People too quick to criticise Andrew
THE shameless criticism of Prince Andrew exposes people’s lack of knowledge about the lives of members of the Royal family.
There’s no defence, however, for his behaviour – but I can understand how a member of the family might find himself in such difficulties with the law.
The family has lived lonely, sheltered lives from birth, not knowing who their true friends are while having to behave like creatures in a zoo.
It’s not surprising that the road leading from the Palace of Westminster and Westminster Abbey to Buckingham Palace is known as Birdcage Walk.
Politicians have placed the Royal Family at the centre of Britain’s democracy instead of the institution of the constitutional monarchy.
The family should have been left able to lead at least semi-private lives and educated to be selfemployed, instead of being forced to act as public relations employees.
However, any realistic hopes of changing the status quo are unlikely to materialise unless a political party is elected to power with the intention of replacing the monarchy with a republic: that is, the Queen, with a president. To do so would require such a government to have the Electoral Commission arrange for a convention of the people to draft a codified constitution which would then need Parliament’s approval and then ratified by the people who have the final say.
Only then could a government put the necessary legislation to Parliament which, if approved, would trigger a (genuine) referendum, conditional on being regulated by mandatory attendance at polling stations with a threshold of 50% plus one vote of the registered electorate.
The Australians tried that with a (genuine) referendum in 1999 but the republicans failed to reach the threshold with only 45.13%, which makes the UK’s 37% support for leaving the EU look rather sick.
Kenneth R Jarrett,