Prime Ministers, Political Advisers and the Powers & Prerogatives of the Monarch

[Curryong]

I am quite sure that most British people don't have images of Her Majesty in their minds for every moment that they are singing the national anthem. An exception might be when she is present. It's usually only the first verse that's sung anyway and if people think anything at all there are probably some patriotic thoughts and feelings.

Having said that, 'God Save the Queen/King' was a patriotic song that became a national anthem almost by default. It's unique in that it refers to a country's sovereign and I do think it's odd, quite frankly. I like 'I vow to thee my country' much better.

Having said that, surely to goodness Corbyn's problems with it and other issues of precedence will be solved in the fullness of time. I do think he is making a play for those republican Labour Party voters but not singing the national anthem may be a false step. The British don't like radicalism on either side of the spectrum.

When Labour first came into office in the 1920's King George V bent over backwards to make the ministers feel comfortable. He wore a red tie at their first meeting and dropped the requirement for them to wear court dress.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I wonder what he would do IF he ever became PM? Refuse to accept the position as he has to receive it from her - it is her right to appoint her PM. Cause a constitutional crisis because he refused to follow the existing rules and procedures under the current constitution of the UK - or change his stance and 'kiss hands' and 'take the oath' as required in that position?


Singing the National Anthem - whether you agree with the system or not - is simply singing along with the official national song of your country - it is patriotic to do so. Choosing not to sing it is also a perfect right in a free country for whatever reason BUT to choose not to sing it at a ceremony to acknowledge those who died for the country and regarded that anthem as their anthem is disrespectful to those for whom the ceremony was about.

 

[Mbruno]

Mr Corbin already took an oath of allegiance to the Queen more than once or, otherwise, he would not have been able to take his seat in the House of Commons as the SInn Fein MPs can't do for example.

 

[Roslyn]

The problem is the North-Korean type of anthem a republican has to sing. It is not about England's pleasant pastures green or about a land of hope and glory. It is about wishing the "noble King" to be happy and glorious, to wish him "long to reign over us". I can very well imagine that any conscious and self-respecting republican refuses to sing that. On itself I prefer someone tk be honest about it than to keep up a facade. That is just playing for the bühne, performing a vaudeville. How can Corbyn ever sing the anthem when his political ideal clashes with every word in that?

I totally agree. In my opinion, "God Save the Queen" is not "National Anthem", it is essentially a song praising the privileged monarch and asking (the Christian) God to look after her so she can reign over the people for a long time. I don't think a Republican ought to be expected to sing it, and I don't think that declining to sing it at the ceremony disrespected the veterans in any way. Mr Corbyn stood in respectful silence, and no more should be asked of anyone.

I admire Corbyn for not singing it because every word would stick in his craw and to voice those words would make him a hypocrite. I hope he declines to sing it in future, despite having apparently said he would. He might not be leader of his party for long, but when he is replaced at least he will be able to say he stuck to his principles while in the job. And his time there, as short as it may be, and the controversy surrounding these events, has set a precedent and raises the question of whether a politician should have to swear allegiance to the monarch rather than to the country - or at least be given the option - and whether he ought to be able to swear an ordinary oath/make an affirmation to keep all the secret Privy Council stuff secret. I hope he is remembered as a man who stuck to his principles rather than as another one who abandoned them for the sake of appearances in order to secure his position.

And I think it was jolly clever of him to manage to get into the Privy Council the way he did. He avoided having to go against his principles and pay homage to the Queen, but was confirmed a member of the Privy Council anyway. Clever boy!

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

I totally agree. In my opinion, "God Save the Queen" is not "National Anthem", it is essentially a song praising the privileged monarch and asking (the Christian) God to look after her so she can reign over the people for a long time. I don't think a Republican ought to be expected to sing it, and I don't think that declining to sing it at the ceremony disrespected the veterans in any way. Mr Corbyn stood in respectful silence, and no more should be asked of anyone.

I admire Corbyn for not singing it because every word would stick in his craw and to voice those words would make him a hypocrite. I hope he declines to sing it in future, despite having apparently said he would. He might not be leader of his party for long, but when he is replaced at least he will be able to say he stuck to his principles while in the job. And his time there, as short as it may be, and the controversy surrounding these events, has set a precedent and raises the question of whether a politician should have to swear allegiance to the monarch rather than to the country - or at least be given the option - and whether he ought to be able to swear an ordinary oath/make an affirmation to keep all the secret Privy Council stuff secret. I hope he is remembered as a man who stuck to his principles rather than as another one who abandoned them for the sake of appearances in order to secure his position.

And I think it was jolly clever of him to manage to get into the Privy Council the way he did. He avoided having to go against his principles and pay homage to the Queen, but was confirmed a member of the Privy Council anyway. Clever boy!

First, I understands / respects those who have problems with the National Anthem.

Second, this ''privileged'' monarch that you always writes so negatively / insulting about is a 90 year old lady, who have dedicated her life to the UK and the commonwealth.

Roslyn, I'll try not to be rude. I have read many of your posts, and I must say I'm surprised with many of your confusing views.

You have repeatedly said that we who believe in the constitutional monarchy should respect those who think otherwise, which I do. But you should also respect us.

You have lashed out at the Queen several times, you have said that you have no respect for those who support the monarchy in Australia and that you are furious with them etc. You have said much worse things too. This posts are now deleted.

The problem with many of you who are republicans is that you lash out against the royals and call them the most unbelievable, ridiculous and vicious of things. And this does not help your case.

This appeals to a few other members on this forum too, most from Australia.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I am a monarchist but I also have empathy. I can replace myself in "the other side". Where Austrialians sing that their nation may advance fair, where Canadians vow to stand guard for their beloved country, where Germans plead for unity, liberty and justice, where the Russians sing about their "sacred homeland" and where the Swedes sing about the stunning beauty of their country, the British -republican or not- have only one reference point and that is praying the Lord to let the King long to reign over them. In that sense it is quite a North-Koreanesque song. Just replace the Queen by the "Great Leader" (Kim Jong-Il).

 

[wyevale]

Just replace the Queen by the "Great Leader" (Kim Jong-Il).

Your comparison is [as is no doubt intended] offensive...

The National Anthem of this country, like the Marseillaise, is a song rooted in history, which, although lyrically anachronistic encapulates the love of ones country..

Corbyn could , and countless others do, think of the things he DOES love about his country, and with good grace, and a 'pinch of salt' sing the words that he finds so hard.. His petty and pedantic inability to do this speaks volumes of his lack of pragmatism, which [along with his perceived extremism] is likely to be his undoing.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Nous sommes Charlie. Mr Corbyn has two options. Pretending he is a dyslectic goof who has no idea what he is mumbling or just respectfully stand up and keeps his mouth shut because every word uttered in that anthem conflicts with his republican conviction. The second option is honourable but sadly the Daily Mail and their likes see this as an insult or something.

 

[Muhler]

Interesting but not particular flattering portrayals of James Corbyn.
I don't know what he stands for except that he is pretty left wing. And that's fine, socialists are humans too...

Anyway, I think he is politically immature.
Standing strongly on your convictions and (perhaps very much) not wanting to lose face with his constituency is all very well if you are a back-bencher or otherwise down the political ranks but it doesn't work in the forefront and if he has any ambitions about being the next PM of Britain he'll have to realize that he will have to swallow a lot more and bigger camels than singing the royal anthem and kneel to QMII.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[...] he will have to swallow a lot more and bigger camels than singing the royal anthem and kneel to QMII.

God Save The Queen is not the royal anthem, it is the national anthem, even for republicans. And understandably that will be difficult to digest for some.

The kneeling and handkissing is entirely optional. It is also a myth that a Prime Minister has to go down the knees and kiss the Queen's hand. Mr Blair himself told that it was a simple handshake with the Queen followed by a businesslike communiqué: "Her Majesty the Queen has asked me to form a government and I have accepted." No kneeling. No handkissing.

 

[Rudolph]

Peter Hunt ‏@BBCPeterHunt
.@jeremycorbyn on Privy Council: I've been appointed and a ceremony will take place at a later date.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Video
Will Jeremy Corbyn kiss the Queen's hand? - BBC News

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said that he will join the Privy Council "at a later date", after missing its first meeting since he took charge of the opposition.

When asked if he would kneel before the Queen and kiss her hand, as obliged in the swearing in ceremony, Mr Corbyn said he had been appointed, "and what happens afterwards will happen".

 

[Muhler]

Well, that sounds like a camel halfway down the throat.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Just wait till he meets her. She tends to charm everyone who have a private meeting with her, even republicans.

 

[wyevale]

Well, that sounds like a camel halfway down the throat.

Would that it chokes him...

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The Court itself always stresses that révérences, bows, "Your Majesty" and the whole thing are optional. So when the Right Honourable Jeremy B. Corbyn MP, The Leader of the Opposition, greets the Queen with a nice handshake, that will do perfectly, despite all screaming and fuming "journalists" of the DM and The Telegraph.

 

[Jacknch]

The Court itself always stresses that révérences, bows, "Your Majesty" and the whole thing are optional. So when the Right Honourable Jeremy B. Corbyn MP, The Leader of the Opposition, greets the Queen with a nice handshake, that will do perfectly, despite all screaming and fuming "journalists" of the DM and The Telegraph.

I do agree. I am sure Mr Corbyn is not the first, nor will he be that last, to choose an alternative option to the usual ceremony/protocol requirements or preferences.

I saw the video of him being interviewed and found myself a little disappointed with his answer, because he went down the usual route an MP does of trying not to answer the question. When politicians do that, it always makes things worse to my mind and it does them no favours with the general public.

He is pro-republic - that we know. So why not just say that he "doesn't approve of the privy council, or the Queen being involved or having all this ceremony, bowing and kissing hands etc and will probably just shake hand, but he has to do it because that is what is required of him and one day he hopes it will all be different".

It's honest, open, doesn't compromise his beliefs and would show spirit of conviction and willingness to compromise. But just to do the usual evading of a question in exactly the same way as other MPs do shows there is nothing particularly different about him that would warrant any worry that we are about to see an end to the monarchy any time soon.

 

[Rudolph]

The Queen’s advisers told Parliament to strip Jeremy Corbyn of his “Right Honourable” status after Number 10 wrongly implied the Labour leader had joined the Privy Council, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Mr Corbyn was described on Parliament’s website as “Right Honourable”, which denotes membership of the centuries-old Privy Council, until late last week.

The Labour leader was also described as a “Right Honourable friend” by Prime Minister David Cameron when they faced each other in the Commons last month, days after he was voted in as Labour leader.

However, after Mr Corbyn failed to attend the first meeting of the Privy Council since the summer holidays with the Queen last Thursday, the “Rt Hon” title was removed from Mr Corbyn’s page on Parliament’s website.

The Daily Telegraph understands that this was done under the orders of the Office of the Privy Council, the group of advisers which carry out the Queen’s wishes.

Photographs show that Mr Corbyn was on holiday near Ben Nevis in Scotland when his spokesman said he had been invited to attend a Privy Council meeting with the Queen last Thursday.

Mr Corbyn, a known republican, said last month he was not previously aware that joining the Privy Council meant he had to kneel before the Queen and kiss her hand.

The Cabinet Office confirmed on Sunday that Mr Corbyn is not a member of the Privy Council. He now cannot become one until the next meeting is held, probably next month.

It means that the Labour leader cannot be briefed on security matters until then, which will complicate efforts by ministers to use intelligence to persuade Mr Corbyn on backing British involvement in military action over Syria.

Read more: Queen's advisers strip Jeremy Corbyn of 'Right Honourable' title after Privy Council snub - Telegraph

 

[Roslyn]

A difficult decision for Mr Corbyn. It will be interesting to see what he does.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

As I wrote in a previous post, I saw an unknown (to me) Royal expert who had worked at the palace on BBC News Channel or Sky News a few weeks ago and he said something like this ''The Queen is not a person who cares if he kneels in front of her or not, and will not se this as a problem. I think she will try to get him feel comfortable, and help him. And when it comes to this media fuss, I think she's just laughing at it.''

He just need to appear at the palace, as this article from yesterday says.

Labour leader took hike to escape Queen | The Sunday Times

Even more damaging than the snub to the Queen was Corbyn’s decision to address protesters outside the Tory conference, Labour MPs said.

Protesters spat and threw eggs at delegates and journalists, with some women even reportedly being threatened with rape. A Jewish delegate described being called “Jewish Tory scum” and told to “get back to Auschwitz”.

Meanwhile, Buckingham Palace has made clear that Corbyn must meet the Queen to become a member of the privy council, after suggestions that he could be appointed without attending.

A senior Whitehall source said the Queen would not force Corbyn to kneel or kiss her ring: “She wants people to feel comfortable.” But the source emphasised that Corbyn must appear at the palace rather than use an “order in council” to join the body, whose members are given access to security *briefings.

“The privy council is essentially a relationship of trust with the state which means people can receive confidential papers without signing the Official Secrets Act .  .  . If he wants the benefits of access, he needs to swear the oath,” the source said.

 

[Rudolph]

The Privy Council issues two kinds of orders. Orders in Council and Orders of Council.

In Council meaning Orders that have been approved at a meeting of the Privy Council personally by The Queen.

Orders in Council are usually Prerogative Orders made under the inherent power of the Crown to act on matters for which Parliament has not legislated.

 

[Curryong]

So now Jeremy Corbyn is threatening to use the State banquet to raise human rights abuses with Chinese leaders, unless he gets a meeting with them of his very own. If he doesn't he will hold his breath until he goes purple! Corbyn's wife has already turned down the invitation to attend.

Jeremy Corbyn threatens to use Buckingham Palace banquet to raise human rights issues with China | UK Politics | News | The Independent

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It is kind of strange that the Leader of the Opposition is not given information, which is nevertheless spread to 600 (!) Privy Councillors, because he is supposed to go down his knees and kiss the Queen's hand.

Try to to look at it: it is almost Putin-esque and not befitting a democracy that the democratically elected Leader of the Opposition, who has a strong personal conviction that the office of the head of state should not be hereditary, is barred from necessary information to do his parliamentary work. It is almost unimagineable in other countries on the Continent!

 

[Jacknch]

It is kind of strange that the Leader of the Opposition is not given information, which is nevertheless spread to 600 (!) Privy Councillors, because he is supposed to go down his knees and kiss the Queen's hand.

Try to to look at it: it is almost Putin-esque and not befitting a democracy that the democratically elected Leader of the Opposition, who has a strong personal conviction that the office of the head of state should not be hereditary, is barred from necessary information to do his parliamentary work. It is almost unimagineable in other countries on the Continent!

Not quite so strange when you consider that the 600 or so Privy Councillors have already sworn not divulge the information or use it to the detriment of the country's security.

All Mr Corbyn has to do it take the oath or the affirmation and if he doesn't want to kiss hands or kneel, he will have to let the Queen know in advance so she knows what to expect. Presumably he will have no objection to shaking her hand or would that be too deferential?

Indeed, Mr Corbyn does have a strong personal conviction against a hereditary head of state, but that is what we have at the moment here in the UK and he will have to put up with it. Common sense should tell him that we cannot become a republic and so change the constitutional laws and procedures for an hour or so just to make him happier while he takes his oath.

 

[Iluvbertie]

He stood for an elected office knowing what he would be required to do if he won. When he won that position he makes it clear he wants the goal posts changed just for him. He basically therefore lied to his electorate by not telling them in advance that he wouldn't abide by the existing constitution and conventions of his country.

 

[Osipi]

So now Jeremy Corbyn is threatening to use the State banquet to raise human rights abuses with Chinese leaders, unless he gets a meeting with them of his very own. If he doesn't he will hold his breath until he goes purple! Corbyn's wife has already turned down the invitation to attend.

Jeremy Corbyn threatens to use Buckingham Palace banquet to raise human rights issues with China | UK Politics | News | The Independent

Silly, silly man. Doesn't he know that advertising the dastardly plot to wreak havoc at a state banquet is a sure fire way to be removed from the guest list?

I don't know much about the man except for what I've been reading here lately and it seems to me that the guy is just a wee bit too big for his own britches and not too diplomatic nor wise.

Silly, silly man.

 

[Rudolph]

The man is out of his depth. He went from backbench obscurity to leader and it doesn't look like it will end well for him.

Corbyn was majorly embarrassed in the Commons yesterday when 21 of his own MP's voted against him on a party vote.

He'll be lucky to survive long enough to become a Privy Councillor lol.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It does not matter what our opinion of the person in question is. It matters that "confidential" information is spread over 600 (!) Privy Councillors but not to the Leader of the Opposition. It is the best plea for a review on the existence of such a body as the Privy Council.

 

[Jacknch]

The man is out of his depth. He went from backbench obscurity to leader and it doesn't look like it will end well for him.

Corbyn was majorly embarrassed in the Commons yesterday when 21 of his own MP's voted against him on a party vote.

He'll be lucky to survive long enough to become a Privy Councillor lol.

I do feel for the man at times because it must be a tough transition from backbencher to leader.

It is ironic that the one person who would do their best to help and advise him or at least want to make him feel comfortable in his role is HM the Queen!

 

[Dman]

Secret. Smug. Sinister: They've covered up torture, led us into an illegal war and are now placing the Press under state control. It's time to kill off the shadowy establishment mafia that is the Privy Council-
It's time to kill off the shadowy establishment mafia that is the Privy Council | Daily Mail Online