keep them than have a chamber composed entirely of "Lords" appointed for life by the present and previous governments.
Royals switch to gas.
June 1998. Simon Lewis, PR chief for the Britain's unpopular leading gas company, has been appointed as Elizabeth Windsor's "communications secretary." Mr Lewis, a one-time adviser to the Social Democratic party, is said to be close to key players in the ruling Labour Party of which he is now a member. His appointment is part of an attempt to improve the public image of the "royal family" but their spokesperson denied that he was to be a "spin doctor."
Legislature's top hat rule thrown out.
June 1998. In another modernisation step the elected house of Britain's legislature has voted that legislators need no longer wear a top hat in order to raise a point of order during votes. One Labour legislator claimed that this change could create a "dangerous situation."
Irish Monarchist says "Queen" is foolish.
May 1998. Ian Paisley, the leader of the Democratic Unionist party in Northern Ireland this week described the British "Queen" as "very foolish." This was apparently in response to Ms Windsor's approval of the "Good Friday agreement" that led to the referendum on whether Northern Ireland should have an elected Assembly. The comment caused great surprise as Mr Paisley is considered to be one of the fiercest opponents of republicanism and a strong defender of the union of Northern Ireland with monarchist Britain.
Police confiscate china pigs.
May 1998. Police in Leicester, England have removed 17 porcelain pigs from the home of Nancy Bennett. The collection, displayed in the window of her house, apparently caused offence to Muslims attending a nearby mosque. The police acted under much-criticised public order powers that allow them to forbid lawful acts if they believed that others may feel provoked to cause disorder.
No more backwards walking.
May 1998. For the first time in hundreds of years the Lord Chancellor, a minister of the government, is to be allowed to turn his back on the "Queen" during the formal annual opening of the legislature. Government officials have decided that it is better to forgo this sign of respect for the "Queen" than put the Chancellor at risk of an injury.
Queen's Chaplain proposes elected monarch.
May 1998. Eric James, a former chaplain to the Queen of the United Kingdom put forward the idea of an elected monarch in a lecture and an article in The Independent newspaper. The paper made great play of the idea, supporting the article with a front page lead and an editorial. However, the editorial went no further than to urge a less ostentatious and expensive royal family. The paper followed up the next day with a piece by monarchist writer Ben Pimlot. He pointed out that hereditary succession is "both a defining and necessary feature" of monarchy.
Artists snub Queen of Britain.
May 1998. Over 300 from the British arts community turned-down an invitation to a drinks party with the "Queen." About 800 did attend the bash at one of the lady's palaces close to London.
More scrutiny of royal spending.
May 1998. The British government has given in to demands for increased scrutiny of the royals spending of taxpayers' money. Under pressure from a committee of the legislature, spending on palaces and royal transport is to be audited. The total expenditure this year on these items will be £19 million (US$30 million).
Lottery for legislators proposed.
April 1998. A British think-tank, Demos, has suggested that the "Lords" who sit in the upper legislative chamber should be replaced, not by elected representatives, but by legislators picked at random. They would serve for a fixed term, with no accountability to anyone.
Britain to be re-branded.
April 1998. The British government has formed a panel of experts to transform the image of Britain in the rest of the world. The Foreign Secretary commented that some people outside of this country saw Britain "as no more than the sum of our past - a heritage theme park of castles and villages." He did not say how the thought that impression could be changed while the government of the country retained many of the features of feudal society.
Setback for democracy.
March 1998. Two "dukes" and a "prince" will keep their hereditary seats in the "upper" chamber of the British legislature when others lose the right to take their parent's seat, according to newspaper reports. Apparently the government is ready to compromise when it publishes proposals to change the law on the hereditary element of government in Britain. Three members of the "royal" family will be allowed to keep their privileged place in government.
Police name to change in Northern Ireland.
April 1998. The British government minister responsible for Northern Ireland, Majorie Mowlam, has told members of the British Parliament that the Royal Ulster Constabulary will have to change its name. The RUC is the police force for Northern Ireland. It is the only police department in the United Kingdom that has "royal" in its name. Wide support for republicanism has existed much longer in Northern Ireland than it has in Britain.
Toyota say British "Queen" has had her day.
March 1998. An Australian advertisement for Toyota cars caused apolexy amonngst monarchisters this month. The ad boldly described the Queen of Britain as a "British export that's had its day."
Subjects to learn to be citizens.
March 1998. Compulsory school classes in citizenship have been recommended by a British government committee. Five percent of the school week should be spent teaching school students that although they may not have the rights of citizens they do carry the duties. The government is expected to accept the recommendations. The committee said that it was worried by the amount of "apathy, ignorance and cynicism about public life" in the UK.
How many Highnesses?
March 1998. Press reports said that the "royal" family were rowing about whether they should reduce the number of family members called "Royal Highness." The idea came from the "Way Ahead Group," that is composed of six leading members of the family and their advisers. Its objective is to "modernise" the monarchy in order to fend off its abolition. The family has also decided that women need no longer curtsy when they meet a royal. And some minor royals are to loose their police bodyguards
British legislature to be less undemocratic.
March 1998. The British government is expected to propose a change in the law before the end of 1998 to remove "Lords" who inherited their seats from the "upper" house of the British Parliament. "Life peers" will keep their seats. These legislators are appointed by the government and keep their seats until they die. However, they cannot hand them on to their children as other "peers" do.
Gender equality for monarchs.
March 1998. The British government announced that it was to propose a change in the law that would end the precedence that the male children of monarchs have had over female children when the position of British head of state became vacant on the death of the monarch.
Australians vote for republic.
February 1998.The Australian constitutional convention endorsed a proposal by the Australian Republican Movement that the "Queen" of Britain should be replaced as the Australian head of state by a president elected by the Australian parliament. There will be a referendum on this proposal in 1999.
Most Australians are republicans.
February 1998. A survey by the Weekend Australian showed that over two-thirds were in favour of their country becoming a republic. At present the "Queen" of Britain is the head of state. Prime Minister John Howard, a monarchist, conceeded that Australia could throw off the scourge of monarchy by 2001.
Family looses yacht.
1998. The "royal" family has at long last lost its yacht. Members of the family sailed in the large ship at the expense of the British tax payers when travelling abroad. But the £50 million (US$160 million) cost of bringing the hulk up to date was too much in the new mood of caution towards the royals' presumptions. They will keep their aircraft and special railway train for the time being. The train takes £2 ½ million (US$4 million) and the planes £9 million (US$14 million) from the pockets of British tax payers each year.
Cost of housing "royals" cut.
1997. The cost of cost of running the numerous palaces in which the "royal" family live was cut by 17% in 1997. Still the tax payers were paying a bill of nearly £20 million (US$32 million).
Majority of British do not support "royal" family.
August 1997. A poll published by the Guardian newspaper in August 1997 suggested that for the first time only a minority of British people believed that the country was better with the monarchy than without. 48% favoured the monarchy. 30% were opposed to it. Don't knows made up 21%.
 For The News In 2000
Top
|
