The Queen, the Royal Family and the Commonwealth

[Charlotte1]

As far as the Australian Head of State is concerned that is just the British monarch, who is next in line or further down has no relevance or role. Until William is King he is just another British prince, he has no connection to Australia, therefore no divided loyalties. He is free to be 'just' a British prince, he's not prince of any other country. When he becomes King ( assuming Australian is still a constitutional monarchy) it doesn't make any difference whether the UK has the World Cup ( he's actually supporting the 2018 bid, not 2022) or Australia he would be King of both countries ( as well as the other realms of the Commonwealth) So win/win either country gets the World Cup, he's King of both and can support both by promoting or attending. Not likely to be a problem though considering it's not that far into the future and Charles is still hale and hearty, not to mention the Queen.

The Queen hosts receptions for various victorious teams, not just the British. The New Zealand rugby team were hosted a few years ago ( Lady Davina's husband is a New Zealander so both were invited. Lady Davina being the daughter of the Duke of Gloucester she rarely attends any official function) Various Australian teams have had special receptions.

The controversy in the UK over William's support for different national teams is due to the fact that he is the patron of Welsh rugby. He wasn't supposed to be seen supporting the English rugby side at a match. William toured New Zealand with the English rugby team a few years ago ( before he was patron of Welsh rugby) and it wasn't an issue. Harry has had no such problems and is often spotted at rugby matches supporting England, including the World Cup in Sydney where he supported the English, there was no criticism there. Princess Anne is the patron of the Scottish rugby team and attends their matches and no criticism that she's not supporting New Zealand ( for example). There are no divided loyalties, as they have no constitutional position in the countries where the British monarch is Head of State.

 

[Iluvbertie]

We obviously disagree - William can't support two teams any more than anyone else can but somehow as an Aussie I am supposed to accept the fact that he his supporting another country over mine and then I am supposed to cheer him. Well I can't - he is either for my country or against it and he is publicly coming out against mine. He is therefore unacceptable as a future Head of State for me.

The Queen can give all the receptions for foreign teams she likes but deep down she supports and cheers for England.

 

[muriel]

The Queen can give all the receptions for foreign teams she likes but deep down she supports and cheers for England.

Is that an assumption, or is the thought based on credible (and direct) information?

 

[Skydragon]

Prince Edward is coming to town. Quick, break out the good china and get rid of the empties.
I almost missed the news of the June visit of the Queen's youngest son, the brief story being tucked away on an inside page

Jack Knox: Royal visits have lost 'wow' factor

 

[Iluvbertie]

Is that an assumption, or is the thought based on credible (and direct) information?

Based on reports of the texts etc she has sent her grandsons and then reported as well as plain logic - she was born in England and lives there most of the time.

 

[muriel]

Based on reports of the texts etc she has sent her grandsons and then reported as well as plain logic - she was born in England and lives there most of the time.

Firstly, my immediate thought is to question how likely is it that W & H share the contents of any text messages they receive with their grandmother with the press, or with people likely to report them to the press. To my cynical mind, this is just some tabloid making up stories on a slow news day.

Secondly, putting aside the spin about how tech savvy HM might be, I do not know many women in their 80s who often send text messages.

Based on the above, whilst I appreciate the Australian republican sentiment, I am not quite convinced by the reasons you provide.

 

[muriel]

Odd as it may seem, I am sure "Granny" would host a reception for the England or the Australia team.... so I am not sure that proves very much.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Odd as it may seem, I am sure "Granny" would host a reception for the England or the Australia team.... so I am not sure that proves very much.

She doesn't actually.

She hosts receptions at BP for English teams or GB teams and leaves it to the other teams own countries to host receptions for their teams.

 

[Charlotte1]

She doesn't actually.

She hosts receptions at BP for English teams or GB teams and leaves it to the other teams own countries to host receptions for their teams.

