Monday, 21 May 2012
Royal Tour of Canada 2012 -- What to Expect
Sunday, 20 May 2012
"Like a Diamond" Jubilee Anthem to challenge Gary Barlow's Jubilee Anthem
Fortunately, another songwriter and producer, Anton and John Lorien, have rescued the day by producing a stirring Jubilee Anthem dedicated entirely to Her Majesty. The lyrics relate directly to Her Majesty's lifelong service to Britain and the Commonwealth.
This terrific, and stirring Jubilee song, deserves as much exposure as possible in these coming days, as we approach the Jubilee. So please, listen to the song below and, if you like it, please share the link with friends and family -- particularly anyone in the media or the music industry. We would love to have this song in the charts before the Jubilee. It's the most appropriate popular music tribute to The Queen one could possibly hope for.
Friday, 18 May 2012
Charles, Camilla's royal visit sticks to tradition
I'm quoted in this article by Melanie Patten published today by the Canadian Press.
Read it on Global News: Global News | Charles, Camilla's royal visit sticks to tradition
Canada, refine your curtsy and practice your bow. Another royal visit is upon us.
But unlike Prince William and Kate's whirlwind, hands-on tour as newlyweds last year, there is no need to brush up on dragon boating or street hockey...
Headlines remarked on the couple's informal attitude, their outward affection for each other, their willingness to mingle freely with crowds, and their desire to participate in non-traditional events, including facing off in a dragon boat race and playing street hockey.
As newlyweds, their visit was a coming out of sorts before the entire world. Charles and Camilla's tour, however, is meant to focus on the Queen's service to the Commonwealth over six decades, said Rafal Heydel-Mankoo, a royal commentator based in the U.K.
"This tour in Canada is not going to be the celebrity glam tour that we saw with Prince William and Catherine," he said from London.
"Instead, we're going to see a focusing on all those initiatives and projects which aren't fashionable but which the monarchy supports."
Heydel-Mankoo said the decision to send the future king to Canada as part of the Diamond Jubilee festivities speaks volumes of the Royal Family's affection for the country.
"Canada has a very, very strong connection with the Royal Family," he said. "They would never say so in public, but I think secretly it's their favourite realm after the U.K."
Charles and Camilla are set to arrive in New Brunswick on Sunday evening. Their official welcome, replete with a 21-gun salute, is scheduled for the following morning at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown.
The royal couple will meet with members of the military and attend a reception with Gov. Gen. David Johnston before heading to Saint John for a walking tour. They will also take in a citizenship ceremony and Victoria Day celebrations before departing New Brunswick for Toronto on Monday evening.
On Tuesday, Charles will meet with students at Ryerson University before he and Camillia attend a Diamond Jubilee celebration hosted by Premier Dalton McGuinty. Charles will also meet with leaders of the Assembly of First Nations.
The couple's final day in Regina will include a meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Heydel-Mankoo said he expects Charles will make many more trips to Canada in the future to give newer generations a chance to know him better.
The prince is already highly regarded in the U.K., he said.
He said Charles successfully emerged from bad press in the 1980s and 1990s and the collapse of his marriage to Diana, Princess of Wales, to become "a renaissance man." Deeply spiritual and reflective, Charles is dedicated to issues of sustainable living, education and helping disadvantaged youths, he said.
As for his relationship with Camilla, royal historian Carolyn Harris said it is one of mutual respect.
Camilla was once vilified as an old flame who poisoned Charles's first marriage to Diana, but the 64-year-old duchess is now considered an integral member of the Royal Family.
Harris said observers will note the public relationship between Charles and Camilla shares similarities with that of William and Kate.
"Diana attracted an enormous amount of attention and, to a certain degree at the time, she upstaged her husband and that created tensions within their marriage," Harris said from Toronto.
"Whereas we see with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall the degree to which they compliment each other as a couple."
Heydel-Mankoo agrees.
"They have a wonderful working relationship. He's very much the ying to her yang," he said.
"There's just a nice, warm happy glow when they're together."
If William and Kate were responsible for reigniting Canada's interest in the monarchy, MacKenzie said Charles and Camilla — and the pomp and ceremony people have come to expect from royal visits —will keep that flame alight.
"There's a little something for everyone of all ages and persuasions in monarchy," he said. "That's what makes it so continually appealing."
