I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree with Mike Small in his article on how the “Passing of the Queen leaves Britain paralysed by sycophantic mania” (Sep 11) where he attacks the hysterical media reaction, controlled by a handful of people intent on deflecting attention from the reality of the approaching eat-or-heat winter under the new Prime Minister.
The coincidence of events over the last few months has revealed the contrasts and similarities between the succession of the Prime Minister and the monarch.
Selection of the Prime Minister took eight weeks; selection of the monarch was predetermined.
READ MORE: Suspension of all political activities in mourning period is unjustified
The government virtually ceased to govern for months before the Prime Minister was ceremonially appointed; the monarchy continued without interruption although it will be months before the ceremonial coronation takes place.
Changing the Prime Minister will have a major immediate impact on the lives of the people, changing the monarch will have little or no immediate impact on the lives of the people.
The millions of people affected by the changes of Prime Minister and monarch had no role in either appointment. There were few if any public demonstrations of enthusiasm for government by the new Prime Minister but the public has enthusiastically welcomed the reign of the new King.
We have a Prime Minister and government behind the bulwark around No 10 legislating to restrict public demonstrations, and a King and his family walking out of the palace gates, joining the public to acknowledge their support, even as they mourned their loss.
READ MORE: Man arrested after shouting abuse at Prince Andrew during Royal Mile procession for the Queen
Perhaps these initial reactions will lead to a recognition for the need to revise the relationship between the monarch, the government and the people in the UK. The current position where the Prime Minister controls the Cabinet, government, parliament and monarch is untenable in a democracy.
Westminster even put in place in Scotland a system where a proportionally representational parliament elects a First Minister to lead a government that has to build a consensus in parliament for its legislation.
The people of Scotland should now set an example for Westminster to follow by reclaiming our independence and turning Scotland into a country where the people are sovereign, with a written constitution that clearly defines the powers and responsibilities of its people, parliament, government, first minister and monarchy.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
IT did not take long for the mask to slip. King Charles III, within minutes of signing the Proclamation, waving his hand for an equerry to move an ink stand. He moved one and slightly moved the other – not good enough. Charles then summoned him through gritted teeth to move it further. (How he could not have moved it himself is the question.)
I felt sympathy for Camilla in the background, very obviously discomforted by his actions and not knowing what to do with herself – and that is something I never thought I would say.
I was reluctant to say anything about this before the funeral, but others are using Her Majesty’s death for their own purposes, especially the BBC – deliberately leaving out the words in Charles III’s speech relating to the Claim of Right. Only a few seconds but very important.
READ MORE: Police Scotland faces questions over anti-monarchist arrests
If we cannot say how we feel, we are not living in a democracy – the BBC had already told us that the “cost of living crisis” becomes insignificant because of the Queen’s death.
In the Sunday National Mike Small tells us the Queen came to power during rationing and now we have gone full circle since many people are already rationing their energy and their food in order to survive.
You have to ask, therefore, how has this country developed and where is it going?
Winifred McCartney
Paisley
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel