Make Canoe my Homepage

The succession question

- October 28th, 2011
RE_2011-07-30T160114Z_01_EDN067_RTRMDNP_3_ROYALS-WEDDING-ZARA

The laws may be changed so that a daughter of the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William could be queen, even if she has brothers. (Photo: Dylan Martinez/REUTERS)

Update!

On Friday, the Commonwealth realms have agreed to new succession rules, putting to rest the 300-year-old law that favour male heirs.

“Put simply, if the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have a little girl, that girl would one day be our queen,” British Prime Minister David Cameron told reporters outside a meeting of Commonwealth leaders in Perth, Australia.

The agreement of Canada and the other realms is required before the changes are put before the British House of Commons.

“There was unanimous agreement that these changes recognized the equality of women and Catholics,” said Prime Minister Stephen Harper. “These are obvious modernizations.”

The legislation will need to come before our Parliament. Changes to the law also include allowing the monarch to marry a Roman Catholic, something forbidden since 1601, and removing getting the monarch’s permission to marry.

Oct. 17 post:

I was on vacation last week and, I’ll be honest, stayed as far away from a computer as possible.

So, that means I missed this news about Britain seriously considering changing the succession laws so that a girl could become queen, even if she had younger brothers (right now, a boy can jump ahead of his older sister as boys rule, girls drool – or something like that).

British PM David Cameron said in a letter last week the current rule is “an anomaly,” the Daily Telegraph reported.

“In the UK, we have found it increasingly difficult to continue to justify two particular aspects of the present rules on the succession to the Crown,” he wrote. “The first is the rule which says that an elder daughter should take a place in the line of succession behind a younger son. We espouse gender equality in all other aspects of life, and it is an anomaly that in the rules relating to the highest public office we continue to enshrine male superiority.”

It’s about time this is being considered. I’m surprised it wasn’t an issue raised by Diana – but then again, she was pretty timid during her first few years with the royal family and if she was concerned about it, that was put to rest with the birth of two boys.

Canadians seem to be behind the change. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said we are “supportive” of “reasonable modernizations.”

Meanwhile, Monarchist League of Canada chairman Robert Finch said members of his group are thrilled.

“You’d be hard-pressed to find someone who doesn’t support doing this,” Finch said.

So, what do you think? I think it’s a good idea, but I’d like to see what you guys think.

Subscribe to the post

4 comments

  1. kenneth | October 28, 2011 at 12:54 am

    a thousand years of history and they decide to change it now.if they are going to change the laws governing succession they may as well scrap the monarchy all together.

  2. kenneth | October 28, 2011 at 12:56 am

    a thousand years of history and they decide to change the succession law now.may as well scrap the monarchy all together.

  3. JT | October 28, 2011 at 8:08 am

    There is a monarchy for historical reason.
    Why change the rules? Why not just get rid of the royal crap altogether?

  4. Marcel A. Coen | October 28, 2011 at 8:19 am

    Get rid of the Monarchist, send them home ,We do not need them here in Canada

Leave a comment

 characters available