The monarchy

The continuity of the English monarchy has been interrupted only by the Cromwell republic of 1649-59 although there have been different lines of descent, such as the Stuarts, the Tudors and the Hanoverians. The Crown, as distinct from any particular monarch, is thus one of the oldest secular institutions in Britain. Succession to the throne is still hereditary, but only for Protestants in the direct line of descent.

The monarch has a number of roles, and serves formally as head of state head of the executive head of the judiciary head of the legislature commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and supreme governor of the Church of England. It follows that all ministers and officials of the central government are the monarch's servants, and judges, military officers, peers, and bishops of the Church of England swear allegiance to the Crown. In holding these and other positions, the monarch is said to personify the British state.

In spite of these roles, there are difficulties in defining the precise powers of the monarch, who is supposed to reign but not rule. The monarch is also expected to be politically neutral, and should not be seen to be making political decisions. In order to avoid potential constitutional crises, proposals have often been made that rules concerning the real powers of the monarch should be established. Ideally they would clarify the uncertain elements in the monarch's position, and avoid the dangers of involving the Crown in political controversy.

However, for all practical purposes and since the old executive royal authority has been virtually abolished, the monarch acts only on the advice of political ministers, which cannot be ignored. The monarch cannot make laws, impose taxes, spend public money or act unilaterally. In this sense, contemporary Britain is governed by Her Majesty's Government in the name of the Queen.

Nevertheless, the monarch still performs some important executive and legislative duties, which are essential to the smooth running of government. These include the summoning, opening, Proroguing (or adjourning), and dissolving of Parliament; giving the Royal Assent (or signature) to bills which have been passed by both Houses of Parliament; appointing government ministers and other public figures; granting honours; holding audiences with the Prime Ministers; convening meetings of the Privy Council; giving pardons to some convicted criminals; and fulfilling international duties as head of state. In practice, most of these functions are performed by the monarch on the advice of the Prime Minister or other ministers.

But central power still possessed by the monarch is the choice and appointment of the Prime Minister. Normally and by convention, this person would be the leader of the political party which has a majority in the House of Commons. However, if there is no clear majority or if the political situation is unclear, the monarch could in theory make a free choice. In practice, it appears that advice would be given by the monarch's advisers and leading politicians in order to present a suitable candidate who would be generally acceptable.

The constitutional conventions stipulate that the monarch has the right to be informed of and advised on all aspects of national life by receiving government documents and meeting with the Prime Minister. The monarch also has the right to encourage, warn and advise ministers. This latter role could be a source of potential power not only in Britain, but also in the Common­wealth of which the monarch is head. It is difficult to know to what extent monarchical advice on formal and informal levels is influential. Some critics suggest that it could be substantial.

The monarch is a permanent fixture in the British political system, unlike temporary politicians, and often has a greater knowledge of domestic and international politics. It seems that the monarchy still has a considerable part to play in the operation of government at various levels. Its practical and constitutional importance is stressed by provisions for the appointment of counsellors of state (or a regent in exceptional cases) to perform royal duties, should the monarch be absent from Britain or unable to carry out public tasks.

Most of the costs of the royal family's official duties are met from public funds. This finance is granted from the Civil List - money which previously had to be debated and approved by Parliament each year, but which from 1990 has been frozen at current levels for a 10-year period. The monarch's private expenses as sovereign come from the Privy Purse - finance which is gathered from the revenues of some royal estates. Any other costs incurred by the monarch as a private individual must come from the Crown's own resources, which are very considerable.

Arguments against the monarchy as a continuing institution in British life maintain that it is out-of-date, non-democratic, too expensive, too exclusive and too closely associated with aristocratic privilege and establishment thinking. It is argued that the monarchy's alleged aloofness from ordinary daily life contributes to class divisions in society and sustains a hierarchical structure. It is also suggested that, if the monarch's functions today are merely ceremonial and lack power or essential point, the office should be abolished and replaced by a cheaper figurehead presidency.

Arguments in favour of the monarchy suggest that it has developed and adapted to modern requirements, and is not remote. It is argued that it serves as a symbol or personification of the state; demonstrates stability and continuity; has a higher prestige than politicians; is not subject to political manipulations; plays a worthwhile role in political institutions; possesses a neutrality with which people can feel secure; and performs an important ambassadorial function in Britain and overseas. The monarchy is also said to reflect family values, and has a certain glamour (some would say soap-opera quality) about it, which is attractive to many people. The British public shows considerable affection for the royal family beyond its representative role. Public opinion polls from time to time demonstrate majority support for the institution of monarchy as against a republican alternative. But the polls also suggest that the monarchy should adapt more to changes in society; that less public money should be spent on it; and that its income should be subject to income tax.

Дата добавления: 2015-07-20