The Commonwealth Nations and the British Monarchy News

[Nightowl]

And for those countries that have Charles as their head with his picture on money or anywhere else, I say..let them go because if the only reason they are part of the Commonwealth is  to keep their name alive and money in their bank accounts, who needs that in their life.....after all countries come and go all the time, life moves on and time changes everyday.

[Curryong]

And for those countries that have Charles as their head with his picture on money or anywhere else, I say..let them go because if the only reason they are part of the Commonwealth is  to keep their name alive and money in their bank accounts, who needs that in their life.....after all countries come and go all the time, life moves on and time changes everyday.

I do not know any leaders of any of the remaining Commonwealth realms who have Charles as their HOS at the moment who are doing it ?to keep their names alive and and money in their bank accounts?. Australia, Canada, NZ, ??? Money (presumably in their PMs bank accounts) from where? And they are well known enough in their own countries, thanks, without Charles?s help!

And it has been explained on this forum many many times that the realms are part of a Commonwealth in which the vast majority of Commonwealth countries are republics. Now. At this point in time, 2023.

Only 14 of the 56 member States have Charles as their HOS. The rest, all 42 of them, have their own Presidents or other leaders. So jettisoning Charles as a country?s HOS does NOT mean leaving the Commonwealth. The 14 will sooner or later join the others until there are 56 members of the Commonwealth that are republics.

[TLLK]

And for those countries that have Charles as their head with his picture on money or anywhere else, I say..let them go because if the only reason they are part of the Commonwealth is  to keep their name alive and money in their bank accounts, who needs that in their life.....after all countries come and go all the time, life moves on and time changes everyday.

Jamaica has made it clear that they plan to become a republic in the coming years but that the process is taking time. The Prime Minister shared his thoughts on the BRF's and KCIII's reactions. He stated that they've been "very graceful."

Jamaica 'on the journey' to become a republic despite delay | The National

JAMAICA?s Prime Minister has said his country is ?on the journey? with plans to become a republic as King Charles made clear that "these matters are for the determination of sovereign nations".

The country's leader Andrew Holness citied ?bureaucratic political processes? as the reason for delaying plans to cut colonial ties with the UK and remove King Charles as head of state.

The PM said he hopes to soon follow Barbados who became a republic on November 30, 2021, exactly 55 years after it was declared independent from the UK.

In an interview during an unofficial visit to the UK this week, Holmess said he would have preferred to have cut ties with the UK as soon as the Queen passed, however a ?long period of public education and public consultation" had ?elongated? the process.

Holness said: ?We have set indicative timelines. We would have wanted to be able to do this within a year, but the process is not a linear one.?



Asked if the royal family have been stalling the process, the Jamaican PM said: ?In fact they have been very graceful. The royal family and King Charles was very clear at the Commonwealth that these matters are for the determination of sovereign nations.?

The British Government ?has expressed no view? on the matter, he revealed.

[wannable]

Both Charles and William have said in their own words if a realm wants to become a Republic - go ahead, congratulations.  They are not losing sleep over this. (chorus song is loud and clear)

The monarchy is focusing on commonwealth ''association''. 

Of course it is up to the realms to do their thing, some are just taking too long to become a republic.

[TLLK]

Both Charles and William have said in their own words if a realm wants to become a Republic - go ahead, congratulations.  They are not losing sleep over this. (chorus song is loud and clear)

The monarchy is focusing on commonwealth ''association''. 

Of course it is up to the realms to do their thing, some are just taking too long to become a republic.

Absolutely true @wannable and the BRF know that the Commonwealth is far more important than the monarch remaining as Head of State.
Jamaica seems to be having issues regarding the wording of the Constitution which is contributing to the delay. The public posturing seen by the PM regarding the nation's intended plan to become a republic took place during the then Cambridges' last visit. However IMO it seemed to be directed at his opposition parties and the press rather than Buckingham Palace and London.

[TLLK]

I do not know any leaders of any of the remaining Commonwealth realms who have Charles as their HOS at the moment who are doing it ?to keep their names alive and and money in their bank accounts?. Australia, Canada, NZ, ??? Money (presumably in their PMs bank accounts) from where? And they are well known enough in their own countries, thanks, without Charles?s help!

