The Queen, the Royal Family and the Commonwealth


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Barbados to Remove Queen Elizabeth II as Titular Head of State-

"Prime Minister Freundel Stuart announced that the plan is to make Barbados a republic by November, 2016, when the island of roughly 300,000 people celebrates its 50th anniversary of independence. He said it makes no sense to keep the monarch as the head of state of an otherwise independent country.

“It’s a little awkward in the year 2015 to still have to stand up and instead of pledging allegiance to Barbados to be pledging allegiance to ‘Her Majesty the Queen,’ ” Stuart said during a recent meeting of his ruling Democratic Labour Party.

A Buckingham Palace spokesman said Monday that “it is a matter for the government and people of Barbados.” British Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokesman said he expected the approach in Barbados to be “consistent with self-determination.”

Barbados to Remove Queen Elizabeth II as Titular Head of State | Caribbean News Service
 
Last edited:
Dman said:
Barbados to Remove Queen Elizabeth II as Titular Head of State-

"Prime Minister Freundel Stuart announced that the plan is to make Barbados a republic by November, 2016, when the island of roughly 300,000 people celebrates its 50th anniversary of independence. He said it makes no sense to keep the monarch as the head of state of an otherwise independent country.

“It’s a little awkward in the year 2015 to still have to stand up and instead of pledging allegiance to Barbados to be pledging allegiance to ‘Her Majesty the Queen,’ ” Stuart said during a recent meeting of his ruling Democratic Labour Party.

A Buckingham Palace spokesman said Monday that “it is a matter for the government and people of Barbados.” British Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokesman said he expected the approach in Barbados to be “consistent with self-determination.”

Barbados to Remove Queen Elizabeth II as Titular Head of State | Caribbean News Service
Click to expand...

Does anybody know the requirements to amend the constitution in Barbados ? Can the monarchy be abolished without a popular referendum ? The fact that the ruling party wants to ditch the Queen doesn't mean it is going to happen if the constitutional bar is too high (see the case of Australia in 1999), but I have no knowledge of Barbados law, so that is why I am asking.
 
Mbruno said:
Does anybody know the requirements to amend the constitution in Barbados ? Can the monarchy be abolished without a popular referendum ? The fact that the ruling party wants to ditch the Queen doesn't mean it is going to happen if the constitutional bar is too high (see the case of Australia in 1999), but I have no knowledge of Barbados law, so that is why I am asking.
Click to expand...

Its explained in the article
"Barbados needs a two-thirds majority in Parliament to authorise the constitutional change"

more detail in the article (2nd half)
 
I don't think it can be done without a Referendum - there was going be a referendum on the matter back in 2005 I think, but it didn't go ahead.
 
It doesn't sound very democratic to abolish the Monarchy without a referendum. Maybe the republican politicians are afraid the population doesn't share their views on the Monarchy.
 
When I first read the article, i was a bit taken aback, because my first thought was that there must be some kind of referedum or vote! I mean, it can't be done so just like this!
 
Cris M said:
It doesn't sound very democratic to abolish the Monarchy without a referendum. Maybe the republican politicians are afraid the population doesn't share their views on the Monarchy.
Click to expand...

Marty91charmed said:
When I first read the article, i was a bit taken aback, because my first thought was that there must be some kind of referedum or vote! I mean, it can't be done so just like this!
Click to expand...

I agree with both of you. I am a strong constitutional monarchist and a strong believer in democracy so I think it is the people of Barbados who should decide this through a referendum and not the government/parliament, but I must admit that I find it odd that a country shall have a foreigner as head of state.

In modern democracies such as Canada, Australia and New zealand it will be held referendums (if the politicians agrees about it), but that is not the case with the Caribbean countries who are full of corrupt politicians.
 
Last edited:
Cris M said:
It doesn't sound very democratic to abolish the Monarchy without a referendum. Maybe the republican politicians are afraid the population doesn't share their views on the Monarchy.
Click to expand...

I agree with Cris M. It may be theoretically possible to abolish the monarchy in Barbados with a two-third majority in parliament, but a decision as serious as that should not be taken without consulting the people first. If the PM doesn't call a referendum, Barbados monarchists should demand one,
 
Last edited:
My country became a Republic without a referendum. It was coup d'état. Everyone know the mess Brazil is today, so I hope Barbados can have a different destiny.

If Barbados becomes a Republic without a referendum, I'll see the Prime Minister as dictator. And I suppose he hopes to become the first President.
 
I get the feeling that it's generally accepted that a republic is what the Barbadians want.

