Rival courts that may lead to a constitutional crisis
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.JAMES CUSICK
Britain today has returned to the 18th-century days of having two rival royal courts. With the Princess of Wales boldly bypassing the authority of the sovereign and stating to a world-wide audience of 200 million that she will determine her own role and how the heir to the throne will be brought up, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland has now entered a full-scale constitutional crisis, according to a leading government historian.
Dr John Barnes, of the London School of Economics, believes that the ignoring of the Queen's authority and of the precedents laid out in the 1701 Act of Settlement has brought the prospect of a republican UK nearer.
Diana's self-appointed agenda, according to Dr Barnes, means "we have returned to the days of Frederick, Prince of Wales, and George III. Then there was a classic royal confrontation between the opposition politicians comprising the Tories and dissident Whigs who courted the future king in his own rival court against George's own court". Only the death of Frederick, killed by an ill- guided cricket ball, avoided open royal warfare.
The emergence of party government, and the end of the sovereign's power to appoint the Prime Minister, effectively ended court rivalry inside the monarchy. Until now.
"Diana, by going on television, has now set up her own rival show to the Queen," said Dr Barnes. "This is such an old-fashioned way of playing royal politics, that the British people will simply not be used to what is about to happen. The Princess of Wales is demanding all of the privileges, but is taking on none of the obligations."
The "extraordinary position" of the princess, according to another historian close to the royal family, differed slightly from the Prince of Wales's own television interview just over a year ago. It is understood that Charles advised the Queen what he was about to do and she reluctantly agreed to the cameras coming in. Diana kept hidden until the last moment all details of the Panorama programme and at no time sought the Queen's authorisation.
Dr Barnes said: "Quite simply - regardless of what the Panorama chat contained - Diana is stating 'I'm no longer playing the game the firm's way. And I'm not going to tell the firm what I'm doing.' " It was, said Dr Barnes, the end of the princess playing by even the minimum of royal rules.
Her comments that William, the future king, will be brought up under her guidance may appear a casual comment by a young mother. Inside sources in Buckingham Palace yesterday were not so understanding.
When the Act of Succession was drawn up at the beginning of the 18th century, stipulating the sovereign would be brought up in the Protestant faith, and that the sovereign would be responsible for an heir's education (and at that time marriage), it was a system that attempted to control the future monarch. Although the Act still remains, Diana has for the first time said it is her business, and not the Queen's, to be responsible for William. "We will now need to wait and see how Diana intends to enforce this," Dr Barnes said.
The resignation of the Buckingham Palace-appointed press secretary to Diana, Geoff Crawford, may be the start of an exodus of "Palace" staff. According to another Buckingham Palace source the "contractual mess" which Diana is now facing with the BBC over financial rights to the interview "would never have happened" had she been properly advised.
The solution to avoid constitutional chaos? "You remove the fuel from the fire by divorce," said Dr Barnes. The Princess of Wales said no to any talk of divorce, but Dr Barnes said there will now be immense pressure for her to do so. "She will become a loose cannon if she is the ex-wife of Charles, but that will be less embarrassing than her becoming Queen."
As well as Diana playing games by her own rules, Dr Barnes believes the BBC "showed very poor judgement". He said they treated Diana "as a personality and not as a crucial part of the constitution . In doing so they have helped bring a republic that bit closer".
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments