Consequences

They never do seem to think through the consequences of their actions, do they, these political types?

Gordon Brown is considering repealing the 1701 Act of Settlement as a way of healing a historic injustice by ending the prohibition against Catholics taking the throne.

But doing so would have the unforeseen consequence of making a 74-year-old German aristocrat the new King of England and Scotland.

Perhaps here are things wrong with the British Constitution as she is: but the whole thing is so interwoven that you can\’t just strike out one part of it without revealing gaping holes in other parts.

As, indeed, they found when they tried to abolish the post of Lord Chancellor.

12 thoughts on “Consequences”

  1. “…doing so would have the unforeseen consequence of making a 74-year-old German aristocrat the new King of England and Scotland.”

    I suspect that’s not a bug….it’s a feature.

  2. “But doing so would have the unforeseen consequence of making a 74-year-old German aristocrat the new King of England and Scotland.”

    This is rubbish, of course. Enacting that Act didn’t mean that Henry VII was never king although he was a Roman Catholic. The effect of repealing would not be retrospective.

  3. Why would the repealing of the Act be backdated over 300 years? That’s not what normally happens with our legislation is it.

  4. Perhaps here are things wrong with the British Constitution as she is: but the whole thing is so interwoven that you can’t just strike out one part of it without revealing gaping holes in other parts.

    Careful Tim, you are sounding like a conservative.

  5. Cobblers.

    The article just about gets it right when it says, “Patrick Cracroft-Brennan, the editor of Cracroft’s Peerage, said that while theoretically the Duke’s claim was good, it could never be actioned because Parliament now effectively chose the monarch.”

    All you have to do is name Betty Windsor as the monarch in the Act that repeals the 1701 Act. Parliament has specified who the monarch was before (overthrowing the line of succession twice) and can do so again.

    Or better still, abolish the institution altogether.

  6. “Or better still, abolish the institution altogether.”

    I wholeheartedly agree; it’s incompetent, corrupt and irrelevant in today’s EU -dominated political system. Abolish Parliament altogether and let’s return to an absolute monarchy. God save the Queen!

  7. “would have the unforeseen consequence of making a 74-year-old German aristocrat “….
    … as opposed the 80 year old German aristocrat who currently wears the crown.

    In other exciting news, it rained today and Mrs Finlay’s cardigan got all wet hanging on the washing line.

  8. So Monty thinks we have a German head of state does he? So anyone born and bred in this country (still the greatest country on earth, incidentally) with foreign ancestors have no right to call themselves English or British?
    Talk about stupidity. Must be a Labour voter. The politburo (sorry, Labour government) use the inequality of the Act towards Catholics as a smokescreen – they don`t have the guts or backbone to put the future of the monarchy to a vote because they know they would lose, so they resort to clandestine acts of treachery in order to achieve their republican agenda, which doesn`t surprise any right-thinking person.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *