In
2005 William Rees -Mog stated "Thank God we elected a Monarch."
How this can change in only 4 years.
[IT IS MAY 2009-LAST YEAR
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN SIGNED THE LISBON TREATY WITHOUT PUTTING
PRESSURE -'TO WARN' THAT SHOULD THE PRIME MINISTER DENY HER PEOPLE A
REFERENDUM THEN SHE WOULD VETO THE TREATY. IT HAS NOW ONLY RECENTLY
COME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT THE QUEEN IS ONE OF THE PROMINENT MASONIC
FIGURES IN THE
NEW WORLD ORDER
SO THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CHEATED
FOR 47 YEARS THINKING THAT THEIR QUEEN WOULD STAND BY HER SOLEMN
OATH OF ALLEGIANCE TO HER PEOPLE AND COUNTRY.]
*
Thank God we
elected a Monarch
By
William Rees-Mogg
(Independent Peer)
Daily Mail
Sunday, April 3, 2005.
…I am glad to
be an Independent peer; I do not have a party and do not have a
vote. Of course, I always support my children wherever they may be
standing. None of the above criticisms applies at this Election to
the admirable Conservative candidate for Aberavon. But she shall
remain anonymous.
It is not the
least of the merits of a hereditary Monarchy that the Queen, and the
other senior members of the Royal Family, are above the fray.
The Monarchy
would not have lasted for well over a thousand years if the Monarch
had been involved in the General Election every four years and been
forced to use stale and mendacious arguments to discredit some
alternative line.
In the 18th
century, the House of Hanover did have to defeat the House of Stuart
on two occasions, 1715 and 1745. Even those dates are 30 years
apart. No Stuart rebellion has been attempted since. That is just as
well as they were a very unfortunate family.
Constitutional
Monarchy is one of the great English discoveries. It separates the
struggle for power from the ultimate
authority.
The Monarch has
no power, decides nothing except the choice of her Ladies- in
-Waiting, the membership of the Garter and Order of Merit, the
seating at State banquets and which statesman to call to office if
the General Election produces a tie.
When I come to
think of it, that might be a good outcome, with 207 MP’s for Labour,
207 Conservatives, 207 Liberal Democrats, 25 others and the Speaker.
The Queen would have some arithmetic to perform; that will not
happen, though it would correspond more closely to voters’ real
preferences than any result we are likely to get. Arguably it might
also produce a better government.
It is sometimes
said, particularly by Scottish patriots that in English theory
sovereignty belongs to the Monarch, but in Scotland, as in the
United States, to the people.
I do not know for
sure about Scottish constitutional theory. I do know that as
recently as 1689 - the day before yesterday by standards of our
national history -William and Mary were
crowned King and Queen of England at Westminster before they had
heard whether they were also to be King and Queen of Scotland.
Until 1707 and
the Act of Union, the parliamentary process was separate and
different for both kingdoms.
Most of us think
of England as having a purely hereditary Monarchy,
but England does not.
Our constitutional Monarchy is itself elective and therefore
democratic. The Queen sits on her throne by
virtue of an Act of Parliament, the Act of Settlement 1701.
That is her
title deed to the Crown. It was passed, like any other Act of
Parliament, by both Houses.
According to the
historian Bishop Burnet, Sir John Bowles ‘who was then disordered in
his senses and soon after quite lost them’, was put up to propose
Sophia, the Electress Dowager of Brunswick, and her heirs as the
line that would eventually follow Queen Anne. That was carried in
Committee of the House of Commons; the Act went through the Lords
with only four dissenters and Sophia’s son eventually became George
I.
The history goes
back much further than that. In 1399, King Richard II was forced to
abdicate in favour of his cousin, King Henry IV, who was John of
Gaunt’s eldest son. Parliament, sitting in Westminster Hall, then
elected Henry as King. He was our first elected Monarch.
[Since
that of King Alfred -
Alfred the Great
in 871. Many would say one of the greatest Kings of the
English.]
In 1571, Queen
Elisabeth’s Parliament resolved that it alone had the right to
determine the succession, and that it would be high treason for
anyone to question Parliament’s right.
In 1642,
Parliament fought and won the Civil War to determine the issue of
ultimate power. In 1660, Parliament invited King Charles II to
return.
Britain does have
a hereditary Monarchy but it is established by parliamentary votes.
Parliaments have made the Monarchy the
keystone to our democratic constitution.
The Act of
Settlement itself could be amended, or on
theory, repealed by a further Act of Parliament. There is no head of
steam for republicanism, but amendment is now probable. Even in this
General Election, Michael Howard has proposed that the Act’s bar on
Roman Catholics should be removed. It is, I
suspect, already unenforceable.
[Like
almost anything in what is left of our Constitution - the Rock has
been chipped away at for the past 32 years]
If Prince
William wanted to marry a Roman Catholic, which he does not, it
would be politically impossible to keep him from the throne on those
grounds. [We expect the existence of Human
Rights Act will be invoked.]
Prince Charles,
Prince William and Prince Harry now come first in the line of
succession; if they were to fail, there would be a strong movement
to put the Princess Royal next in line rather than her younger
brothers. Parliament does not believe in gender discrimination, nor
does the Human Rights Act. Fortunately this is a very remote
possibility.
The Monarchy
contributes six key virtues to our Constitution. These are:
Impartiality,
Duty,
Personality,
Authority,
Unity
And Permanence.
The idea of a
national authority which is personal humanises the inevitable
bureaucracy of the State. Few of us would
watch a Christmas broadcast by the Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs.
However
high-minded they are, politicians can never be genuinely impartial,
as impartial journalists who become politicians have repeatedly
found. There is a choice of loyalties to be
made.
No political
leader has permanence however powerful or imposing he may seem at
the time - I doubt whether Tony Blair, Michael Howard or Charles
Kennedy will be leading their parties into the General Election
after this one.
Politicians are
mayflies, creatures for the day.
The Crown is for
centuries.[?]
The Monarch
exchanges power, which belongs to the Prime Minister with a majority
in the House of Commons, for permanence and authority. Their two
functions are quite different. For my part, I feel like saying:
‘God bless our
politicians; thank God for the Queen.’
[We would say most sincerely:
‘God help
our politicians; thank God for the Queen.
[How
wrong we were to believe we could count on a Queen with the
illustrious name of
ELIZABETH of ENGLAND]
*
[Font
altered-bolding &underlining used-comments in brackets]
APRIL/05
* * *
[IT IS MAY 2009-LAST
YEAR HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN SIGNED THE LISBON TREATY WITHOUT PUTTING
PRESSURE
-TO WARN THAT SHOULD THE PRIME
MINISTER DENY HER PEOPLE A REFERENDUM THEN SHE WOULD VETO THE
TREATY. IT HAS NOW ONLY RECENTLY COME TO OUR ATTENTION THAT
THE QUEEN IS ONE OF THE PROMINENT MASONIC FIGURES IN THE NEW WORLD
ORDER SO THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CHEATED FOR 47 YEARS THINKING
THAT THEIR QUEEN WOULD STAND BY HER SOLEMN OATH OF ALLEGIANCE TO HER
PEOPLE AND COUNTRY.]
[ADDED TO
BULLETIN IN MAY-2009]
A
MERRY CHRISTMAS
(
