Graham Smith the CEO of Republic, the campaign for a democratic alternative to the monarchy joined us this month.
Graham
stated that the monarchy was both wrong in principle and in practice.
It undermines our desire to make decisions for ourselves and “is an
obstacle to a genuine flourishing of democratic ideals.”
Graham
also accused the monarchy of corruption. If we can define corruption
as the abuse of public office for personal gain then Graham cited royal
access to ministers to lobby for their own political agenda and using
public money for personal use (i.e. £20,000 spent by Prince Charles for a
4 day Scottish holiday) as examples.
The
media states that the total cost of the monarchy to be £35 million a
year. But Republic contend that this figure is artificially low as it
doesn’t include the costs of security, police, local council costs on
visits and that there real figure is more like £200 million. By
contrast the Irish Head of State costs that nation £7 million a year.
But Graham stressed that this wasn’t simply a question of cost. Even if
the monarchy cost nothing its existence would erode our democratic
potential.
To
Graham just as worrying as the high financial price of the monarchy
was the fact that it is “out of control and not open to scrutiny”. Both
Prince Charles and the Queen have an effective veto on any legislation that affects their extensive private interests. Civil
Servants are duty bound to make them aware of any legislation that might
do so. The result is that legislation is changed in advance to avoid
it affecting these private interests as Civil Servants know it will have
to be amended in favour of the Royals anyway.
When
it comes to the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) the monarchy is exempt
even though it is a publicly funded body. The Act was later amended so
that in addition to any internal Royal correspondence being out of
bounds any correspondence between the monarchy and any other public
bodies was also safe from scrutiny. We know that Prince Charles sends
plenty of missives to government but we’re not allowed to know their
contents. The Guardian has been fighting a long battle to get
access to these letters with the government repeatedly losing in the
courts and then putting in motion appeal after appeal. This lobbying explodes the myth that the monarchy is merely a decorative
figure
head, detached from politics.
Another such myth, according to Graham, is that the monarchy brings valuable tourist trade to the UK.
So what’s the alternative? Republic campaigns for a fully elected Parliament and an elected Head of State
that acts as the Guardian of the Constitution. Graham gave examples of
where proposed laws have been vetoed in Ireland when the President has referred them to the Supreme Court where they have subsequently been deemed unconstitutional. We are not talking about the same style
Presidency as Mugabe in Zimbabwe (as some of the audience seemed to
think) but for a Head of State that protects the constitution and
represents the country rather than running it as a personal fiefdom.
After
a break to refill glasses and empty bladders (given a whole new twist
to the phrase ‘The Royal Wee’) Graham fielded questions from the
audience. Some in the audience believed that simply replacing the
monarchy with a presidency wouldn’t change anything and that there are
plenty of examples of corrupt Heads of State. Graham countered that it
wasn’t about changing human nature but making those that held high
office open to scrutiny and accountable for their actions. Something
that the monarchy patently isn’t. In addition, it’s impossible to
change the status quo without presenting ourselves with “the opportunity
to change the system.”
Once
again it was a lively debate with even the bar staff joining in.
Personally, what struck me is that for those who believe in the monarchy
it very much appeared as more of an act of faith that an evidence based
belief. I was left wondering why as a Nation many of us feel that
this privileged family with no experience of everyday life are an
accurate image of Britishness to project to the world and ourselves? It
is a cosy nostalgia for a supposedly simpler time where everyone know
their place and things seemed a little more ordered?
NEXT MONTH: Christopher Snowden will challenge 'The Spirit Level' theory that more equal societies always do better. It's bound to be a controversial stance so do come along. Thursday April 17th, 7pm, The White Horse. Full details HERE.