But she does host receptions at BP for Commonwealth countries' sporting teams. Have already pointed out that she hosted one for the New Zealand rugby team 2 (?) years ago. It sticks out in my memory as Lady Davina and her New Zealand husband Gary Lewis were there. The Queen has previously hosted receptions for various Australian sporting teams at BP, cricketers, rugby players.

as well as plain logic - she was born in England and lives there most of the time.

Well I don't agree with this argument and I don't think it's logic. I wasn't born in Australia ( nor live here most of the time) and yet support Australian teams in international competitions. I also support the teams of other countries where I've lived for extended period of times. It means I always have someone to support in a given competition when one of my teams gets beaten! I don't think it's impossible to be supportive of more than one national team!

 

[Lumutqueen]

The Queen can give all the receptions for foreign teams she likes but deep down she supports and cheers for England.

Isn't the Queen suppose to be biased about who she supports and cheers for. Just because she lives in england most of the time has no relevance to which team she would prefer to win medals or football matches. I live in Yorkshire, have fdor nearly 10 years but I support Liverpool FC.
x

 

[RoyalistRiley]

On the future of the Commonwealth, I think it will continue after the death of the Queen. Views that it is a 'poor man's version of the Empire' are its strength - all members nations from rich and industrialised Australia, Canada and the UK to the smaller, less developed nations of Africa and the Pacific; are welcomed into the group and are active participants in activities, something which larger, more general groups such as the UN fail to do.

 

[Iluvbertie]

It may very well continue but I see it changing to having a rotating head. In other words I don't think Charles would be acceptable to some of the countries as a permanent Head of the Commonwealth.

 

[Lumutqueen]

Trinidad and Tobago's Newsday : newsday.co.tt :

The Queen is going to Trinidad for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.

 

[RoyalistRiley]

It may very well continue but I see it changing to having a rotating head. In other words I don't think Charles would be acceptable to some of the countries as a permanent Head of the Commonwealth.

Who would the headship rotate amongst? The Crown is what most of the Commonwealth members have in common and is really its reason for being. It should stay with Charles upon his ascension.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I didn't think a headship could rotate?
And I really doubt that it will, your right that the crown is the one thing that the commonwealth has in common, why would they want to get rid of a link that makes them known to the world?

 

[Iluvbertie]

The majority of the countries in the Commonwealth are republics and ask why their Head of State can't be Head of the Commonwealth for a period of time. Why should it be the Head of State of Great Britain all the time?

Yes you can have a rotating headship. It happens in Malaysia and the EU with alternating heads.

The Crown isn't the link anymore - afterall we now have countries who have never been British as members e.g. Madagascar I think it is that has joined without that link to Britain at all.

 

[Lumutqueen]

But would that mean rotating the Soverign aswell. That would be ridiculous. The head of the commonwealth is the Soverign of the United Kingdom. What good would rotating this title do?

Giving this title to Governer-Generals or Prime Ministers of people in the commonwealth would be difficult, knwoing how each and every country works, would take a while to learn. Whereas the Soverign already knows this information and has formed personal links with these countries herself. Why break them?

The EU rotate headship so that decisions are not made biasly and because the Eu is larger than the commonwealth. The Queen seems to have managed for quite some time dealing with the commonwealth.

What do you mean about Madagascar?

 

[Iluvbertie]

I mean that the Head of State of say India is Head of the Commonwealth for two years and then the Head of State of South Africa followed by Trinidad etc.

Why should it be the Head of State of the United Kingdom if all the countries are equal?

Sorry it isn't Madagascar but Mozambique - that was a Portuguese colony and never a British one joined the Commonwealth so it is no longer an organisation made up of countries that had been part of the British Empire. Non British Empire countries are now able to join.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I realised what you meant about the rotating Head Of State, and all countries are equal but the Head Of the commonwealth has always been the Head of State in the UK, thats how its always been and the Commonwealth Countries know that.

"The 1949 London Declaration ended this, allowing republican and indigenous monarchic members on the condition that they recognised the British monarch as the 'Head of the commonwealth'

And as I said before it would a nightmare if the head of the commonwealth of nations changed every year. 5 countries in the Commonwealth of Nations already have distinct monarchies, as you said thirty two members are republic I think they have enough to worry about without adding the commonwealth of nations to it aswell. The Commonwealth secretariat changes every 8 years. Kamalesh Sharma from India is Secretariat at the moment.

