Editor:
Re: We are all serfs in her estate (Letters, Optimist, March 18).
So it didn’t take long for the renewed debate, on whether or not to retain the British monarchy, to arrive in our local newspaper. In fact, only 11 days since the interview by “American royalty” was presented, to millions of people around the world, in which the British royal family was “thrown under the bus” (a double-decker), by two disgruntled family members and their “close personal friend.”
While the statement that “land in Canada is solely owned by Queen Elizabeth II” may be legally and technically accurate, based on British Common Law, that does not mean that she can or will do whatever she wants with it. If that were the case, then why didn’t the Queen just give some of that best land to her grandson and his new wife, when they decided to move to Canada, before they eventually relocated to the U.S.?
Because it is not as simple as that.
Before we decide whether or not to abolish the British Monarchy, as a result of scant, unproven, or biased evidence, we should all do a little more in-depth “fact checking” on the subject, well beyond a simple “Google search”, or binge-watching of past seasons of “The Crown.”
As a person of British descent, who before now didn’t consider myself much of a Monarchist, even I know that the Queen’s role as “The Crown” is mostly symbolic. The Queen is an appointed Monarch, not an elected political representative, of Commonwealth countries including Canada. While I do agree with the argument that the symbolic position of Governor General could be eliminated, due to its high overall cost to Canadian taxpayers, including the monies that are provided to previous Governors General, after their tenures have officially ended (not to mention that a bully should not be allowed to continue in a position of leadership); that does not mean that I don’t respect what the Queen has done, over the long course of her reign.
In fact, the opposite is true. In my opinion, the Queen has proven herself to have more tact, diplomacy, and sophistication in her little finger, than those “small people”, who have recently belittled her family in a public forum. She is also a flawed human being who, like all of us, has made some mistakes (moreso in public, than the rest of us will ever likely have to endure). To quote Shakespeare, “uneasy is the head that wear the crown”. Indeed. In effect, what several high-profile “shameless self-promoters” just did, was to play a metaphorical game of “musical chairs” with a 94-year old matriarch, in which they quickly sat down in the remaining chairs. Ironically, the only one left standing was Queen Elizabeth II. Not the loser in the game, but the real winner, who will soon get to retire after almost 70 years of personal sacrifice, service, and duty, which is more that can be said, for the rest of the naysayers combined.
A Cameron