© The Canadian Press, 2012
Read it on Global News: Global News | Charles, Camilla's royal visit sticks to tradition
Wednesday, 16 May 2012
Prince of Wales Announces New Canadian Patronages
Press Release: "TORONTO – Prince’s Charities Canada (PCC) is pleased to announce that two new Canadian organizations have been granted a Royal patronage from HRH The Prince of Wales. Both The Royal Conservatory of Music and Earth Rangers were notified of the honour just ahead of The Prince’s official visit to Canada next week.
“The Prince of Wales has been involved in Canadian public life for 40 years,” said Amanda Sherrington, President and CEO of Prince’s Charities Canada. “These patronages represent a further deepening of that relationship and honour the good work of these organizations in The Prince’s areas of interest”.
The Prince of Wales currently serves as patron to six Canadian organizations including those announced today as well as acting as Colonel-in-Chief to seven Canadian regiments.
“The Royal Conservatory is extremely proud and grateful to join a select group of organizations reflecting the values and goals of His Royal Highness,” said, Dr. Peter Simon, President of The Royal Conservatory. “We are honoured to announce the patronage relationship as we celebrate 125 years of excellence as one of the world’s largest and most influential music and arts education institutions.”
The Royal Conservatory is also working with Prince’s Charities Canada to take it’s successful “Learning through the Arts” program to the United Kingdom where this Canadian success story will be administered by The Prince’s Foundation for Children and the Arts. Learning through the Arts (LTTA) is a rigorous, structured curriculum program that uses music, drama and visual art to teach core subjects such as math and science. His Royal Highness will be meeting representatives of The Royal Conservatory of Music as well as students and teachers who use the LTTA program during an event at First Nations University in Regina.
The Royal Conservatory of Music is one of the largest and most respected music education institutions in the world. Providing the definitive standard of excellence through its curriculum, assessment, performance and teacher education programs.
Prince’s Charities Canada is currently working with Earth Rangers to explore similar opportunities within The Prince’s global network. “The Prince of Wales shares our passion for wildlife and the environment and we are thrilled by today’s announcement”, said Peter Kendall, Executive Director and Co-CEO Earth Rangers
Earth Rangers is a non-profit organization dedicated to educating and inspiring children on the importance of protecting biodiversity and adopting more sustainable behaviours.
-30-
For more information:
Daniela Minicucci, NATIONAL Public Relations"
Spanish Government force Queen Sofia to cancel her attendance at the reigning world monarchs' Diamond Jubilee Lunch
Poor Queen Sofia. HM is a frequent visitor to London -- she is often seen shopping in St. James's and elsewhere. London is familiar territory to her. More important, she is a descendant of Queen Victoria and thus a cousin of our Queen -- Queen Sofia is also a first cousin once removed of the Duke of Edinburgh. The Spanish Government has stated that Queen Sofia cannot even attend in a private capacity. This must be a most disappointing turn of events -- particularly after the bad publicity surrounding His Majesty's big game hunting (and subsequent injury). Queen Sofia will no doubt be most upset to miss such an important opportunity to meet with her peers and relatives and celebrate such a momentous occasions -- the world's reigning monarchs and consorts meet very rarely.
Some reports bear headlines that suggest Queen Sofia has snubbed Queen Elizabeth. This is wholly incorrect. The fault lies with the Spanish Government's attempt to insert politics into a day of non-partisan celebrations. A great shame, and much to be lamented.
Tuesday, 15 May 2012
Britons Support The Sovereign's Role as "Defender of the Faith", poll suggests
These findings will come as a blow to republicans, many of whom have argued for years that the Sovereign's Christian faith is divisive and incompatible with a multi-faith society. Whatever one's personal views on religion, the Comres poll demonstrates that many non-Christians approve of the values and principles according to which The Queen has led her life and believe that the essence of these values are not restricted to adherents of any single faith. Indeed, several non-Christian religious leaders have stated their preference for a Head of State who is a person of faith, rather than a person without faith.
Although the title of Fidei Defensor ("Defender of the Faith") was originally bestowed on the then Catholic King Henry VIII by Pope Leo X in 1521 in recognition of his book Assertio Septem Sacramentorum ("Defence of the Seven Sacraments"), the title was revoked by Pope Paul III following King Henry's break with Rome. The Sovereign's current title of "Defender of the Faith" was conferred by Parliament for precisely the opposite purpose of the original papal grant (i.e., to defend the Protestant faith against Catholicism). Today, however, the use of "Defender of the Faith" in the Sovereign's formal Royal Titles and Styles may be taken as a reference to the Sovereign's status as Supreme Governor of the Church of England (as this role is not included in HM's formal styles and titles).
