The true degree of influence a young person will have king in British the political scene is currently surrounded by clouds of “deliberate ambiguity,” as the Financial Times notes in its analysis.

Officially, the monarch in England remains out of politics. The Crown may have many powers, but they are exercised according to the advice and wishes of the elected government.

So the king in England officially stays away from party clashes. It is clear. However, in practice it remains “deliberately” vague and opaque, at least to some extent, the actual degree of influence and participation that the monarch has or may have.

“Rare” royal interventions

According to the FT’s Robert Shrimsley, there have been times in the past 70 years when Queen Elizabeth’s intervention has been prominent, but such times have been rare.

What remains a little-known fact is the extent of the influence that Elizabeth had during her weekly meetings with the Prime Minister, or after daily “browsing” of official documents coming from both the UK and other Commonwealth states.

The plot again comes to the fore against the backdrop of the accession to the throne of Charles. Charles is also reminded that in recent decades, as Prince of Wales, he has repeatedly taken a public stand on a number of issues, sometimes promoting specific campaigns. More recently, he has made no secret of his disagreement with the British government’s plan to send illegal immigrants to Rwanda.

What he stated on the BBC

However, Charles himself, speaking four years ago to the BBC, made it clear that if he ever becomes king, he will behave differently. “Of course, I won’t be able to do what I can do as the heir to the throne,” he said at the time, adding that he would not interfere in political matters as a king, since he was “not stupid enough” to do so. so.

Charles repeated something similar last Friday from the stage of his speech to the nation. Speaking for the first time as a king, he said: “Of course, my life will change when I take on new responsibilities. I can no longer devote so much time and energy to charity and a cause that I care about.” Now this work will be transferred to others, he continued.

conclusions

In the shadow of the above, the FT’s Robert Shrimsley concludes that while Charles does not give up his belief that senior members of the royal family should speak out on social issues, he does agree that this task should now be taken on by others besides him. , a king, such as the new Prince of Wales.

Officially the monarch seals his assent and assent to every bill, yet it has never been the case in modern times that the monarch in England has not given this assent when asked to do so. The monarch officially opens each new session of Parliament, but his speech outlining what measures will follow, the government writes.

So there are powers that fall under the so-called royal prerogative, but actually these powers are now vested in the government and/or parliament. For example, the power to sign treaties and declare war is now in the hands of the government, while, especially in the case of a declaration of war, it is believed that the government must seek the consent of parliamentarians.

From 1970s Australia to Brexit

Theoretically, the monarch has the right to dissolve parliament and dismiss the prime minister, leading the country to elections. Again, this is not a power that he would use against the will of the government or parliament.

However, there is also a gray area, as the FT analyst notes in his article.

During the debate about BrexitThose close to Buckingham Palace were concerned about what would happen if the then government lost a vote of no confidence and the Queen was forced to ask another leader to try to form a government.

Robert Shrimsley of the FT recalls what happened not in the UK, but in distant Australia in the mid-1970s, when Sir Joe Kerrthen Queen Elizabeth’s representative (governor general) in the country, dismissed the then prime minister Gough Whitlam. The letters show that the Queen was not informed of the move in advance, although the decision was discussed at Buckingham Palace. Whitlam was unable to get parliamentary approval of the budget and subsequently refused to call an election… prompting Sir John Kerr to intervene, taking action on behalf of the queen. As noted, Kerr’s move at the time shocked many Australians. However, Whitlam was defeated in the election that followed.

Declaration before the Scottish referendum

There were also moments of more direct intervention during Elizabeth’s 70-year reign, such as before the referendum on Scottish independence in 2014.

Speaking years later, then-Prime Minister David Cameron revealed that at the time he was seeking help from the monarch because he was worried about what the polls were predicting.

Cameron told the BBC: “I remember the conversations I had with the Queen’s private secretary. […] not to ask (the queen) for anything that would be inappropriate or unconstitutional, but simply to raise an eyebrow (on her part) […] we thought it would make some difference.”

The Sunday before this referendum, the Queen had a short conversation with a woman in the cemetery of the Scottish village of Crati: “You have an important vote on Thursday. I hope that people will think very carefully about the future, ”Elizabeth said then.

Conflict with Thatcher

However, Elizabeth as queen had previously clashed with Margaret Thatcher when the latter refused to support sanctions against apartheid in South Africa.

The monarch was concerned about the damage that could be done to the Commonwealth, as well as the negative impact of Thatcher’s policies on the social fabric of Britain. The Queen’s press secretary even expressed her displeasure to the Sunday Times at the time…

However, members of the royal family have also lobbied for their own interests in the past. In 2021, The Guardian reported that, as early as the 1970s, the Palace pushed to ensure that private royal investment was exempt from financial transparency laws.

Karolos’ past as a “lobbyist”

As Prince of Wales, the current King Charles has also come under fire for political meddling. He is known for his positions on issues related to architecture, alternative medicine and the environment (in favor of organic farming, sustainability and climate awareness).

However, at the same time as Prince Charles lobbied ministers on a host of other issues, including schools and school programs, the operation of supermarkets, the planning of new hospitals, the availability of alternative medicines on the market, the equipment of British troops in Iraq, etc.

After a lengthy legal battle, 27 letters from the Prince to top ministers have been unearthed, revealing the extent of his political lobbying.

The royal family does not officially have the power to impose policy, but the letters raise concerns that the current king may continue to pressure ministers on matters of concern to him.

As the FT notes in its article, the monarch has the ability to influence debate with even very small gestures, gently asking questions both in private and in public.

Looking back at Shakespeare

However, Charles himself, in an interview with the BBC, called “nonsense” the idea that he could remain king and behave the way he behaved when he was a prince. “The idea that I would behave exactly the same way is completely stupid because the two situations are completely different,” he said, citing Shakespeare’s Henrys IV and V and the changes in the young king Henry V as the latter. becomes a monarch.

Of course, many would like Charles as king to speak on important social issues such as climate change. How he moves away from his side in the near future will determine his reign.

Source: FT