Also are you suggesting rotating the headship between the Commonwealth Nations or the Commonwealth realms?

 

[RoyalistRiley]

The fact that it is a condition of membership that countries recognise the British King/Queen as Head of the Commonwealth simply means that a rotating head won't happen. A rotating headship would also ruin the one real link the member states have with each other.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The idea that Charles won't be the Head of the Commonwealth has been around for about 10 years with a range of models suggested, including one that the Head should be someone from a Third World country to break the link between the idea of colonisation - i.e. recognise that the colonised are truly equal and that the Empire is dead.

 

[RoyalistRiley]

Isn't the host of the CHOGM meeting the de facto head of the Commonwealth as they set the agenda for that meeting and it is the only time the members meet as a group? Much as the Prime Minister is the de facto leader of the nation as they are in charge of the day to day operations of the government.

Therefore, a Head of the Commonwealth would not need to come from a Third World country as they already get a turn. Besides, there would be so many problems figuring out who it should be, how long they should serve for if it were possible etc if a rotating headship was chosen - which lumutqueen has already pointed out is not possible

 

[wbenson]

Science and technology key to better lives, says Queen

The Queen has urged Commonwealth countries, including Australia, to help young people take advantage of cutting edge technology to improve their lives.

Delivering her annual Commonwealth Day message to the 54-member nations on Monday, March 8, the Queen highlighted the important role science and technology played in giving people a better quality of life.

A message from Her Majesty The Queen, Head of the Commonwealth

Today's societies are constantly seeking ways to improve their quality of life, and science and technology play a vital part in that search.

ELIZABETH R

Richard Kay 8 March 2010 | Mail Online

For nearly 60 years, it has been one of the Queen’s highlights of the royal calendar, the only occasion apart from Christmas Day when the sovereign broadcasts to all 54 nations of the Commonwealth and its two billion citizens.

But as she marks Commonwealth Day today by attending a special service at Westminster Abbey, a shadow is hanging over the celebrations — and at its heart are doubts over whether the Prince of Wales should succeed her as Head of the Commonwealth.

 

[wbenson]

YouTube - Commonwealth Day Message 2010

 

[wbenson]

The Queen to miss Commonwealth Games for first time in 44 years | Mail Online

The Queen will miss this year’s Commonwealth Games – for the first time since England won the World Cup.

Aides say it is down to a heavy workload and that Prince Charles will represent the Royal Family in India. A message of support from the Monarch to the athletes will be read out.

 

[RoyalistRiley]

I find that a bit disappointing. After all, I'd have thought the Commonwealth would have vanished altogether by now if she hadn't been so committed to it over the years.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I can understand why she isn't coming, Prince Charles has to step up sometime.
I don't think the Commonwealth would have disappeared.

 

[wbenson]

India angry as Queen to miss Commonwealth games | Sport | The Guardian

Britain's new "enhanced partnership" with India got off to a rocky start today as Delhi reacted angrily to a decision by the Queen not to attend the Commonwealth Games this autumn.

After breathlessly reporting that Indo-Anglo relations had topped the foreign policy part of the Queen's speech, India's media gave the decision to send Prince Charles instead front-page treatment. "Royal Snub", read one headline. Noting that the monarch, 84, has attended every games except the 1966 Kingston event, papers quoted organisers and athletes angered by the decision.

 

[wbenson]

I think it's worth noting that these are only the second games ever to be held outside of one of the Queen's realms. In all (but one) case of the Queen attending the games, she's also gone as queen of the host country. That's not to say there's no significance in her attendance at games in other countries, but I don't think it's quite the same.

 

[wbenson]

Why Queen will skip Games- Hindustan Times

It is not the British Queen who has decided to stay away from the Commonwealth Games in New Delhi — rather her surprise absence from India in the autumn will be the result of a decision taken by the former Labour government.