Counsellors of State

[Iluvbertie]

This is a moot point. CoS are not really needed as TQ never leaves the UK anymore. If the need ever arises, it will easily skip over the non-available people (Harry, possibly Andrew) and the next in line will serve,

Although, I agree reform will be needed in the future. Under the current circumstances, Archie will never be allowed to serve as a CoS. Thus, changes will need to be made at some point.

You can't just 'skip over the non-available people and the next in line will serve'.

Who qualifies is governed by law:

1. The spouse of the monarch
2. The first four adults in the line of succession (heir apparent over 18 and all others over 21).
3. Domiciled in the UK.

If a person doesn't meet that criteria they can't just be added to that list because those who do aren't available.

I don't see why Archie won't be allowed to serve, assuming he ever is one of the first four adults. He only has to be living in the UK.

 

[miss whirley]

You can't just 'skip over the non-available people and the next in line will serve'.

Who qualifies is governed by law:

1. The spouse of the monarch
2. The first four adults in the line of succession (heir apparent over 18 and all others over 21).
3. Domiciled in the UK.

If a person doesn't meet that criteria they can't just be added to that list because those who do aren't available.

I don't see why Archie won't be allowed to serve, assuming he ever is one of the first four adults. He only has to be living in the UK.

I guess the presumption is that if he grew up in America he'd want to stay in America as an adult. The move is a big cultural difference as Meghan has shown, she's returned to America where she was raised. Though it would be the ultimate irony if Archie moved to the UK as a young man (University?), became close to the BRF and "spurned" his parents and upbringing. It would be Harry 2.0 but in reverse.

 

[Mbruno]

I guess the presumption is that if he grew up in America he'd want to stay in America as an adult. The move is a big cultural difference as Meghan has shown, she's returned to America where she was raised. Though it would be the ultimate irony if Archie moved to the UK as a young man (University?), became close to the BRF and "spurned" his parents and upbringing. It would be Harry 2.0 but in reverse.

If Archie grows up in LA, I don't think he will see himself as British. He won't even pick a British (Received Pronunciation) accent from his father. His mother's General American accent or, even more so, the dominant accent he will hear at school or on the TV will be his main language references.



It is sad really because he will be a grandson in male line of the British monarch, not some distant family relative or, as in the past, a member of another foreign royal house born of a British princess who married into that house.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I guess the presumption is that if he grew up in America he'd want to stay in America as an adult. The move is a big cultural difference as Meghan has shown, she's returned to America where she was raised. Though it would be the ultimate irony if Archie moved to the UK as a young man (University?), became close to the BRF and "spurned" his parents and upbringing. It would be Harry 2.0 but in reverse.

The Sussex's said they planned on spending six months a year in both Britain and the US. Until there is concrete evidence that they have changed their mind I would assume that Archie would also be raised for six months a year in each country.

I do think it sad that if he is raised in the US he won't have any real relationship with his paternal family and his maternal family isn't that close. He will grow up with no real idea of an extended family.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

The Sussex's said they planned on spending six months a year in both Britain and the US.

Where was this said?

 

[Osipi]

I believe it was part of the half in, half out plan. They wanted to split time between the US and North America. Don't quote me on that though.

 

[Durham]

I don't see why Archie won't be allowed to serve, assuming he ever is one of the first four adults. He only has to be living in the UK.

Well yes indeed. Surely another reason for reform of the system if someone can just move from another country & be involved by right of birth in our constitution. Someone who may have had next to nothing to do with Britain apart from being born there. What a farce that would be.

 

[Eskimo]

Well yes indeed. Surely another reason for reform of the system if someone can just move from another country & be involved by right of birth in our constitution. Someone who may have had next to nothing to do with Britain apart form being born there. What a farce that would be.