And it has been explained on this forum many many times that the realms are part of a Commonwealth in which the vast majority of Commonwealth countries are republics. Now. At this point in time, 2023.

Only 14 of the 56 member States have Charles as their HOS. The rest, all 42 of them, have their own Presidents or other leaders. So jettisoning Charles as a country?s HOS does NOT mean leaving the Commonwealth. The 14 will sooner or later join the others until there are 56 members of the Commonwealth that are republics.

Good points @Curryong. Also it should be pointed out that the new nations that are choosing to join the Commonwealth, don't always have historic ties to the UK, but believe that association in the organization will be beneficial for their own country. Gabon and Togo recently joined in 2022 and these are former French, not British, colonies.
Gabon and Togo join the Commonwealth | Commonwealth

[Curryong]

Both Charles and William have said in their own words if a realm wants to become a Republic - go ahead, congratulations.  They are not losing sleep over this. (chorus song is loud and clear)

The monarchy is focusing on commonwealth ''association''. 

Of course it is up to the realms to do their thing, some are just taking too long to become a republic.

What do you expect Charles and William to say, that all their mother?s and grandmother?s work was in vain? The Commonwealth AND the realms were a source of immense pride to her and she never begrudged the visits to different countries, the networking with and between Commonwealth leaders that took a great deal of work sometimes.

Charles is a different kettle of fish, people in the Commonwealth in general don?t feel the same way as they did about his mother, and he knows it. As for William it is most unlikely that he will have any official role in Commonwealth affairs when he becomes King.

Both father and son can smell the prevailing winds and they aren?t in favour of monarchy, especially after that pretty disastrous visit to the Caribbean where Kate and William seemed to be imitating the late Queen and Prince Philip with white uniform and standing up in a land rover to meet and greet the massed proletariat. That went down like a lead balloon. 

As for some realms taking too long to become republics, for some of us it?s not a question of a one person one vote referendum and it?s done. The Aus constitution took many years to formulate, in the latter years of Queen Victoria?s reign. Our constitution was about the last piece of Imperial legislation she signed before she died.

And it is incredibly difficult to change. Not only do all States and Territories populations have to have an over 51% Yes vote but there has to be a majority of States saying Yes, and then a totality of everyone, States, Territories, citizens. So one State saying a definite No can cause an imbalance. Our constitution has had only eight changes to it since Federation in 1901. So that alone presents difficulties.

If we didn?t have a written Constitution Aus would probably have been a republic since the 1970s when an elected PM was sacked by the Governor General of the time. That caused enormous resentment.

As for Canada, where opinion polls since the Queen?s death have shown a distinct upswing in republic sentiment, more hoops to have to jump.

Here's how to abolish the monarchy in Canada (and say goodbye to King Charles)

[wannable]

Both have upheld every single time any of the 15 realms they have visited in person or via communication a go ahead, congratulations. Objective fact.  I disagree with the Caribbean visit - I think it went very well, a handful of loudmouths was more exiting and clickbating news for a frontpage.

The latest yougov Australia poll seems to be very much a delay - same same for the past 30 years, bits and pieces not swinging mid or high.

One year into King Charles? reign, where do Australian attitudes to the monarchy stand? | YouGov

^ With a sentiment described here - it's difficult to govern a country like the example I gave with the USA divided up and down from government to civilians.

King Charles III is more popular than any Australian politician. 1 in 3 want a republic. The other 2 monarchists still beat 1 republican.

[PrincessOfPeace]

Well all the realms have the ability to stay or leave. It's very difficult for some countries but it can be done. What gets me riled up is a country like Jamaica that's been independent for 60 years and yet goes on as if it's a province or state of the UK.

[TLLK]

Well all the realms have the ability to stay or leave. It's very difficult for some countries but it can be done. What gets me riled up is a country like Jamaica that's been independent for 60 years and yet goes on as if it's a province or state of the UK.

Yes!!! This is something that really annoys me about  the politicians, journalists and even some royal fans especially in reference to  the Caribbean nations.  Those nations who became independent countries in the 1960's could have chosen to become republics but decided to remain constitutional monarchies.

[TLLK]

Both have upheld every single time any of the 15 realms they have visited in person or via communication a go ahead, congratulations. Objective fact.  I disagree with the Caribbean visit - I think it went very well, a handful of loudmouths was more exiting and clickbating news for a frontpage.

The latest yougov Australia poll seems to be very much a delay - same same for the past 30 years, bits and pieces not swinging mid or high.

One year into King Charles? reign, where do Australian attitudes to the monarchy stand? | YouGov

^ With a sentiment described here - it's difficult to govern a country like the example I gave with the USA divided up and down from government to civilians.

King Charles III is more popular than any Australian politician. 1 in 3 want a republic. The other 2 monarchists still beat 1 republican.

Wow! I have to admit that I was surprised that KCIII is more popular than the politicians and his heir has even higher approval ratings.

And while Australia?s constitutional status may be in question, on a personal level, King Charles is more popular than any Australian politician. Half (50%) have a positive opinion of the King, compared to 40% with a negative view, giving a net score of +10.

The next in line to the throne ? Prince William ? is substantially more popular still: fully 69% of Australians have a favourable view of the Prince of Wales, with only 20% having a negative view.

Even those who want Australia to become a republic as soon as possible have a positive opinion of Prince William, by 52% to 38%. (By contrast, King Charles is unpopular among this group, with 60% having a negative view and only 31% a positive one).

The politician that the largest number of Australians have a positive opinion of is prime minister Anthony Albanese, with 47% having a favourable view and 44% an unfavourable one (giving a net score of +3).

Foreign minister and senate leader Penny Wong and senator Jacqui Lambi have slightly higher net scores than Albanese (both are on +8), but this is somewhat a factor of them being slightly less well known (22-24% are unfamiliar with them, compared to Albanese?s 10%).

Catherine, Princess of Wales, Princess Anne, and Prince Edward also prove to be more popular than Australian politicians. Unsurprisingly Prince Andrew does not, and Camilla, Queen Consort, and Prince Harry and wife Meghan also prove to be unpopular overall.

[Curryong]

As I have said before in posts the subject of a republic is on the back burner at the moment with The Voice referendum to the fore in this first term of Labor Govt. Labor is likely to be returned next time as the Liberals are in disarray at the moment. So the issue is not at the fore of people?s minds at this time. In the run up to such a burning question as this one people (especially the under 45s will be making their minds up very much more definitely than they express now when it?s not at the forefront.

Point 2. Practically no referenda has ever been passed without the bipartisan support of the two main political parties and just as a point of interest there are many more Republican-minded politicians on both sides in our Federal Parliament than there are monarchists. That has been so for twenty years or more.

As for Charles being more ?popular? than our PM, so what. The late Queen had glowing figure of respect and esteem. It hasn?t stopped republicanism here. Political leaders make hard decisions that change Australians?
lives. People who live halfway across the world do not. And as a matter of fact, until the last few months when cost of living issues bit, PM Albanese had terrific poll results for a mid term PM.

And I do question whether YouGov has been able to contact younger Australians who have cell phones as distinct from older Aussies who don?t.

You may believe as a result of this one poll that two out of three Aussies still love the monarchy and only one out of three want a republic. Well, go on believing that if you wish. I actually live here and I know that is not the case. When the referendum for a republic actually comes up and is widely discussed, a very different picture may well emerge that will surprise you.

[Curryong]

Labor and Albanese recover in Newspoll as Dutton falls, but the Voice's slump continues,term%20in%20the%20previous%20Newspoll.

[Curryong]

As for Jamaica, some interesting reading for those here who believe the push for a republic in the past couple of years is only the view of some loudmouths politicians..

11 Point Decline In Support For Jamaica Becoming A Republic - RJRGLEANER Don Anderson Poll | RJR News - Jamaican News Online

Despite that headline


The latest RJRGLEANER Don Anderson shows the 45 per cent of respondents wanting the country to adopt a republic type government, similar to Trinidad & Tobago, Guyana or Barbados, with some even favouring the American style of government.

Another 26 per cent of citizens who believe Jamaica should retain the British Monarch as Head of State.

That figure represents only a 19 per cent difference between those who support the move towards becoming a republic and those against it.

Twenty-nine per cent of respondents said they were unsure about which option the country should adopt.

Still, he said the 19 per cent gap between those who want to sever ties with the monarchy and those who believe Jamaica should remain under British rule, shows that support for Jamaica's shift to a republic continues to remain "pretty strong".

