News

LIB DEM WIN COULD PROVOKE CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS

By Finkle

Did you hear the one about the the ...don't be alarmed...read on. 

I may be wrong but, at this election, something unprecedented is taking place in British Politics - for the first time we go into election where each of the leaders of the three main political parties belongs to a different faith - Blair is a High Anglican, Howard is Jewish and Kennedy is a Roman Catholic.

Even as someone who believes firmly in the separation of church and state I consider this to be a good thing, a small but positive reflection of the diversity of modern British society.

Today we have an Anglican, a Catholic and a Jew leading our three main political parties and in the future, who knows? A Muslim leading the Labour Party? A Sikh, perhaps or maybe even a Buddhist.

Anything is possible given time and tolerance and that's something that reflects well o­n 21st Century Britain......except that were the Lib Dems to somehow win this upcoming election it could, and is some quarters would, provoke a constitutional crisis.

There's nothing explicit in law which expressly forbids a Catholic from becoming PM - interpreted strictly the 1701 Act of Settlement applies such a prohibition only on the Monarch as head of the church - nevertheless there is what amounts to a constitutional bar on a Catholic, and therefore Charles Kennedy, becoming PM.

The problem resides in this passage of the 1701 Act:" And it was thereby further enacted, that all and every person and persons that then were, or afterwards should be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with the see or Church of Rome, or should profess the popish religion, or marry a papist, should be excluded, and are by that Act made for ever incapable to inherit, possess, or enjoy the Crown and government of this realm, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, or any part of the same, or to have, use, or exercise any regal power, authority, or jurisdiction within the same.

In simple terms, the Act of Settlement prohibits a Roman Catholic from exercising any powers which fall within the Royal Prerogative which includes:(for the Royal Prerogative see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Prerogative )

* The appointment and dismissal of ministers;

* The dissolution of parliament and the calling of elections;

* Clemency and pardon;

* The awarding of dignities and honours;

* The declaration of war;

* The declaration of an emergency;

* The granting of Charters of Incorporation;

* The collection of tolls;

* The minting of coinage;

* The issuance and revocation of passports;

* The expulsion of a foreign national from the United Kingdom;

* The creation of new common law courts;

* The creation of new universities;

* The appointment of bishops and archbishops in the Church of England;

* The printing of the authorised Church of England version of The Bible;

* The publication of all statutes, legislative instruments and Orders-in-Council.

If this is the case, then how does Tony Blair, who is married to a Roman Catholic hold office ?

Ironically, this same problem does not affect Michael Howard; his Jewish origins are of no consequence to the 1701 Act and Britain has already had a Jewish Prime Minister and one of its most famous ones at that, Benjamin Disraeli.

This is a situation in which something will eventually have to give, where if we are to have a fair and equitable one  in which anyone, of any faith or of no faith at all, can aspire to the highest political office in the land, then we cannot allow the constitutional position of the Crown and of the Church of England to exclude Catholics from realising such aspirations.

As Geoffrey of Occam observed, the simple solution is invariably the best - separate church and state and disestablish the Church of England - you know it makes sense.