I cannot see the UK ever allowing Archie to serve as a CoS if he’s never lived in the Country past the first few months of his life

 

[Durham]

I cannot see the UK ever allowing Archie to serve as a CoS if he’s never lived in the Country past the first few months of his life

Well unless the system is reformed it remains a possibility. Hopefully the position of CofS can be reformed or replaced before any such eventuality

 

[Mbruno]

I cannot see the UK ever allowing Archie to serve as a CoS if he’s never lived in the Country past the first few months of his life

As things are going, I see Archie becoming 100 % American . I see him going to US schools and spending little time in Britain. I don't think he can be expected to understand British government to the point of being a CoS, but he probably won't be domiciled in the UK anyway.



As I said before, the situation is really bizarre considering that his paternal grandfather will be the King. British monarchs always had "foreign" grandchildren living overseas, but they were normally children of a British princess who had married into another European sovereign family. Nothing like the Harry/Meghan/Archie situation.

 

[Durham]

As things are going, I see Archie becoming 100 % American . I see him going to US schools and spending little time in Britain. I don't think he can be expected to understand British government to the point of being a CoS, but he probably won't be domiciled in the UK anyway.

What you say is more likely as not but there is the possibility as things now stand that an individual who is to all intents & purposes a foreigner can become involved in our government.

Hopefully this will be a spur to some sort of reform.

 

[Eskimo]

Well unless the system is reformed it remains a possibility. Hopefully the position of CofS can be reformed or replaced before any such eventuality

It will have to be reformed. I do not see the British people reacting well to Harry or Archie jumping over the pond and being acting head of state (which is basically what a CoS is)

 

[Somebody]

Even though Archie might be Counsellor of State at some point (although not very likely (unless William abdicates); as that would be during George's reign unless George, Charlotte, Louis or Harry passed away before that happens AND neither George, Charlotte or Louis has adult children at that point); it doesn't seem likely he would be called upon to actually serve as CoS given that other options would normally be available with those closer in line to the throne and raised in the UK (specifically Charlotte and Louis).

 

[Eskimo]

Even though Archie might be Counsellor of State at some point (although not very likely (unless William abdicates); as that would be during George's reign unless George, Charlotte, Louis or Harry passed away before that happens AND neither George, Charlotte or Louis has adult children at that point); it doesn't seem likely he would be called upon to actually serve as CoS given that other options would normally be available with those closer in line to the throne and raised in the UK (specifically Charlotte and Louis).

I am willing to wager a bet that at this point Harry would not be acceptable as CoS either

 

[Iluvbertie]

It will have to be reformed. I do not see the British people reacting well to Harry or Archie jumping over the pond and being acting head of state (which is basically what a CoS is)

They wouldn't be able to 'jump over the pond'. They have to be 'domiciled' in the UK. If they are permanently living in the US they aren't eligible to be a CoS under the existing laws.

 

[sndral]

I’m sure if the need arises they’ll amend the 1937 act to add whomever was best qualified like they did in 1953 to add the Queen mother as a counselor of state https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1953/nov/11/regency-bill

 

[Iluvbertie]

They added the Queen Mother simply because she was upset that she no longer qualified when she was no longer the spouse of the monarch.

 

[Osipi]

and therefore.... started the whole feminist movement pointing out a woman's worth is *not* dependent on her husband. Mark down that date. November 19, 1953.

Disclaimer: of course I'm being silly here. Haven't had enough reality juice yet this morning.

 

[muriel]

They added the Queen Mother simply because she was upset that she no longer qualified when she was no longer the spouse of the monarch.

There may well also be the point that those further down the line of sucession were probably not that well qualified to act as CoS.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Well yes indeed. Surely another reason for reform of the system if someone can just move from another country & be involved by right of birth in our constitution. Someone who may have had next to nothing to do with Britain apart from being born there. What a farce that would be.

It will have to be reformed. I do not see the British people reacting well to Harry or Archie jumping over the pond and being acting head of state (which is basically what a CoS is)

As the matter stands, a foreigner who has never set foot in Britain can become not only the acting head of state but the actual head of state. When Parliament reformed the laws of succession in 2013, it was open to them to restrict the line of succession to British residents and/or citizens, but they chose to maintain the foreigners in the line of succession, and the British people did not protest.