The Queen demonstrated the evolution of this role earlier this year, during a multi-faith gathering at Lambeth Palace, which was attended by leaders of Britain's nine largest religious faiths (including Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, Buddhists, Baha'i, Zoroastrians and Jains), in which Her Majesty said that the role of the Church was not "to defend Anglicanism to the exclusion of all other religions, instead the Church has a duty to protect the free practice of all faiths in this country."
Thursday, 3 May 2012
Government of Canada Unveils Details of the 2012 Royal Tour
Official Release: Their Royal Highnesses The Prince of Wales and The Duchess of Cornwall will tour Canada from May 20 to 23, 3012, visiting four communities in three provinces. This will be the 16th time His Royal Highness has toured Canada. His most recent tour was in 2009. This will be the second tour to Canada for Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cornwall.
The program will highlight Canadians’ service to their communities, in recognition of which The Prince of Wales will present The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Medals.
The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall will visit:
- Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Gagetown, Oromocto, New Brunswick (May 21)
- Saint John, New Brunswick (May 21)
- Toronto, Ontario (May 21 and 22)
- Regina, Saskatchewan (May 22 and 23)
Opportunities for Canadians to see Their Royal Highnesses will be at the following events:
- Official welcome to Canada at CFB Gagetown in Oromocto on May 21
- Victoria Day Celebration in Saint John, New Brunswick on May 21
- Arrival at Queen’s Park in Toronto, on May 22
- Arrival at the Saskatchewan Legislature on May 23
- Arrival at the First Nations University in Regina on May 23
In addition to these public opportunities, there are several highlights of this tour:
- Victoria Day fireworks in Toronto on May 21
- A meeting with chief executives and youth who have participated in The Prince’s Charities Seeing is Believing program in Canada on May 22
- A meeting with young veterans and mentors involved in the Military Entrepreneurship summer school at CFB Gagetown on May 21
- A meeting with the National Leadership of Assembly of First Nations in Toronto on May 22
- A first visit for Her Royal Highness to the Queen’s Own Rifles—she has just become Colonel-in-Chief of the regiment—in Toronto on May 22
- A special military event that will commemorate the War of 1812 in Toronto on May 22
- A celebration of the centennial of Regina’s Legislative Building on May 23
- A performance by the Regina Symphony Orchestra of which His Royal Highness is a Royal Patron in Regina on May 23.
The theme of the 2012 Royal Tour is “For Queen and Country: Service to Canada—A Royal and a National Value.” Source: Government of Canada: http://www.pch.gc.ca/eng/1335470669033/1335471159074
The Royal Line of Succession genealogical and heraldic chart
Sunday, 29 April 2012
One Year On: Public Love Affair with William and Catherine Remains Strong
I am quoted in today's Canadian Press article marking the first anniversary of the wedding of TRH The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
By Michelle McQuigge, Canadian Press
TORONTO - It's been a year since they declared their love for each other in the most anticipated wedding of the decade, but 12 months haven't been enough to quell the public passion for the newest royal couple.
Prince William and Kate spent their first year as newlyweds under the sort of global spotlight usually reserved for Hollywood a-listers. Their every appearance has been mobbed with adoring crowds and their slightest remarks analyzed for possible suggestions that they're preparing to bring a future monarch into the world.
Through it all, royal-watchers say the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have managed to carve out a private life while still living up to lofty public expectations.
"They've played a perfect year," commentator Rafal Heydel-Mankoo said in a telephone interview. "They've covered all the bases. They've had an international trip, they've had local visits, work with charitable causes. They've engaged in their work roles admirably. I think you could really give them a 10 out of 10 when it comes to their performance over the first year."
William and Kate were public darlings for months before their glamorous wedding ceremony at London's Westminster Abbey.
On that day, thousands mobbed the streets of London while millions more around the world tuned in from home to watch the future heir to the throne wed his college sweetheart.
The couple retreated from the spotlight after their nuptials, only to re-emerge with greater star power than ever on their first visit abroad. The newlyweds' nine-day, whirlwind tour of Canada, observers say, showed the couple of at their best.
Their more informal attitudes set the tone for the trip as they freely mingled with rapturous crowds, participated in Canadian sports such as street hockey and faced off against one another in a dragonboat race. Kate's now legendary fashion sense was also on full display as she modeled outfits from homegrown designers and even donned the national colours in honour of Canada Day.
"Canada was really the country that made them as a royal couple," Heydel-Mankoo said.
Susan Catto, deputy editor of celebrity magazine Hello Canada, agreed. Canadians were thoroughly charmed by the new generation of royals, she said, adding reader interest in the couple has been unprecedented.
Enthusiasm for Kate _ who enjoyed a middle-class upbringing before marrying into the monarchy _ has resonated most with a country in the process of rediscovering its royal heritage, she said.
"There's a lot of admiration for her grace under pressure and the decorum that she's shown in the role," Catto said. "I think Canadians do appreciate the traditions of the royal family, and I think there's an appreciation for the fact that she has not put a foot wrong."
Certainly she has brought a lot of lustre to the family."
Much of Kate's comportment is the result of lessons learned in the aftermath of previous broken royal marriages, observers said.
Royal historian Carolyn Harris said William's mother Diana and former aunt Sarah Ferguson both complained about feeling isolated and overwhelmed in their first years of marriage to royalty. Kate has received extensive coaching on maintaining a balance between public and private responsibilities, she said.
Between official engagements at home and abroad, the couple live in comparative seclusion in Wales, she said. William has continued his military career as a search and rescue pilot and recently completed a six-week deployment to the Falklands earlier this year.
The fact that William and Kate have managed to carve out a private life, Harris said, has helped to preserve their mystique by making sure they're not over-exposed in the public eye.
That fascination has fuelled the constant speculation about when the couple can expect their first child, a subject on which both have remained tight-lipped.
"It speaks to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's personal popularity that there's so much interest in the royal family continuing through that direct line," Harris said. "That shows how well-regarded they are."
William and Kate have announced they will recognize their first wedding anniversary in a private celebration.
Saturday, 28 April 2012
Launch of my new website: www.heydel-mankoo.com
I am pleased to announce the launch of my website: www.heydel-mankoo.com This site focusses on my work as a royal commentator, writer & lecturer, and honours, protocol & etiquette consultant. Kind regards, RHM
Tuesday, 17 April 2012
Royal Commentary Video Show Reel of Rafe Heydel-Mankoo
I have finally decided to create a video show reel featuring a selection of clips from some of the broadcasts I have made over the past 15 years. I post it below should it be of any interest to anyone.
Sunday, 8 April 2012
Ceremonial Procession to the Lying-in-State of HM Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother
This month marks the 10th anniversary of the death of HM Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. The 5th April 2002 was the date of the Ceremonial Procession to the Lying-in-State at Westminster Hall. In commemoration of that event I post below the full-length broadcast coverage from 2002, which includes my live running commentary.
Wednesday, 21 March 2012
BBC commentary on The Queen's Diamond Jubilee Address to Parliament
Radio 5 Live:
Radio 4's Today Programme:
Tuesday, 6 March 2012
Bicameralism & Representative Democracy: An International Perspective - PART TWO
BICAMERALISM & REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY: AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE - PART TWO
by Rafe Heydel-Mankoo
Typically, given their more reflective and sober nature and their representation of established long-term societal interests, one of the critical roles of an upper house has been to guard the constitution against a potentially impulsive and populist lower house. Through their written constitutions, upper houses and supreme courts, the majority of the world’s bicameral states have entrenched safeguards to protect the constitution and
fundamental human rights. The French Senate is amongst those upper houses that are empowered to veto constitutional legislation (but not ordinary legislation). A number of advanced democracies require a 2/3 or 3/5 majority vote in both chambers in order to enact a constitutional amendment. Some states also require a national referendum before effecting constitutional change – and federal countries can additionally require the approval of a certain number of state legislatures within the federation.
The United Kingdom is the only advanced democracy in which constitutional reform legislation and ordinary legislation are enacted in precisely the same manner. The safeguards that exist in other countries are not present here. From the start of the 21st century, the United Kingdom has undergone profound constitutional change, transforming it into a quasi-federal state with a constitution considerably more codified than previously. The threat of terrorism and extremism has also occasionally led to attempts to restrict certain long-established civil rights and liberties. Parliamentary sovereignty, the executive dominance of the lower house, political distrust of judicial review and the absence of a written constitution can potentially enable a strong-minded majority government to wreak constitutional havoc. The House of Lords is not a powerless constitutional guardian – and yet, ultimately, when faced with dangerously ill-considered legislation that it opposes, it can do little more than voice its disapproval and urge the Commons to reconsider.