In 1994 the Barbados Labour Party made it clear that a republic was one of their aims. They won the election and in 1996 they had a Constitution Review Commission which after 2 years recommended the formation of a republic. A referendum bill was introduced in 2000, but dropped during the 2003 election. It was then reintroduced in 2005, with a plan for a 2008 referendum, but that got dropped (the government focused instead on CARICOM). I feel that it should be added that during all this time the same party was in power, being re-elected twice; and one of the main issues in the 2003 election was abolishing the monarchy.

The BLP lost the 2008 election, bringing in the Democratic Labour Party. It's this party that is currently in power (and had been since 2008, with a 2013 re-election) and is pushing the issue again. So basically the two major parties in Barbados support a republic.

I don't think it's a coup or un-democratic. Perhaps not the best way to do it, but if the issue has been on the table for more than 20 years and has consistently been sidelined by other issues I can understand the desire to skip what would be a costly and time consuming referendum that ultimately wouldn't actually do anything as the change would have to be issued on a vote in the House of Assembly in the end anyways.

ROYAL NORWAY said:
In modern democracies such as Canada, Australia and New zealand it will be held referendums (if the politicians agrees about it ), but that is not the case with the Caribbean countries who are full of corrupt politicians.
Click to expand...


Given the difficulty with changing the constitution in Canada and the fact that the provincial and federal governments seem to never all be on the same page, I wouldn't expect a Canadian Republic any time soon. Too much hassle without enough support.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ish said:
I get the feeling that it's generally accepted that a republic is what the Barbadians want.

In 1994 the Barbados Labour Party made it clear that a republic was one of their aims. They won the election and in 1996 they had a Constitution Review Commission which after 2 years recommended the formation of a republic. A referendum bill was introduced in 2000, but dropped during the 2003 election. It was then reintroduced in 2005, with a plan for a 2008 referendum, but that got dropped (the government focused instead on CARICOM). I feel that it should be added that during all this time the same party was in power, being re-elected twice; and one of the main issues in the 2003 election was abolishing the monarchy.

The BLP lost the 2008 election, bringing in the Democratic Labour Party. It's this party that is currently in power (and had been since 2008, with a 2013 re-election) and is pushing the issue again. So basically the two major parties in Barbados support a republic.

I don't think it's a coup or un-democratic. Perhaps not the best way to do it, but if the issue has been on the table for more than 20 years and has consistently been sidelined by other issues I can understand the desire to skip what would be a costly and time consuming referendum that ultimately wouldn't actually do anything as the change would have to be issued on a vote in the House of Assembly in the end anyways.
Click to expand...

1 - It's not a coup, but it is very un-democratic.

2 - If a referendum is held on the monarchy and the Barbadians votes to keep it, Barbados will remain a monarchy. Yes, it will be costly, but democratic.

Ish said:
Given the difficulty with changing the constitution in Canada and the fact that the provincial and federal governments seem to never all be on the same page, I wouldn't expect a Canadian Republic any time soon. Too much hassle without enough support.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know.

What I meant was if the monarchy was abolished in these modern democratic countries (Canada, Australia and New zealand), it had only happened after a referendum. People would have demanded it, regardless of what the constitution requires or not.
 
Last edited:
If the Constitution says that the law can be changed with a vote in parliament then that is all that is needed.


The fact that for around 20 years this has been on the agenda but hasn't happened suggests that the political parties are working towards passing the law when there is a clear majority without having to waste the money on a referendum.


If the people of Barbados have been electing parties that support that idea for the last two decades it suggests very strongly that there is a broad base of support.


Is there a party that supports keeping the monarchy? If not then that too would suggest that there is broad support for a republic.
 
Barbados is a two party system. Both parties favour a republic.

ROYAL NORWAY said:
1 - It's not a coup, but it is very un-democratic.

2 - If a referendum is held on the monarchy and the Barbadians votes to keep it, Barbados will remain a monarchy. Yes, it will be costly, but democratic.
Click to expand...


If a key component of an election campaign is creating a republic and that party gets voted in, it's safe to assume that the people support a republic.

If both major parties in a country support the creation of a republic, particularly if the country tends to be regarded as fairly democratic and without corruption (Barbados tied the US for the 17th least corrupt country in the world, 2014, on the Transparency Index), then it's safe to assume that that's in line with what the people want.

Both cases are true in Barbados. This may not be the best way to go about it, but the government - not fringe groups, not even the opposition, the party holding the majority of the seats in the House of Assembly - has been working towards a republic for 20 years now. That's despite the fact that both of the major parties have formed governments in that time period.

