State Opening of Parliament 1: 2002-2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
What has happened in the past when the Monarch has not been available on the day of the opening? Not that I am saying that applies here - I am just wondering in general what has happened in the past? Have there been times when the Opening was delayed?
 
The only times that The Queen was unable to Open Parliament in person was when she was pregnant with Andrew and Edward and then the Lord Commissioners performed the opening with the Lord Chancellor reading the speech.

The date is in HM's diary years in advance as it is fairly fixed but this year the government hasn't anything much to say so has delayed it causing this bottleneck of events for HM.
 
:previous: Oh, I am sure you are correct about party politics however, that does not alter the fact that in such an important year they have delayed the Queens Speech by over a month.

Whatever else they do, they need to ensure they do not set up unrealistic deadlines for HM when her entire schedule is set so far ahead and they have a bad case of procrastination.

But really, what were they thinking? Are any of the MP's or Public Servants aware of the significance of this year? Do they even know their own history or is it considered irrelevant or beneath them?
 
Marg, our MPs and Public Servants hardly know their own names dear, let alone anything else!
The State Opening of Parliament should never have moved from November in the first place, let alone having it treated as casual occasion to be moved about, post-poned, cancelled or otherwise!
Quite frankly, if I was the Head of State and got a call asking to change the date, I would tell the Government where to go in the traditional two-word manner. I would then turn up at the Palace of Westminster on the original date, in full ermine robes, crown and all! I would then march straight up to the House of Commons and drag the prime-minister (and the leader of the opposition so as to remain impartial) by the scruff and take him to the House of Lords. I would then read out my own speech giving a run down of how in 60 years of reigning, I have never in all that time had a phone call from any government minister or civil servant asking to change the date!
 
The date is in HM's diary years in advance as it is fairly fixed but this year the government hasn't anything much to say so has delayed it causing this bottleneck of events for HM.

But what happens, like this year, when it is delayed, if it conflicts with another engagement? I wonder if, in their private meetings, the Queen tells the PM, in appropriate language to "s**t or get off the pot".
 
I think it is sorted out for the 3rd June (same day as garden party). Tricky for the Palace because she is the Head of State and although allowances can be made for her age and government should be better organised, she has to do it. If they emphasis the problems because of her age, then people will start the rumour mill of not being able to do the job.

Its a fine line.
 
But what happens, like this year, when it is delayed, if it conflicts with another engagement? I wonder if, in their private meetings, the Queen tells the PM, in appropriate language to "s**t or get off the pot".

HM is a constitutional monarch and thus has no say in these things but has to simply turn up when told to do so by her government.

Negotiations are possible between her office and the government but in the end she is a servant of the government and has no option but to turn up.
 
She might have no option to turn up, yes, but I´m sure she has made her disapproval of this chaotic planning of this particular state opening very clear and the Queen, no matter if constitutional monarch or not, is a person of authority and respect to the much younger PM!
I remember that documentary a couple of years ago when photographer Annie Leibovitz asked the Queen to change this and that for the session, I finally understood what the phrase "HM was not amused!" means! I got the impression everyone present (photographic crew, courtiers) ducked down their heads....
So, I highly doubt that the Queen is a puppet when it comes to other people in disposal of her time!

I also doubt the Queen being a "servant of the government"! She considers herself as first servant of the state, country and commonwealth, but surely NOT of a current Labour or Tory government, that´s for sure!
 
Last edited:
She is a servant of each government and is there to do what they tell her to do regardless of her own personal feelings such as shaking the hands of the men who murdered her uncle-in-law or entertaining despots - each government uses her and that is her role - to be used by the government of the day, regardless of its political persuasion.
 
No, it´s the Queen´s government, not the other way round!
And at the state opening it is she who "commands this honourable house to attend her immediately in the house of peers"

Although standing above politics she encourages and advices the PMs of the day every week they come to Buck. Palace. I´ve seen many interviews of lots of british PMs, old and new. Everyone said how much this audience with the monarch is cherished and valued because of her lifelong experience. It is not the Queen who´s going to Downing Street every week to be told what to do, it is the PM reporting his work to the monarch.
Of course HM has no real political power. But if she´d refuse to open parliament on june 3rd, nobody could make her to! The point is that she never would because of her sense of duty, not because she´s afraid of the government!
Queen Victoria, not that much more powerful than the current Queen, refused to open parliament for years, and there was no one to change that.
The Queen of today has a much too strong sense of duty ever to miss such an important constitutional task. It is because of that sense of duty to do all that, not to please Mr. Cameron!
 
Sorry - but all you are describing is the tradition and words not the reality.

The Queen is the least powerful and free person in the UK - she is a servant of the people - and she herself acknowledged that when she promised to 'serve' for her entire life.

If she didn't open parliament then that ceremony would be done by someone else and no one would care as parliament would continue and her role would be diminished even further as she would be outside the ceremonial role in the parliament.

She has so much power that if parliament voted to abolish the monarchy she would have to simply go - because she isn't necessary but is a servant of the people to keep up an image and some traditions.

If the PM didn't report weekly (and they don't do so for about 4 months each year - when she is at Balmoral or at Sandringham - she has the PM visit for one weekend only in those 4 months) the government would continue as it does through August and September and again December and January without the PM meeting her and without the monthly council meetings as well.

Simply put she needs to the government to make her seem relevant not the other way round.
 
Sorry - but all you are describing is the tradition and words not the reality.

The Queen is the least powerful and free person in the UK - she is a servant of the people - and she herself acknowledged that when she promised to 'serve' for her entire life.

If she didn't open parliament then that ceremony would be done by someone else and no one would care as parliament would continue and her role would be diminished even further as she would be outside the ceremonial role in the parliament.

