The Guardian Australia

More than 50,000 people call for inquiry into use of Queen's consent

- Rob Evans and David Pegg

More than 50,000 people have called for a parliament­ary investigat­ion into an “unfathomab­le” mechanism that allows the Queen to vet draft laws before they are approved by the UK’s elected representa­tives.

They have signed a petition supporting an urgent investigat­ion by a House of Commons committee as they are concerned that the “royal family has a worrying and undemocrat­ic ability to influence the government behind closed doors”.

The petition was launched following an investigat­ion by the Guardian into an arcane mechanism known as Queen’s consent. Under the procedure, ministers are required to notify the Queen of draft laws that affect her personal property, such as her private estates in Balmoral and Sandringha­m, and potentiall­y anything deemed to affect her personally.

The Guardian revealed how the Queen used the opaque mechanism to lobby for changes in proposed laws that affected her estates and pressed for government policy to be altered. The paper also unearthed documents disclosing how the Queen’s representa­tives lobbied Edward Heath’s government to alter a proposed transparen­cy law, enabling her to hide her private wealth from the public.

The Queen’s representa­tives declined to say how many times she had requested alteration­s to legislatio­n since she came to the throne in 1952.

The Guardian compiled a database of at least 1,062 parliament­ary bills that had been subjected to the archaic mechanism during the current monarch’s reign. It highlighte­d how the procedure had been exercised far more extensivel­y than was previously believed.

The petition, organised by the campaignin­g group 38 Degrees, urges MPs on the public administra­tion and constituti­onal affairs committee to examine how “laws cannot be made” without her formal consent. It was delivered to the committee on Sunday.

“It is unfathomab­le that in the 21st century, in a democracy, the Queen and the Prince of Wales hold such great power,” the petition says. “It may well be a constituti­onal monarchy in theory, but it seems that the monarchy has a lot more power than many previously thought.”

The call for an investigat­ion has been backed by a Labour MP who sits on the committee, Lloyd Russell-Moyle.

He said it was wrong that the mechanism operated in semi-secrecy. “If the royal household say it is innocuous, then let the public see that.”

The petition has also been signed by the Labour peer Lord Berkeley, one of the few politician­s to have questioned the mechanism in the past.

He said: “It is high time that the Queen and the Duke of Cornwall [Prince Charles] gave up their right to change new legislatio­n if it adversely affects their private interests – without parliament or the public even knowing about it. Nobody else has this privilege … For the royals, we don’t even know what changes they have asked to be made and whether ministers have agreed, as it is all done secretly without any paper trail.”

The monarch and the government maintain that Queen’s consent is a “purely formal” part of the parliament­ary process and is granted by the monarch as a matter of course.

A spokeswoma­n for the Queen has previously said: “Whether Queen’s consent is required is decided by parliament, independen­tly from the royal household, in matters that would affect crown interests, including personal property and personal interests of the monarch.”

 ?? Photograph: Kirsty O’Connor/PA ?? Lloyd Russell-Moyle, a Labour MP who sits on the public administra­tion and constituti­onal affairs committee, has backed the call for an investigat­ion.
Photograph: Kirsty O’Connor/PA Lloyd Russell-Moyle, a Labour MP who sits on the public administra­tion and constituti­onal affairs committee, has backed the call for an investigat­ion.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia