Queen’s legacy to her son? A united kingdom
EVEN IN death this remarkable monarch – arguably the most significant in the institution’s 1,000-year incarnation – has continued to serve. And her last dutiful act could go down as her most symbolic. You don’t have to go back that far to recall the dark rumblings of discontent that led to a small, but mounting, anti-monarchist chorus of calls for a republic. Regrettably this was doubtlessly fuelled by a litany of poor decisions and even worse behaviour by some members of her family.
And concerns wouldn’t have been eased by the political moods across the country.
In the Queen’s beloved Scotland, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon rules with an iron grip and would have us believe it is a nation clamouring to rise and break free from its bonds with Westminster. But more, and probably the truth, on that later!
When King Charles arrived in Northern Ireland last week he was met by Alex Maskey, the Speaker of the Northern Ireland Assembly, which is currently suspended.
He is a prominent member of Sinn Fein and was interned twice in the 1970s as a suspected member of the Provisional IRA.
When the Assembly gets back to work, first minister will be Sinn Fein’s Michelle O’neill,
‘Her love for Scotland was deep and genuine’
who leads the party with the most seats.
While the picture in Wales was rosier for the King at the end of last week, perhaps as a result of his more than half a century of loyal service as the Prince of Wales following his investiture at Caernarfon Castle, the challenge to keep the Union united is real.
This is where his recently departed mother has proved to be of the greatest service.
The whole nation, and indeed the world, now knows the deep affection with which the Queen viewed Scotland.
Her love for the country and its people was deep, genuine and returned in full.
As we watched the coffin bearing her body make its way through the gates at Balmoral, and we were then treated to TV coverage of the surrounding area, it was easy to see why she relished the time she spent there.
You could easily imagine the family barbecues and picnics held in breathtaking countryside, and the happiness and succour the Queen got from her time there.
The route was lined with people wanting to pay their respects and after it had passed salutes were given by a disparate range of groups, including horse riders and tractor drivers. It passed through Dundee, an SNP stronghold for decades, but yet again large, respectful crowds turned out. The arrival at Edinburgh saw more of the same. Huge
crowds gathered, with any voice of dissent so negligible it scarcely bears mention. It is interesting to note that on at least one occasion the police moved to arrest one protester “for his own wellbeing”.
That’s code for the rest of the mourning crowd being ready to take matters into their own hands. With grief as raw as this, that would be a dangerous prospect for anyone.
Is this really the Scotland where, for many elections, nearly half the population have voted for a party that wants to split from the rest of the UK? It certainly hasn’t felt like it over the past 10 days.
In 2014 shortly before the Scottish referendum, the Queen told a wellwisher outside the church near Balmoral: “Well, I hope people will think very carefully about the future.” A gentle touch on the tiller, and indeed they did.
After standing vigil over the Queen’s coffin in St Giles’s Cathedral in Edinburgh with his siblings in some of the most powerful images we saw, it was straight to Belfast for the new King. It’s important to realise just how much work he has already put into this eternally complex part of the Kingdom. Prior
to last week’s visit, Charles had been there 39 times already. As one senior Northern Irish politician sagely observed: “He’s probably seen more of this place than I have.”
And he will know that for the uncertainty over the Assembly to clear, the thorny issue of post-brexit UK and the Northern Ireland Protocol must be addressed.
THE King said inwestminster Hall on Monday he felt “the weight of history” – and it’s a fair bet he had the province in his thoughts at the time. For decades anti-monarchists saw these sad times as the moment to strike. The respectful ones at least admitted they weren’t heralding the passing of a Queen with the longest period of loyal service on record, but this would be the opportunity they craved.
As the heir, Charles would be seen as out of touch and remote and the public would be repelled by his demand to have Camilla by his side as Queen Consort. They’ve been proved to be wrong on every level. On some
occasions it has been like harking back to the early years of Armistice Day when all traffic would stop and drivers would leave their vehicles to doff their hats.
Admittedly on the roads where the traffic stopped as the new King and his consort drove by, the crowds were more likely to raise their phones than any headwear, but the respectful solemnity was just the same.
As we saw more of the King and heard him speak of his “dear Mama” we saw just how intensely the grief was etched on his face.
But the red eyes, sometimes possibly even bearing the slightest of tears, simply showed how human he was.
Just as Queen Elizabeth represented a time when it was widely felt as inappropriate to shed a tear, so King Charles’s emotions are in tune with the current mood.
The reality is there is no other person nor institution in the land that would see people queueing for 20 hours for the chance to show their respects, albeit for a few seconds.
And the fact they have come from all corners of this country is the legacy this monarch passes to her son, the true face of the nation: a United Kingdom.