Britain can no longer remain the global democratic anomaly. Given the complexity of Britain’s fast evolving and increasingly codified constitutional make-up, the reform of the House of Lords provides the ideal opportunity to strengthen its role as the guardian of the constitution and civil liberties.
Consequently, in addition to its existing veto over attempts to extend the life of Parliament, any reformed House of Lords should have a veto over constitutional reform legislation as well as legislation affecting fundamental human rights (habeas corpus, etc.) – convention should establish the veto as a reserve power to be used only in the most exceptional of circumstances.
Whilst considering its position, the House of Lords should have the ability to refer issues relating to the constitution and/or human rights to the law lords at the new Supreme Court. Many upper houses, including those in Germany, Poland and Spain, possess this power. Should the House of Lords choose to exercise its veto, and should the House of Commons refuse to back down, political deadlock would ensue and a mechanism would need to be established to reach a solution or compromise. Bicameral states around the world utilise a number of different mechanisms to resolve deadlock between the houses. These include double dissolution, lower house 2/3 majority override of the upper house, suspensory veto, joint sittings and joint committees. To preserve the principle of the supremacy of the House of Commons, a 2/3 majority Commons vote would be a suitable means of breaking the deadlock. Another possibility for resolution might be the creation of a joint committee. Outside of the heated atmosphere of the parliamentary chambers it is likely that more meaningful and productive negotiations can be entered into between both Houses until, hopefully, a satisfactory compromise can be reached.
Reform of the House of Lords affords the perfect opportunity to position the upper house as a powerful guardian of the constitution and democracy, human rights and the rule of law. This role is of such profound importance that it should merit as much attention as the process by which members are selected to sit in the chamber. As the global evidence suggests, bicameralism adds immense value to the legislative process and to
national governance. Two chambers representing different polities create legislation and public policy that is more democratic and more reflective of public concerns. The various appointments systems have helped to create upper houses that, to varying degrees, can represent society, or provide a voice for specific elements within society, in ways that would be virtually impossible in wholly elected chambers. Elections do not favour minorities.
This is no less true in the United Kingdom – and it is very likely that a wholly or mainly elected House of Lords would be considerably more impenetrable to minority groups than it is currently. Elections would certainly deprive Parliament of many of its most learned and respected members. The majority of the eminent scholars, doctors, scientists, social workers, educators, economists, businessmen, musicians and writers who have been elevated to the Lords – transforming the institution into a pantheon of British excellence – would be unlikely to stand for election. This priceless pool of talent and experience, drawn from so many sectors of society and so critically important to the work of the upper house, would be lost. To maintain a diverse and representative chamber in a reformed House of Lords it is clear that a significant appointed element must be retained.
Global analysis also reveals the remarkable vulnerability of our constitution and fundamental rights compared with all other advanced democracies. No attempt at reforming the House of Lords should fail to consider the opportunity of strengthening its role as a guardian of the constitution and the rule of law.
The House of Lords clearly performs a democratic function and fills a democratic void that an elected House of Commons cannot. There can be little doubt that, if successful, the proposal to institute elections to “democratise” the House of Lords and make it more “representative” would transform it into a much more homogenous and far less representative institution than it is today. The quality of governance would decline and parliamentary democracy would be weakened. In the history of constitutional reform, there are few proposals whose results would be more ironic.
This essay is taken from ResPublica's landmark report "Our House: Reflections on Representation and Reform in the House of Lords", (available for download at this LINK) which was launched in the House of Lords on 29 February 2012. This important publication, produced in response to the Government's Draft Bill on the Reform of the House of Lords, opposes the Government's desire for a "wholly or mainly elected" upper house and, instead, argues for a radical alternative. Other contributors include the Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform, Mark Harper MP, Lord Low of Dalston, Lord Wei of Shoreditch, Sir Stephen Bubb, The Bishop of Leicester (Convenor of the Lords Spiritual), the political philosopher Prof. Roger Scruton, Lord Adebowale and Phillip Blond, Director of ResPublica.
Friday, 2 March 2012
Bicameralism & Representative Democracy: An International Perspective - PART ONE
BICAMERALISM & REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY: AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE - PART ONE
by Rafe Heydel-Mankoo
The House of Lords has long suffered at the satirist’s hand and is routinely portrayed as an out-of-touch, undemocratic and anachronistic private club. These hackneyed stereotypes, now indelibly embedded in popular culture, have spurred many of the calls for Lords reform; yet they obscure a plain reality: the increasingly diverse House of Lords is more representative of British society than the elected House of Commons, is better suited to serve the wider public interest and, in common with many upper houses, it performs a role as democratically vital as the lower house, through its championing of the constitution and human rights, its legislative review and executive scrutiny, and its defence of political minorities and opposition.
Since the end of the Second World War, with two exceptions (in 1974 and 2010 no party was able to win a majority of seats), each UK General Election has resulted in a majority government in which the winning party secured less than 50% of the electoral vote. In the 2005 General Election, for example, the Labour Party won a majority government of 355 seats with a 35.2% share of the vote, whilst the Conservative Party secured 198 seats with 32.4% of the vote and the Liberal Democrats won 62 seats with 22% of the vote. So it is, that in our parliamentary system, a government that represents the will of approximately one third of the nation can secure a Commons majority and enact, perhaps deeply divisive, legislation based upon a manifesto that was rejected by the majority of the electorate. A crude majoritarian might consider such a result inherently undemocratic.
Fortunately, liberal democracy is far more sophisticated and complex; it balances the interests of the electoral majority against other important values, such as the protection of human rights, the promotion of social justice and equality, and respect for political dissent, opposition and the representation of minority opinions. In advanced democracies, these fundamental values, essentially moral in nature, enjoy protection beyond the reach of the majority’s will. Upper houses such as the House of Lords, comparatively free from party control and endowed with a long-term perspective untrammelled by the lower houses’ short-termism, tend to be far better guardians of these basic values – often functioning as defenders of the constitution and fundamental rights.
In an effort to bring a different perspective to the political process, improve the quality of legislation and check the potential for unfettered legislative populism, many states have created upper houses with a membership that differs significantly from that of their lower houses – in some cases specifically admitting, by appointment or quota, learned experts or individuals from historically under-represented communities. This enables some second chambers, including the House of Lords, to perform a democratic role and be representative of society in a manner that is unachievable in a popularly elected lower house. In countries such as at the UK, this representative role in no way challenges the supremacy of the lower house – the Lords’ relationship with the Commons is complementary rather than competitive.
Statistical analysis of the legislative process in overseas states suggests that bicameralism improves legislation and results in more predictable public policy that better reflects voter concerns, especially in countries where the policy originates in overtly partisan lower chambers. This research also demonstrates that legislation enacted by a bicameral legislature comprising two chambers composed of different majorities and reflecting different interests, is likely to be more democratic and more representative of society’s interests than legislation emanating from a unicameral state or a bicameral state with two chambers of similar composition.
This is logical: to secure a bill’s passage, a government will need to ensure that it appeals to a wider range of interests than might initially have been intended. Bills that successfully pass both chambers can be deemed to have attained the ultimate democratic accolade: a “supermajority”.
A lack of cameral consensus can also be democratic. The House of Lords is arguably most effective and representative of society when it is opposed to a government majority. Parliamentary conflicts generate increased interest from the media and the wider world, motivating concerned elements within society to engage with the issue at hand and make their views known (be it through public debate, community activism, signed petitions, or direct representation to a legislative member). Indeed, as I write this essay, the House of Lords has embarrassed the Government by defeating it three times over proposed welfare reforms. The democratic “will of the people” is clearly more effectively served when the critical review of the Upper House, and the public reaction arising from it, has the potential to cause the government to reconsider its position.
The arguments for bicameralism are compelling. Nevertheless, although the number of bicameral states is increasing (from 45 in the 1970s to nearly 80 today), unicameralism remains the majority legislative system in the world – accounting for approximately 60% of national legislatures.
The predominance of bicameralism in the majority of the national legislatures of the English-speaking world (most of which are modelled on the Westminster System), in 16 of the member states of the G20, and in the majority of the world’s 25 most-developed countries might perhaps explain why it appears much less of an anomaly than it is in reality.
Bicameral legislatures arose (and disappeared) in different countries for reasons that are largely dependent upon each state’s political and constitutional evolution. At their most basic representative level, however, bicameral legislatures share one common historic characteristic: the two chambers served different polities – lower houses existed to advance the interests of voters whilst upper houses represented specific (viz. established) elements in society. A more expansive, all-encompassing contemporary definition is impossible – myriad forms of bicameralism exist today, each with a different composition and division of power. Some upper houses are composed of elected members representing regional interests, others contain appointed members representing sectional interests, and some have a mixed membership. Some upper houses have an absolute veto over legislation whilst others, the majority, may delay a bill but lack the ability to formally block the lower house. Of the world’s 78 bicameral legislatures, 69 have upper chambers composed of less than 200 members and none, other than the UK, has a membership over 400.
According to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, approximately 60% of upper houses have direct elections, with the remaining 40% primarily comprising appointed or indirectly elected members. Further upper house variations are caused by the influence of political parties, the method of appointment or election of members, and their term of office -- a majority of these chambers have terms that last 4 – 5 years, whilst less than 18% have terms in excess of 7 years.
The ability of bicameral legislatures to more fairly reflect the interests of disparate elements of the nation accounts for their overwhelming predominance in federal states – as the United Kingdom now displays “quasi-federal” characteristics this is of particular relevance. Federal democracy is partly based on the principle that, to be truly representative of society, the state must balance the will of the majority against regional minority interests. To enable this, many federations, most of which cover large geographic areas, allocate a disproportionate number of upper house seats to less-populated regions (the United States and Australia accord all states equal representation in their senates, despite huge variations in the size of state populations). One could argue that this violates the basic principle of majoritarian democracy, yet it is an essential characteristic of federalism, providing a political forum for the advocacy of issues (i.e. agriculture, fisheries, natural resources, etc.) that may be of vital importance to less-populated, largely rural, regions of the country but which would not be accorded due attention in the population-based lower house, which might have a stronger inclination to reflect urban/industrial concerns. Without this counter-balanced democratic representation, many federations would cease to exist.
Aside from regional interests, a number of states, both federal and unitary, have established strict quotas to guarantee upper house representation for specific segments of society, including those that have been historically under-represented (most notably, women). These quotas may be established via constitutional entrenchment (such as in Afghanistan and Senegal), by the enactment of electoral legislation (such as in Bolivia and France) or by the voluntary agreement of political parties (as in the United Kingdom and Poland).
Among states with guaranteed female representation in the upper house, the percentage of seats allocated varies considerably: party electoral lists for the Argentinian and Brazilian senates require that women comprise
30% of candidates, whereas in Mexico and Spain this figure rises to 40% – Belgium requires gender parity.
Strong regional concentrations of minorities will often yield upper house representation from different ethnic, linguistic and religious communities; nevertheless, a growing number of bicameral countries are utilising their upper houses to more fairly reflect national diversity. For example, to match the approximate ratio of Dutch-speakers to French-speakers, 25 of Belgium’s 40 directly elected Senators (out of a total of 71) are elected by the Dutch electoral college and 15 are elected by the French electoral college; Malaysia’s head of state is constitutionally empowered to appoint representatives from racial minority groups; and Ethiopia’s constitution guarantees that each of its historic “nations, nationalities and peoples” shall be represented in the upper house by at least one member and by one additional representative for each one million of its population. In 2010, Pakistan, which already has reserved seats for technocrats and women, announced plans to enact an amendment to its constitution that would reserve four seats in the upper house for non-Muslims. Prior to this, guaranteed religious representation was limited to Muslim scholars.
Several states also allocate upper house seats to eminent leaders from specific fields of endeavour; the justification for their appointment is predicated on the belief that their professional expertise will aid in the creation of better laws and policies. Representatives of civic society and experts in fields such as medicine, agriculture, education, business, industry, and arts and culture, add value to the legislative process by providing invaluable insights into their sectors – their presence enhances the ability of the upper house to be broadly representative not only of society, but also of many of its constituent parts.
In India’s upper house, 12 of its 250 representatives are selected by the head of state for their expertise in arts and literature, science, or social services. In Italy, 315 elected senators are complemented by a further seven who are appointed for life, these include those appointed for outstanding contributions to society, science, the arts or literature. Of Malaysia’s 70 senators, the elected king appoints 44, of whom 40 must have “rendered distinguishable public service or have achieved distinction in the professions, commerce, industry, agriculture, culture or social service” or, as mentioned supra, are representative of racial minorities.