The poll canvassed a representative sample of 1,010 people over the age of 18 who are eligible to vote.

Field work was done between August 30 and September 14 2023 with a margin of error of plus or minus three per cent.

I?d say a 19% difference in support is indeed pretty strong and it looks as if Jamaican politicians have read the room, unlike those who organised the disastrous Caribbean royal tour last year. If it was such an overwhelming success why did the British media report that William was incandescent when they arrived home and tore strips off his inexperienced staff for putting he and his wife in such a position?

'Incompetent' Foreign Office is blamed for William and Kate's 'embarrassing' Caribbean tour | Daily Mail Online

?Perfect storm?: royals misjudged Caribbean tour, say critics | Monarchy | The Guardian

[Curryong]

And by the way that YouGov poll does NOT say that one in three Aussies want a republic and two out of three therefore are monarchists at all.

What is actually says, and I?m quoting from the YouGov data here, ?A similar number?. If two out of three wanted the monarchy to stay then their figures would be far in excess of 35%, more like 65%.

?Should Australia remain a constitutional monarchy or become a republic?

One in three Australians want the country to become a republic as soon as possible (32%). A similar number want to remain a constitutional monarchy for the long term (35%). In between are 12% of Australians who want to kick the republican can down the road, saying that the country should only become a republic once the King has died.?

[wannable]

Based on that data, it is very high risk for the Republicans to win. There needs to be, as I said in my previous comment at least a ''mid'' swing (a high swing would really be a relaxing win of really not so hard work to change all what needs to be changed from Monarchy to Republic) in favor of the Republicans in ''all accounts'' for independence. 

The fact that the Australians have voted King Charles winning over any/all politicians from all parties is not a surprise - too many blunders, most of it vengeance, revenge in many areas that are not even monarchy related, which never ends well to the point of losing office.  We've seen it happen. I think as with William (since he also is surveyed in the USA as winner), more compassion, empathy but level headed decision making is in order from countries at least who are in the G-20 United Nations. Do better situation asap. I think we have all witnessed very rash decision making from leaders of the G-20 countries in the past 2-5 years.

[Curryong]

Based on that data, it is very high risk for the Republicans to win. There needs to be, as I said in my previous comment at least a ''mid'' swing (a high swing would really be a relaxing win of really not so hard work to change all what needs to be changed from Monarchy to Republic) in favor of the Republicans in ''all accounts'' for independence. 

The fact that the Australians have voted King Charles winning over any/all politicians from all parties is not a surprise - too many blunders, most of it vengeance, revenge in many areas that are not even monarchy related, which never ends well to the point of losing office.  We've seen it happen. I think as with William (since he also is surveyed in the USA as winner), more compassion, empathy but level headed decision making is in order from countries at least who are in the G-20 United Nations. Do better situation asap. I think we have all witnessed very rash decision making from leaders of the G-20 countries in the past 2-5 years.

If Charles and William actually stood for office as politicians and had to put actual contentious issues into the public arena, the picture would be very very different in the US, UK and Commonwealth.

The fact is that non elected officials such as those two are regarded as somewhat neutral and innocuous because they don?t represent anything that directly affects people?s lives.  And in Aus the figures between approval of Charles the King and Albanese, our PM, are about 2%, well within the margin or error. Albanese?s never been regarded with hatred or great dislike even by Liberal voters.

And I stand by my previous comments that this issue is not at the forefront of Australians? minds at the moment. The Voice referenda is. The republic will only be seriously debated in the next term of a Labor Govt and then and only then will a much clearer picture emerge.

[wannable]

I think it might happen with next generation Z, who are the strongest numbers with a few scattered from the previous generation of Millenials - as long as there is a massive vote nationwide by them.  So far the double majority isn't happening in any of the 6 states, they are all bellow 50%. The government and the people know this, a referendum to be succesful - would need what I stated or at least 4/6 states - but so far none have reached 50%.

[Curryong]

Are we talking about The Voice, which unfortunately is failing badly in polling, or the future referendum for a republic? Because if it?s the latter there has not been any detailed State wide or provincial cities data produced on what Aussies in say Brisbane in Queensland  or Broome in WA think about a republic as compared to those in say Launceston Tasmania  or Newcastle NSW, since the run up to sole the republic referendum in the 1990s.

