Description
Quotation: In fact, said Dr Craig Prescott, a constitutional law expert at Royal Holloway, University of London, there was little else the king could have said. The royal family, as implied in Charles’s response to the ARM, has no say, constitutionally.“Fundamentally it is for Australia to decide who its head of state should be and whether to continue with the king of Australia. We saw this in the 1999 referendum. It was an Australian decision to hold the referendum, effectively Australians decided. So the royal family, or Buckingham Palace, don’t have a role. They will stick with what Australia decides, if Australia ever ask the question again,” Prescott said.
Quotation: Charles was a guest at the Barbados ceremony of transition to a republic. “And gave it tacit support: if that’s the decision of the people of one of the Commonwealth realms then we will support that and facilitate the transition, and do it with best wishes,” said Prescott, the author of the forthcoming book Modern Monarchy. “This is the consistent line you get from Buckingham Palace and, ultimately, from the British government.”
Quotation: Prescott said: “You can discuss if it would be a bad thing if many of these countries became republics. It might not be a bad thing for the British monarchy.” It would be consistent with the king’s wish for a slimmed-down monarchy. “How often can a slimmed-down royal family visit the 14 Commonwealth realms where the king is also head of state? Perhaps not as often as might have been the case 10, 20, 30 years ago.”
Historic ties have loosened since the late Queen Elizabeth came to the throne in 1952.
“If you think about the monarchy today and you think about the countries we are talking about, the generation of politicians you have today in those countries just don’t have that same guttural link with the crown, or with Britain,” he added.
| Period | 18 Oct 2024 |
|---|---|
| Held at | The Guardian, United Kingdom |