Charles? ..William? ...or A.N.Other?

The taboo is broken.

Rules of royal succession have been immutable for 311 years. No longer do they have the authority of Holy Writ. Arcane restrictions will change. Other anachronisms can now be debated and modernised.

Defenders of royalty hoped to strip out some egregiously indefensible features of the succession rules in a single day. An unlikely coalition of royalists, republicans and royalty sought and won more time. Unintended consequences are feared. Opportunities for a thorough reform were demanded.

Many people believe Charles would be an unsuitable head of state. Most would prefer the Cambridges to rule at the demise of the Queen. New proposed clauses seek to reform the succession on democratic lines fit for the 21st century. The public should have a choice of Charles, William or Citizen A.N. Other.

The Queen's faultless reign has been exceptional. In the past troublesome monarchs were the norm. Charles has been an incurable meddler in political affairs. He threatened to relocate to Switzerland if the Hunting Bill was passed. It was. He didn’t. Would he sign all future bills? The Attorney General overturned a FOI ruling on Charles' letters to government ministers because 'disclosure could damage The Prince of Wales’ ability to perform his duties when he becomes King'. The public have the right to be fully informed on the foibles of the future Charles III.

One of the new clauses I am proposing is to future proof the monarchy from charges of discrimination by giving same-sex partnerships the same validity as heterosexual ones in the rights of succession. I am not optimistic that my amendments will be called but I and a few others will be ready to contribute.

Downing Street failed to suppress news of the eye-popping powers of royals to ditch parliamentary bills. One to transfer power to wage war from Monarch to the Commons was vetoed by the Queen. My hope of a free open debate is on a protozoan level. Fixers will deny an adult discussion. Confronted by royalty, Parliament becomes infantilised and squirms and fawns like a nursery class meeting Santa Claus.

	Notices of Amendments
	given on
	Wednesday 19 December 2012
	SucCession To The Crown Bill
	Paul Flynn
		1
	Clause 1, page 1, line 2, leave out ‘born after 28 October 2011’ and insert
	‘whenever born’.

 

NEW CLAUSE:

In the event of the heir to the throne contracting a civil partnership, any progeny of that marriage by adoption or artificial insemination should qualify to inherit the throne.

  

	Notices of Amendments
	given on
	Tuesday 8 January 2013
	SucCession To The Crown Bill
		Holding of referendum
	Paul Flynn
		NC1
	To move the following Clause:—
		‘(1) A referendum shall be held on the question whether on the next demise of the
		Crown (whether by death or abdication) any person should succeed Her Majesty
		Queen Elizabeth the Second as Sovereign and Head of State of the United
		Kingdom.
		(2) A referendum shall be held at the same time as that to be held under subsection
		(1) above on the question as to how any future head of state of the United
		Kingdom should be elected in the event of Parliament determining that no person
		shall succeed Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second.
		(3) The questions to be asked in the referendums shall be in the form set out in the
		Schedule to this Act.’.
		Those entitled to vote in referendum
	To move the following Clause:—
		‘Those entitled to vote in the referendum shall be—
		(a) the persons who, at the date of the referendum, would be entitled to vote
		as electors at a parliamentary election in any constituency; and
		(b) peers who, at the date of the referendum, would be entitled to vote as
		electors at a local government election in any area.’.
	To move the following Schedule:—
		‘Form of Ballot Paper
		Parliament has voted to hold referendums simultaneously on the questions of
		whether—
		(a) any person should succeed Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth as Sovereign
		and Head of State; and
		(b) whether, in the event of Parliament deciding to end the role of the
		Crown as Head of State of the United Kingdom, future heads of state
		should be elected by Members of both Houses of Parliament or by popular vote.
		You may choose to answer either or both of the questions printed below. If
		you answer only one question, your vote will still be counted.
		The questions are—
		1. DO YOU AGREE THAT ON THE DEATH OR ABDICATION
		OF HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH NO-ONE SHOULD
		SUCCEED HER AS SOVEREIGN AND HEAD OF STATE,
		AND THAT FUTURE HEADS OF STATE OF THE UNITED
		KINGDOM SHOULD BE ELECTED?
		YES
		NO
		2. IF FUTURE HEADS OF STATE OF THIS COUNTRY WERE TO
		BE ELECTED, DO YOU THINK THAT THEY SHOULD BE
		ELECTED BY—
		A. MEMBERS OF BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT?
		OR
		B. POPULAR VOTE?’.

 

 

Comments

[Paul Flynn]

Mr Mervyn James, You have either not read or not understood the replies I sent you. I suggest you try to read them again. It's not possible to engage with you on a sensible level. Try contacting your own MP.

[Mervyn James]

It is this type of non cooperation that puts voters off. Not my problem...

[Paul Flynn]

Mr Mervyn James, I saw your letter in the Argus which included your address which you refused to give to me (see above). You are not a constituent of mine. I have replied immediately, courteously and helpfully to your questions. The service offered by my offices and my staff is second to none in Wales. You persist in the nonsense that my priorities are not the correct ones. If you care to look through the thousands of blogs, questions and speeches I have made you will be better informed. If you sincerely want to advance the causes you support, you should be guided to address your complaint to the right person or body.

[Mervyn James]

No nom de plume, my name is at the top of the comment. I'm not posting my address on here. I doubt somehow the issues I put in a previous comment are singular, it isn't a personal gripe. I don't want such issues approached that way, it affects 1,000s in Gwent and wales. I have no interest whatever in what the Queen says or does, and a lot of other Gwent don't care either they have more important things to address.

[Paul Flynn]

The royal issue is before Parliament on royal succession for the first time since 1701. I have played a large part in the bills passage. On many other issues I play a leading role including pensions, Afghanistan, social security, civil service future, energy future and dozens of the subject. I believe I speak n the chamber and on committees more than any other Welsh MP. I have held public meetings in New port on a dozen recent occasions on matter for which I have responsibility. If you have an individual case to raise please let me. You use a nom de plume. Could you let me have your name and address so I can check.

Paul Flynn

01633 262348/02072193478/ 07887925699

Twitter: @paulflynnmp

www.paulflynnmp.co.uk

[Mervyn James]

This is a diversion away from what is happening in Wales. WHY would she oppose powers to Wales, if her 'Ministers' approve of it ? She will be just be overruled. If you believe she can endorse more powers to Wales without regard to Westminster you don't understand politics either, sorry. You didn't answer the question of what you are dong about the points I made either. so many EDM's so little time ?

[D.G.]

If you read the recently released pamphlet, you'll see that it really DOES matter what the Queen says, and the assumption that she just plays a ceremonial role is not accurate.

She could veto a bill transferring further powers to Wales, for example, and you'd never hear about it.

[Mervyn James]

I doubt if you are even aware of two surveys/reports on the NHS discrimination of deaf people in Wales, such an impact the BBC is taking it up. The information station isn't even accessible to your own area deaf despite assurances,it never happened. Forget London, plenty to do here.

[Mervyn James]

Should we not concentrate on WALES ? most of us don't care who is next in line for an English Crown, we have more pressing issues here. Doesn't matter what the queen says, parliament rules, she is just for tourists. This constant emphasis in London and royalty is alienating welsh people. Our NHS is in meltdown, Newport is dead or at least dying from criminal city council neglect, Wales has no jobs to offer anyone, and special needs support is being taken away from disabled children. In april 1,000s of social housing tenants, will be plunged into poverty, some will be taxed for not taking total strangers into their home, and food is being distributed daily to welsh people who cannot afford to eat. Do you not think you are trivialising on this blog and missing what you were elected for ?