She has so much power that if parliament voted to abolish the monarchy she would have to simply go - because she isn't necessary but is a servant of the people to keep up an image and some traditions.

If the PM didn't report weekly (and they don't do so for about 4 months each year - when she is at Balmoral or at Sandringham - she has the PM visit for one weekend only in those 4 months) the government would continue as it does through August and September and again December and January without the PM meeting her and without the monthly council meetings as well.

Simply put she needs to the government to make her seem relevant not the other way round.

Very well stated.
 
This will be The Queen's 60th State Opening of Parliament. I wonder if there will be something special added to this year's ceremony or just all the same?
 
Very well stated.


I stated myself that she considers herself "servant" of the people, Britain!
But I protest against the opinion that she is a servant of any government.
And she is, despite being a powerless symbolic figurehead when it comes to daily politics, not a willingless puppet!
I strongly disagree when you say, that she has to do whatever the PM tolds her to.
Luckily there were not so many decisions by the government that she was so opposed against that she felt not to do what they asked her to with the exception of Mrs. Thatcher. Some papers reported back in the 1980s about the Queen being unhappy with some of the Thatcherist decisions; The PM got some bad press which didn´t contribute her image in a way she would hoped.
Another example: Mrs. Thatcher didn´t want the Queen to take part in the 1979 heads of commonwealth meeting in Lusaka. Downing Street communicated this very clear towards Buckingham Palace. The Queen said, Of course I will go, and that´s what she did! Mrs. Thatcher had no saying in that decision, just agree and smile.

Yes, the Queen is a constitutional monarch without power of daily politics, but she is very influential (like the monarchy itself) in Britain and voices her disagreement about issues (behind closed doors) she´s opposed to.
If the Queen had said clearly "No, I won´t open on june 3rd!", Cameron would have been, more or less, forced, to find another date.
If he´d say somethin´ like "The Queen won´t open herself this time because she´s too busy, strain too great etc., someone from parliament will take over", this would backclash against him, not the Queen! The damage of his chaotic planning of this state opening is already been done. But there´s only pity for the Queen and anger about the PM.
 
Last edited:
Another example: Mrs. Thatcher didn´t want the Queen to take part in the 1979 heads of commonwealth meeting in Lusaka. Downing Street communicated this very clear towards Buckingham Palace. The Queen said, Of course I will go, and that´s what she did! Mrs. Thatcher had no saying in that decision, just agree and smile.

Mrs Thatcher advised The Queen not to go to that specific commonwealth meeting due to security reasons due to tensions between Zimbabwe-Rhodesia and Zambia, the headquarters of the army was based in Lusaka. Hence why The Queen as advised not go, she clearly examined the situation, looked at the probability and chose to go anyway. This has little to do with politics, and a lot to do with safety.

Yes, the Queen is a constitutional monarch without power of daily politics, but she is very influential (like the monarchy itself) in Britain and voices her disagreement about issues (behind closed doors) she´s opposed to.

Does she? I never knew that.

If the Queen had said clearly "No, I won´t open on june 3rd!", Cameron would have been, more or less, forced, to find another date.
If he´d say somethin´ like "The Queen won´t open herself this time because she´s too busy, strain too great etc., someone from parliament will take over", this would backclash against him, not the Queen! The damage of his chaotic planning of this state opening is already been done. But there´s only pity for the Queen and anger about the PM.

As iluvbertie said if The Queen refused, someone else would open parliament. There wouldn't and hasn't been any backlash because nobody cares. If The Queen refused, and parliament opened without her, the backlash would be towards The Queen for refusing to do something she's supposed to do. Whilst it is David Cameron's fault for re-arranging the date, which now clashes with a garden party, if The Queen chooses not to go and Cameron isn't ameanable to another date then we're in trouble.
 
:previous: And, on the other hand, there is a very big tourist industry that organises tours around big royal events. People want to see the Queen in a Carriage and having the goverment dicking around with dates is an expensive exercise and has far reaching consequences.

If tourists book for a certain date and it doesn't happen what are they supposed to do . . . go stand outside the palace and watch nothing? And if that happens this year then others are going to start looking very carefully at any tourist holidays they take and invest money in if there is no pay-off, i.e. The State Opening of Parliament with all its attending bells and whistles.

The government had better watch the industry or suffer the consequences. Regardless of who has the power, the tourists have the money and the bottom line is something that any prudent government should be watching.
 
Yes, I imagine some people do book holidays to see the state opening of parliament, but seeing as it changes almost every year it would be much more advisable for them to come when the Trooping of Colour is happening or when Ascot is on. I wouldn't have known the SOP was in June until I checked here.
 
@WindsorEditor: The State Opening of Parliament has been delayed until 4th June it’s announced (moved one day forward), due to a G7 meeting in Brussels.
 
Peter Hunt ‏@BBCPeterHunt 1h
The Queen's Speech will now take place on Wed June 4 -- a day later than planned -- because of a G7 summit in Brussels.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised that it hasn't been announced if Charles & Camilla will attend this years State Opening.

In the rehearsal pictures it appears that two coaches are being used, the usual Australian State Coach but also the possible new State Coach Britannia, I think. I could be wrong.
 
Last edited:
Don't they use a carriage for the crown and the regalia and then the Queen and Philip in a different carriage?
 
Yes they do, Skippyboo... but the coach carrying the regalia goes ahead of the Royal procession [by about 20 minutes], so it can be made ready beforehand in the Robing room.

Its not clear from the photo wether this new coach will carry the regalia, the Queen and the Duke, or [if they attend] the Prince and the Duchess.

All will be revealed tomorrow...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom