CONGRATULATIONS, YOUR MAJESTY

 

On Wednesday 9^th September 2015, and after 63 years, 217 days, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II took her place in the record books as being the longest serving British monarch of all time, overtaking her great, great grandmother Queen Victoria. 

Taking into account that most people’s memories go back to when they were about three years old, you have to be around 66 (or born in 1949 or earlier) to remember anyone else other than HM The Queen on the British throne.

I’ll hold my hands up from the start to say I am a royalist and monarchist and prefer this form of a head of state in preference to a Presidential system of whatever colour.  I believe that the head of a country should be respected by everyone, should be proud of them and to support them in whatever they do.  They are, and should remain apolitical.  Just look at the countries around the world that are currently (and in very recent history) in the news and the dreadful situations they find themselves in.  Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.  Then look at the countries where threatening noises come from.  Russia, Argentina and North Korea.  The link?  All run by Presidents or unelected dictators.  

“Unelected, just like the Queen”, I can hear some of the republican sympathisers shouting from their patios and choking on their cafe con leche.  Yes, I agree, unelected.  But the “unelected” royal family of the United Kingdom come from a long line of people trained and immersed in service to their country, as opposed to subjecting their people to a life of tyranny and persecution.  I believe that countries with a monarchy simply have that stabilising influence that the others do not.  Apart from the UK, there’s Spain to Denmark, Oman to Morocco, New Zealand to Thailand.   Is it simply a coincidence that even in the modern times of countries being dominated by Islamist factions, those with a monarch as its head of state are never in the news for the wrong reasons such as Jordan, Bahrain and Morocco?  I don’t think so.  Even in modern day Europe with problems in Greece and Ukraine, they are without a monarch.  

Granted, the UK and other parts of her realm has had its problems during the reign of Elizabeth II but I do wonder just how many other potential and even worse situations she has prevented by having the odd quiet word in any of the ears of her 12 British Prime Ministers, as well as her 14 in New Zealand, 13 in Australia and 11 in Canada.  The contents of the regular private Tuesday evening meetings between HM The Queen and her Prime Minister have always been kept a well guarded secret.  It’s a conversation between two people.  No others are present. Prime Ministers of all parties in the past 63 years have all said of Her Majesty that she does guide and advise them.  Presidents and dictators simply have their own clique of similar minded sycophants surrounding them, daring not to challenge their masters.  I perceive that the British Prime Minister has that underlying respect and reverence that the Head of State deserves.

On the occasion of her 21^st birthday, 21^st April 1947, and still Princess Elizabeth, she made her now very famous speech when in Cape Town during a tour of South Africa, which included this excerpt: 

“There is a motto which has been borne by many of my ancestors - a noble motto, "I serve". Those words were an inspiration to many bygone heirs to the Throne when they made their knightly dedication as they came to manhood. I cannot do quite as they did.

“But through the inventions of science I can do what was not possible for any of them. I can make my solemn act of dedication with a whole Empire listening. I should like to make that dedication now. It is very simple. 

“I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.”

The words “I serve” and “service” dominate the piece.  There have been many calls over the years for a variety of reasons calling for the abdication of Her Majesty; more so in recent years with the increasing popularity of William, The Duke of Cambridge, but the Queen, through her spokespeople, always refer those detractors to that speech above.  “...my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service”.  

Let’s look at the word “service”.  The Queen has been an exemplary servant to her country, and continues to be so at the age of 89.  I’ve probably stirred up the anarchists and republicans among you even more now, but I don’t care!  I consider her service as being that of representing the country as the Head of State both within the United Kingdom and across the world stage.  It’s a job, and I believe a very difficult job too.  I’ve heard people say what a cushy and easy life not only members of the Royal Family have but politicians too.  The perception of many of the Royal lifestyle is similar to that of the famous Imperial Leather soap adverts of years past which saw the family lounging around all-day in a gold bath flying around in an executive jet.   And when some say, “they’ve never done a day’s work in their lives”, it depends what you class as work.  Running your own business, sitting in an office in front of a computer, sweeping the roads, driving a bus or performing a heart operation?  Whatever your views, just put yourself in any of their shoes for a moment. 

Your life is never your own ever again.  You are at the beck and call of the country and your courtiers.  You really are on duty all the time.  Senior politicians are just the same.  Remember if you’re listening to the Foreign Secretary being interviewed on the Today programmes at 6.30am (UK time); just think what time he has to set his alarm to be at the studio.  Imagine yourself on a week’s visit to Australia.  Wonderful, you may think.  Again, you do what you’re told and when to do it and say what you’re told to say, and not.  Being flown and driven and going by rail every day, and presented to strangers and listening to people that you’d probably choose not to meet in normal circumstances.  It would be boring and tedious for many, but HM The Queen and members of her family do it day in day out without complaint, showing a dedication to duty and to the country. 

I would venture to suggest that keeping to such a timetable and routine was the original downfall of Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York.  They simply weren’t ready and prepared, or probably capable of the level of dedication needed to be a full-time royal. The famous photograph of Diana looking bored and dejected on a tour to India and Sarah’s much documented lifestyle simply exposed that fact.  They were found wanting and weren’t up to the standards expected of the job of being a servant to the country.

Over these 63 years and 217 days, and counting, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II hasn’t put a single foot wrong.  I always found it fascinating the amount of criticism thrown towards her and stirred up by the Tony Blair machine in the aftermath of the death of Diana.  The scenario was highlighted during the film, The Queen, where Her Majesty decided to stay in Balmoral with her grandchildren William and Harry rather than return to London.  She really was damned if she did or didn’t.  One minute people would be saying the Royal Family were out of touch, and then, when demonstrating the kind of concern, support and love that any grandmother would have shown, she was expected – nee demanded – to be in London with “her people”.  I know who I believe benefitted most from that exercise, and it certainly wasn’t the wonderful lady who lives in Buckingham Palace.

Queen Elizabeth II outlasted that particular incumbent of No 10 Downing Street and, if she stays in the remarkable state of health she enjoys will kiss hands with even more Prime Ministers.  She will be celebrating her 90^th birthday in April 2016, and I truly hope and believe she will enact out every single word of her message 69 years earlier.