royal succession

**robbiethepiper** · 28th October 11, 02:01 PM

The BBC today announced that future monarchs would no longer be selected by male primogeniture i.e. if the first born chid is female, she will become queen even if a brother is born later. Also a monarch or heir will henceforth be legally allowed to marry a roman catholic. I post this as information, without comment, except to say I'm celebrating!

**Peter Crowe** · 28th October 11, 02:06 PM

This was being discussed earlier on

http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...7/#post1030390

In any event, without being political I would say I too welcome these developments.

**madmacs** · 28th October 11, 06:10 PM

One has to wonder how much of the decision was the Queen's and how much was the rest of the commonwealth's... The country will never be the same again...

**JSFMACLJR** · 28th October 11, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by madmacs

One has to wonder how much of the decision was the Queen's and how much was the rest of the commonwealth's... The country will never be the same again...

Does it matter whose decision it was?

**Peter Crowe** · 28th October 11, 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by madmacs

One has to wonder how much of the decision was the Queen's and how much was the rest of the commonwealth's... The country will never be the same again...

To be honest when this was first raised as a Private Bill in the House of Lords by Lord Archer (about 20 years ago), the Queen was asked for her permission that such a Bill be tabled, and she graciously assented.

As to never being the same again, Britain has never remained the same. The Constitution of the United Kingdom (the sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament) has meant that the country has always been changing, and continues to change by piecemeal political and constitution reform. Great Britain as a legal entity is only 304 years old (with the Treaty and Acts of Union between Scotland and England). The United Kingdom a mere 210 years old (Union between Great Britain and Ireland) subsequently modified 90 years ago with the independence of the then Irish Free State. From 1832 when the upper middle classes in towns and cities were admitted to the franchise until 1969 when all adults over 18 got the vote, there has been a process of continual but gradual extension of voting rights. Reforms have continued down to the present with devolution to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, the abolition of voting rights for hereditary peers, and the establishment of the UK Supreme Court to replace the judicial role of the House of Lords.

The Commonwealth Realms have Independent Crowns (of the United Kingdom and each other) and had to be consulted because this change could only proceed on the basis of their unanimous agreement.

In my view (and purely from a Scottish and/or UK perspective) this is just another step in the British polity's evolution from the Revolution settlement(s)1688/90.

**madmacs** · 28th October 11, 09:27 PM

I would have to say here... I never said there was anything wrong with it...

**pascs** · 28th October 11, 09:57 PM

I hope that when the Queen finally lets go that Prince William will take over and not Charles. I think Prince William and his wife are by far the most popular of the royals at this point in time and would do far more for the image of British royalty than Charles. I guess this just isnt going to happen though.

Unfortunately I dont think William is much of a kilt wearer LOL

**davidg** · 29th October 11, 12:30 AM

I think you will find that this is not a "done deal" just yet. The heads of the other governments may have agreed but legislation will still have to go through parliament

**Chas** · 29th October 11, 04:34 AM

Originally Posted by pascs

I hope that when the Queen finally lets go that Prince William will take over and not Charles. I think Prince William and his wife are by far the most popular of the royals at this point in time and would do far more for the image of British royalty than Charles. I guess this just isnt going to happen though.

Unfortunately I dont think William is much of a kilt wearer LOL

Well, that's your opinion. I for one, do not agree with it at all. I have met Prince Charles twice and unlike yourself, he is not concerned with the cult of celebrity.

There is a lot more to the job than having a pretty wife and mother, you know.

Regards

Chas

**McClef** · 29th October 11, 05:14 AM

Just to add to what Chas has said:

For William to "take over", Charles would have to abdicate first if he is still alive when Her Majesty passes. It would then require a parliamentary bill to be passed to give effect to this desire to which he would have to give his Royal Assent.

The consent of every country where he would be Head of State would also be required.

There is no precedent for "jumping" the line here.