The selection processes for the upper houses of Ireland and Thailand are particularly noteworthy for the
incorporation of elements of civil society. In the 1930s, the creators of Ireland’s current constitution were
greatly inspired by a contemporary Roman Catholic philosophy of social stability and integration that stressed the importance of inter-vocational cooperation. 43 of the 60 senators in Ireland’s upper house are therefore elected (via electoral college) from a pool of candidates whose professional experience has made them eligible for nomination to one of five specialised “Vocational Panels”: Adminstrative (public administration, social services and the voluntary sector), Agricultural (includes fisheries), Cultural and Educational, Industrial and Commercial, and Labour.
Similarly, approximately half of Thailand’s 150 senators are appointed from a group of candidates nominated by various sectors, including the public, private, professional and academic. In its consideration of nominees, and whilst aiming for a fair balance of seats per sector, the selection committee assesses candidates’ on their sector-specific skills and experience, as well as their interdisciplinary capabilities and the overall value that they can add to the legislative process.
Part Two may be read HERE.
This essay is taken from ResPublica's landmark report "Our House: Reflections on Representation and Reform in the House of Lords", (available for download at this LINK) which was launched in the House of Lords on 29 February 2012. This important publication, produced in response to the Government's Draft Bill on the Reform of the House of Lords, opposes the Government's desire for a "wholly or mainly elected" upper house and, instead, argues for a radical alternative. Other contributors include the Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform, Mark Harper MP, Lord Low of Dalston, Lord Wei of Shoreditch, Sir Stephen Bubb, The Bishop of Leicester (Convenor of the Lords Spiritual), the political philosopher Prof. Roger Scruton, Lord Adebowale and Phillip Blond, Director of ResPublica.
Thursday, 1 March 2012
Launch of: "Our House: Reflections on Representation & Reform in the House of Lords"
Prompted by the publication of the Coalition Government's Draft House of Lords Reform Bill, and the subsequent debate that has ensued in response to the proposals, this essay collection draws together civic and institutional leaders, experts and commentators, including Bishop Tim Stevens, Convenor of the Lords Spiritual; John Longworth, Director General of the British Chambers of Commerce; political philosopher Professor Roger Scruton; former welfare minister Frank Field MP; Sir Stephen Bubb, the Chief Executive of Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations; Lord Adebowale, the Chief Executive of social enterprise Turning Point; and Lord Wei, former Government Adviser on the 'Big Society'. In doing so, it aims to reflect on the opportunity for a House of Lords that best embodies British society.
Edited by Caroline Julian, Senior Researcher at ResPublica and with an opening Government statement by the Minister for Constitutional and Political Reform, Mark Harper MP outlining the Coalition's reforms, the collection of essays is published amidst the on-going debates surrounding the Coalition’s proposals.
In their concluding chapter, Phillip Blond and Rafal Heydel-Mankoo lay out a series of powerful arguments against the planned reforms and set out a radical alternative, a ‘hybrid house’, with one third of its member’s elected by the people, one third nominated by the political parties and one third appointed by civil society. Whilst agreeing that an elected element should be introduced, they argue that such an election should foster plurality and strengthen of our mixed constitution, rather than extend the writ of a form of democracy that will diminish the plurality of the Upper House.
The compendium will be formally launched on Wednesday the 29th February at 3pm in Committee Room 2, House of Lords, with a panel including the Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform, Mark Harper MP, The Rt Hon Frank Field MP, The Rt Hon The Lord Low of Dalston and ResPublica Director, Phillip Blond.
The Report is available for download at this link: http://respublica.org.uk/item/Our-House-Reflections-on-Representation-and-Reform-in-the-House-of-Lords
Monday, 6 February 2012
The Accession of HM The Queen - February 6th - 8th 1952
The Queen's Privy Council for Canada was the first to formally proclaim the new sovereign, doing so on Accession Day itself, closely followed by Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council of the United Kingdom.
HE The Governor General of Australia and HE the Governor General and Federal Executive Council of South Africa issued their proclamations on February 7th. New Zealand's Governor General proclaimed the new Queen on February 11th.
The proclamation was gazetted in the London Gazette on February 6th and published in The Times on February 7th .
 |
| Friary Court, St. James's Palace |
The heralds were then escorted by cavalry escort to read the proclamations from Charing Cross, Temple Bar and the Royal Exchange (here accompanied by The Lord Mayor of London and other City dignitaries). On that same day, the proclamation was read out across the country and the world.
 |
| Mercat Cross, Edinburgh |
Film footage of the proclamation from the steps of the Royal Exchange, Cornhill in the City of London
Thus started Her Majesty's reign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)