It would be like if a Democrat in the US ran for president on an issue, was elected, spent two terms working towards that issue (including having a Commission say that yes, the American people were behind said issue), then his successor ran on the same issue and was elected, dropped the issue to focus on other things and lost his re-election to the Republican candidate who said that he was going to focus on that issue and agreed with the Democrats that it should be done.

A referendum, while appearing more democratic, at this point would really just confirm what 20 years of Babados' political history has established, waste time and tax payer money, and potentially drop the issue again, when even after a referendum they would still have to have two-thirds of the House of Assembly vote to pass a change to the constitution.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Iluvbertie said:
If the Constitution says that the law can be changed with a vote in parliament then that is all that is needed.


The fact that for around 20 years this has been on the agenda but hasn't happened suggests that the political parties are working towards passing the law when there is a clear majority without having to waste the money on a referendum.


If the people of Barbados have been electing parties that support that idea for the last two decades it suggests very strongly that there is a broad base of support.

.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. General elections are fought around many issues and the fact that a republican party wins them doesn't directly imply that there is a republican majority among voters. The only way to know that for sure is to have a single-issue vote, i.e a Yes/No referendum specifically on keeping or abolishing the monarchy, preceded by a campaign period where each side can put its case to the electorate.

It may be the case that, if a referendum is held, the republic will win with a comfortable majority, but taking the decision to fundamentally change the way Barbados' head of State is chosen without consulting the people and without giving the monarchists a chance to be heard would be fundamentally wrong and undemocratic.
 
Last edited:
Ish said:
If a key component of an election campaign is creating a republic and that party gets voted in, it's safe to assume that the people support a republic.

If both major parties in a country support the creation of a republic, particularly if the country tends to be regarded as fairly democratic and without corruption (Barbados tied the US for the 17th least corrupt country in the world, 2014, on the Transparency Index), then it's safe to assume that that's in line with what the people want.

Both cases are true in Barbados. This may not be the best way to go about it, but the government - not fringe groups, not even the opposition, the party holding the majority of the seats in the House of Assembly - has been working towards a republic for 20 years now. That's despite the fact that both of the major parties have formed governments in that time period.

It would be like if a Democrat in the US ran for president on an issue, was elected, spent two terms working towards that issue (including having a Commission say that yes, the American people were behind said issue), then his successor ran on the same issue and was elected, dropped the issue to focus on other things and lost his re-election to the Republican candidate who said that he was going to focus on that issue and agreed with the Democrats that it should be done.

A referendum, while appearing more democratic, at this point would really just confirm what 20 years of Babados' political history has established, waste time and tax payer money, and potentially drop the issue again, when even after a referendum they would still have to have two-thirds of the House of Assembly vote to pass a change to the constitution.
Click to expand...

You obviously know what you're talking about and I often agree with you, but not in this.

Mbruno said:
It may be the case that, if a referendum is held, the republic will win with a comfortable majority, but taking the decision to fundamentally change the way Barbados' head of State is chosen without consulting the people and without giving the monarchists a chance to be heard would be fundamentally wrong and undemocratic.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right when it comes to this, to abolish the monarchy without consulting the people and without giving the monarchists a chance to be heard is (as you say) fundamentally wrong and undemocratic.
 
ROYAL NORWAY said:
I agree with both of you. I am a strong constitutional monarchist and a strong believer in democracy so I think it is the people of Barbados who should decide this through a referendum and not the government/parliament, but I must admit that I find it odd that a country shall have a foreigner as head of state.

In modern democracies such as Canada, Australia and New zealand it will be held referendums (if the politicians agrees about it), but that is not the case with the Caribbean countries who are full of corrupt politicians.
Click to expand...


It's odd but sad at the same time thinking about this. :ohmy:
 
Mbruno said:
Not necessarily. General elections are fought around many issues and the fact that a republican party wins them doesn't directly imply that there is a republican majority among voters. The only way to know that for sure is to have a single-issue vote, i.e a Yes/No referendum specifically on keeping or abolishing the monarchy, preceded by a campaign period where each side can put its case to the electorate.
Click to expand...


I agree; it's telling that the issue has been tabled for so long because other things were deemed more important.

I think a referendum should be held, since that would make it clear how the majority feels.

(They may feel monarchy is out of date, as many do. Perhaps they should take a look at the last state banquet; does anyone truly think that the Chinese president would be just as happy dining at 10 Downing Street instead of Buckingham Palace?) ;)
 
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even if temporary this is very good news! The Queen garners such respect from leaders all over the Commonwealth.
 
Queen Urges Inclusivity In Commonwealth Message
The Queen has urged people to support "those in need" and others who "feel excluded" in her annual message to mark Commonwealth Day.

She said helping those less fortunate would be a way of embodying this year's Commonwealth theme of inclusivity.

The Queen's message will form part of the annual Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey being held this afternoon.

In her message, the Queen, who is head of the Commonwealth, wrote: "Today, and in the year ahead, the theme An Inclusive Commonwealth is an inspiration for us all.

"Let us give it practical effect by supporting those in need and those who feel excluded in all walks of life. By doing so, we will continue to build a truly representative Commonwealth community."

The Queen also said working together for the common good was an essential ingredient of belonging to the family of nations.

"Each of us has cause to celebrate the sense of belonging expressed in our 2016 theme: An Inclusive Commonwealth," she wrote.

"Our recognition of this value, and the wisdom of mutual respect for each other, is set out in the Commonwealth Charter. Its opening words, 'We the people of the Commonwealth' convey the conviction that individuals, as well as governments, build and shape our success.

"Being inclusive and accepting diversity goes far deeper than accepting differences at face value and being tolerant.

"True celebration of the dignity of each person, and the value of their uniqueness and contribution, involves reaching out, recognising and embracing their individual identity."
Click to expand...

Beautifully said by our beloved Monarch.
 
eya said:
http://gpdhome.typepad.com/royalblo...ps-jamaica-and-barbados-for-now-at-least.html

Long To reign over us:Queen Elizabeth keeps Jamaica and Barbados (for now at least)
Click to expand...


What is happening in Jamaica and Barbados is a common pattern among Commonwealth realms, specifically:

1) Changing the Head of State is not a priority and makes little difference in people's daily lives.

2) The republican movement cannot agree on a model for the Head of State who would replace the Queen (e.g. ceremonial president versus executive president).

3) The constitutional hurdle to abolish the monarchy is very high and normally difficult to overcome.

4) There is a great deal of respect for QEII personally and, due to her seniority, there is reluctance to propose any change while she is still on the throne.
 
Commonwealth Day: Queen calls for inclusiveness - BBC News
Mr Annan told the congregation: "Today the Commonwealth stands as a confident, modern, multicultural and proudly inclusive organisation."

He said the Queen had shown "unwavering and steadfast devotion" to the Commonwealth, adding: "We are greatly honoured and deeply grateful for your extraordinary commitment to its people."
Click to expand...
 
Video:
The Queen attends a reception for the High Commissioners' Banquet at the Guildhall in central London this evening, in her role as Head of the Commonwealth. Her Majesty is accompanied by the Duke of Edinburgh Prince Phillip, and receives a presentation from the Lord Mayor on behalf of the City of London Corporation.
Home - ITNSource News
 
ROYAL NORWAY said:
Video:
The Queen attends a reception for the High Commissioners' Banquet at the Guildhall in central London this evening, in her role as Head of the Commonwealth. Her Majesty is accompanied by the Duke of Edinburgh Prince Phillip, and receives a presentation from the Lord Mayor on behalf of the City of London Corporation.
Home - ITNSource News
Click to expand...

I like how The Queen chuckled when she had a problem getting up from her chair at 2:56.
 
Excellent news, a demonstration that assumptions should not be made about the will of the people.
 
TLLK said:
Going OT Curryong but has there been a similar movement to change the Australian flag?
Click to expand...

Yes, since 1988, when a Mr Harold Scruby headed the 88AusFlag campaign. A competition was held at that time, which came up with a Southern cross tricolour design I believe. No-one really liked it apart from the designer and judges, and the campaign went no further.

There was further debate every few years or so for a while then it died down again. It's died down a lot, haven't heard of any serious campaigning to change the flag for years. To be honest, I think there's a bit more of a sentimental attachment to the present flag here than to the monarchy. Nevertheless, if there is a republic in the future the flag would go soon after, I think.

By the way, Australia's present flag (the Union Jack and the southern cross on a blue background) was also the result of a competition, a magazine competition just before Federation in 1901. It's very similar in design to New Zealand's.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proposed_Australian_flags
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
God Save the Queen anthem
Replies
0
Views
54
jf161
J
Marengo
The King, the Royal Family and the Commonwealth
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
11K
Anthony Claydon
A
Somebody
British Royal Family and the Media
Replies
0
Views
329
Somebody
Somebody
P
CP Mary visits Vanuatu, Fiji and Australia. April 23-28, 2023
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
Muhler
Muhler
JessRulz
  • Locked
Death of Queen Elizabeth II - Pre-Funeral Discussion and Reception
14 15 16
Replies
462
Views
51K
muriel
muriel

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom