I am not usually one to take aim at the Royals - as far as I'm concerned, they are still a valuable British institution despite their much-noted shortcomings. When it comes to politics, however, a line must be drawn firmly in the sand. And that line has been crossed.
The restriction of monarchic power has been a long, difficult struggle, beginning with the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. Formally, the Queen is still the Head of State - but the Crown is (supposedly, at least) a symbol, little more than a figurehead who serves an altogether apolitical role. This, however, as the Guardian has uncovered this week, may have never been the case at all.
A process called Queen's Consent, which originated in the 1700s, has been used 'more than 1000 times' by the monarch to vet proposed legislation which directly impacts them. Essentially, this process enables the Queen, and other senior Royals like Prince Philip and Prince Charles to scrutinise bills before they are voted on in Parliament - allowing them to lobby and influence the political process in their favour.
The Guardian has reported on multiple examples of legislation tampered with by Royal hands, mostly related to land and agriculture ownership and subsidies, which has a significant impact on the family, who still own substantial areas of land. Another shocking example describes the Crown's lawyers pressuring ministers to alter legislation so that the Queen's private wealth was not made publicly available.
Let there be no confusion here - this is corruption. Imagine if we were talking about a corporation, or privately wealthy individual being afforded this level of access to the political system. It would be a disgrace, an outrage of national, even international, proportions. It would inevitably lead to legal proceedings. The Queen, however, need not fear. Despite publication in a major national newspaper, the revelation has garnered no widespread media attention - I'm sure the Queen's press office has seen to that; after all, politics isn't the only area where the Royals have influence.
That an unelected body, who is meant to wield no power, to respect the democratic process, has shown such flagrant disregard for said institutions, has openly lauded the modernisation of the political system, while simultaneously leaching off it like a parasite, undermining it in order to benefit its own interests, is insulting.
This stain on our democracy, needless to say, must be corrected. Whether or not abolition of the monarchy should be on the table is not for me to debate - frankly, I don't think it will be anywhere near the table any time soon. It may, however, finally be the time for the monarchy to be removed from the political process altogether; many would argue this is long overdue. Surely this will be the final straw.
Given the current royalist leanings of the current PM, and of most Conservative politicians, however, even this is highly unlikely. The onus, it seems, will remain with the Crown. The Queen would be wise, therefore, to heed her own advice from the 2013 Christmas Broadcast:
"We all need to get the balance right between action and reflection"
Perhaps a little more reflection, and a little less action, is needed on your part, Your Majesty.
Comments