As I?ve said it is not at the forefront of Australians? minds at the moment and so it is far too early to jump to conclusions about what Aussies of any age think about a republic with a referendum on it about two years away. And there is not a clear division between what say Aussies of 30+ to 50 yrs think about the monarchy in comparison to 18 year olds or 65+ think of them. A lot in all age groups are indifferent about the issue.

That kind of age divide, as is stated in that YouGov polling, is much clearer in the UK. Many more Aussies of all ages are indifferent to the monarchy for instance than is the case in the UK. That is often forgotten. It?s not part of our national life since no royal lives here. We are half a world away from the UK.

More Australians over 60 years of age are pro monarchy than those 18 to 30 is about all can be concluded from these latest results  and that?s no surprise. It?s always been the case.

That Aussies are by and large just indifferent to the monarchy has also been the case for a good fifty years or more. The exception to this were the huge and enthusiastic crowds that turned out everywhere for Diana when she visited as Prss of Wales.

[wannable]

The Guardian News & Media

Offices: UK, Australia, USA

The numbers provided by The Guardian states the highest ''yes'' votes are Gen Z followed by scattered around the 6 states Millenials. Everyone else not so.  None of the 6 states have reached 50% the closest is Victoria with 46%, but even then with the combo of the 6 states article 128 says it needs ''double majority''.

[Curryong]

From that YouGov poll.
?The most common feelings towards the monarchy in Australia are indifference, but more think it is good for the country than bad
Generally speaking, do you think the institution of the monarchy is good or bad for Australia?
Good for Australia
34
Bad for Australia
21
Neither good nor bad for Australia
38
Do you think the monarchy should have more or less of a role in Australia?
More
13
Less
35
No change/ currently adequate
43
Would you say you are proud or embarrassed of the monarchy?
Proud
28
Embarrassed
23
Neither proud nor embarrassed
42
YouGov 2022?

[wannable]

Those numbers will change for the republicans once Gen Z is old enough to vote. ^ The above literally mirrors the results of Sept 2023 Yougov AU and The Guardian AU.

[Curryong]

I said ?detailed polling? between Aussies in different States in my last post. There were dozens of such studies undertaken in the 1990s. There has been nothing like that recently.

And I?ve posted links here on this forum several times in the last couple of years on how referenda to change the Constitution work in Australia. I?ll do so again. And Im well aware how the system works. I studied political science at Monash as a mature age student.

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp2223/Quick_Guides/ConstitutionalReferendumsAustralia

And there are plenty of Gen Z Aussies of voting age now, born in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

[wannable]

My comments were just detailed hard facts. Nothing wrong in basically being a messenger of what is in a ''link''.

The Guardian AU poll detailing Gen Z was Sept. 2022, they are sandwiched between Millenials and the new Gen Alpha - who might tip the scales if the government does more blunders.

I'm not a fan of The Guardian, much less when gaslighting is involved, they are basically saying the Gen Z are blunderers too - sandwiched.  Every generation has to live whatever happens during their time, is what I can say about it all and worldwide. Although traditional countries like China and Russia might end up ruling the planet.

[Curryong]

Monarchy isn't ideal, but Canadians don't care enough to abolish: poll | National Post


?But asked how they would vote today (the poll of more than 2,000 Canadians was taken in February and March), and the republican impulse weakens. Twenty-three per cent would vote to keep the king, and 47 per cent would vote to abolish.

Curiously, if asked to predict the result of a referendum held tomorrow, Canadian republicanism seems even weaker still. People think 36 per cent would vote to keep things as they are, and 40 per cent would vote for abolition.

These results are in line with the common anti-monarchist view that Canadians would reject the monarchy if they ever paid it more than passing attention. But they don?t, so they don?t.

It?s not quite procrastination. It?s partly that there are bigger fish to fry in Canadian public life. But it?s also partly that Canadians don?t care enough. There is also an expectation that the monarchy will naturally fade into irrelevance as an interest only of older generations.?

And, curiously, that?s the view of many people in another two of the realms, Aus and NZ. Indifference and a feeling that the monarchy is irrelevant to the lives of ordinary people and will, as the years progress, become even more so. Especially from halfway across the world. Yawn, yawn. And that tide can?t be reversed.