Given that the British people apparently have no issues with the possibility of a foreigner reigning as their King, a foreigner acting as Counsellor of State should raise no issues.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There may well also be the point that those further down the line of sucession were probably not that well qualified to act as CoS.

Many of those 'further down the list' had already served as CoS.

The reason I gave was given to the public at the time ... it was felt right that she remain in the list due to being the wife of the previous monarch.

At the time the CoS's were: Philip, Margaret, Henry, Mary and George Lascelles. Other than Margaret who had been added to the list in 1951 the others had been on the list for a decade or so when The Queen became The Queen. The next on the list was Gerald Lascelles who had been replaced by Margaret but himself had been on the list from 1944 to 1950.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There is a difference between a foreigner becoming Head of State - a lot of people have to die before the King of Norway (who, by the way is a British citizen ... as is the Queen of Denmark and the King of Sweden ... although not their descendants).

The law is quite clear - a CoS MUST be domiciled in the UK - what their citizenship is is irrelevant - they have to live in the UK.

 

[muriel]

There is a difference between a foreigner becoming Head of State - a lot of people have to die before the King of Norway (who, by the way is a British citizen ... as is the Queen of Denmark and the King of Sweden ... although not their descendants).

This is new to me, is the King of Norway a British citizen?

 

[Iluvbertie]

This is new to me, is the King of Norway a British citizen?

Any descendant of the Electress Sophia born before 1948 is automatically a British citizen under the Sophia Naturalisation Act.

In the 1950s the father of Prince Ernest of Hanover wanted to do something in Britain and was told he couldn't as he wasn't a British citizen. He argued - that as a descendant of Sophia he was. He took it to court and won. The government then changed the law restricting the British citizenship to those born before 1948 (had this been remembered in 1947 Prince Philip wouldn't have had to renounce his Greek and Danish citizenship as he was born a British citizen).

That is why the current Kings of Norway and Sweden and the Queen of Denmark are British citizens but their children aren't - they were all born before 1948 and are all descended from Sophia.

The King of Norway is the first foreigner in the line of succession being descended from Edward VII's youngest daughter.

 

[muriel]

Any descendant of the Electress Sophia born before 1948 is automatically a British citizen under the Sophia Naturalisation Act.

In the 1950s the father of Prince Ernest of Hanover wanted to do something in Britain and was told he couldn't as he wasn't a British citizen. He argued - that as a descendant of Sophia he was. He took it to court and won. The government then changed the law restricting the British citizenship to those born before 1948 (had this been remembered in 1947 Prince Philip wouldn't have had to renounce his Greek and Danish citizenship as he was born a British citizen).

That is why the current Kings of Norway and Sweden and the Queen of Denmark are British citizens but their children aren't - they were all born before 1948 and are all descended from Sophia.

The King of Norway is the first foreigner in the line of succession being descended from Edward VII's youngest daughter.

Very interesting, thank you for sharing. ?

 

[Durham]

But domiciled for how long? A month , a year?

 

[Iluvbertie]

That isn't clear ... it could be as little as a month but I would think that logically it should be at least half the year. I would assume that the primary country of residence has to be the UK but so far it hasn't come up as all the CoSs since 1937 have resided in the UK. Harry's decision has raised a wrinkle that will have to be considered if it turns out that he isn't spending at least half his time in the UK.

 

[Durham]

Well it certainly is a wrinkle.

It's a good opportunity to revise the criteria. Only full time residents should be eligible. I'm sure everyone would see the fairness in that.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

"Domicile" is distinct from "residence".

RDRM20010 - Residence, Domicile and Remittance Basis Manual - HMRC internal manual - GOV.UK

It is possible to be resident in one country for decades, but remain domiciled in another country.

 

[Durham]

"Domicile" is distinct from "residence".

RDRM20010 - Residence, Domicile and Remittance Basis Manual - HMRC internal manual - GOV.UK

It is possible to be resident in one country for decades, but remain domiciled in another country.

Thank for that, I was uncertain.

Clearly there is need for reform. Even if we keep what I think is a flawed system, only citizens who are full time residents should be eligible.

Maybe reform is already in the pipeline.