Australia-British media exposes Queen's "blockbuster scandal" Buckingham Palace speaks urgently | Australia Chinatown

Release your eyes, put on headphones, and listen~!
On the 7th of this month, the British "Guardian" pointedly pointed at the kingship, boldly exposing Queen Elizabeth II of England half a century ago for obstructing the legislative process in order to protect private interests.according to. . .

本月7日,英国《卫报》剑指王权,大胆曝光英女王伊丽莎白二世半个世纪前涉嫌妨碍立法进程、以保护私利。据报道,英国王室主要承担礼仪性职责,女王不干预政府和议会事宜是英国君主立宪制的基石,为此这则“重磅丑闻”曝光后直接引发舆论有关女王是否“滥用权力”的讨论。对此,白金汉宫方面紧急发表声明,正面驳斥《卫报》报道的相关内容不实,也有媒体认为《卫报》这篇报道涉嫌“碰瓷”。

Queen was exploded "using power for personal gain"

According to reports, a draft of the British Company Act in 1973 has attracted the attention of the royal family: the draft contained a transparency clause, which was originally intended to prevent investors from secretly acquiring and increasing the company’s shares, which would increase the company’s business risks.Once it becomes law, the British public will have the opportunity to learn the true identity of specific investors or shareholders. The Guardian speculated that the Queen was probably worried that the draft could allow the public to spy on her financial situation, so she appointed a private lawyer to secretly lobby government officials.

"Guardian" staff learned by consulting the government memorandum in the National Archives that the Queen's personal lawyer at the time, Matthew Farrer, had contact with officials of the British Ministry of Trade and Industry at the time.Faller clearly conveyed the Queen’s objections, believing that this law would lead to the disclosure of her private investment, and proposed “special matters” for the Queen’s interests.An official said: "Faller explained the risks related to the disclosure (financial status)... Such disclosure of information is embarrassing to anyone." After that, the Minister of Trade and Industry He Wei persuaded the British government to contribute to this ministry. The draft adds new clauses to add all companies involved in the Queen's interests to the "white list" to ensure that the shareholder status of these companies will be exempt from review in the future.

This draft became law in 1976.According to the report, although the British government has undergone several changes, the Queen’s private investment and shareholding status has always been protected, and this “secrecy” status will continue until at least 2011.

Involved in "secret kingship"?

《卫报》称,王室的这场“秘密操作”牵涉到英国一项古老而晦涩的“秘密王权”,即“女王首肯权”(Queen’s
consent),这与英国人所熟知的“王室御准”有本质不同。“御准”是指相关法案正式成为法律前需要获得女王批准,这在整个立法过程中仅仅是礼节和形式化的一步。而“女王首肯”则直接关系到王室成员的切身利益:根据规定,若一项立法有可能影响王室特权及相关利益,那么政府官员应在议会辩论前告知王室。

According to the official website of the British royal family, "Queen's approval" is a "long-standing tradition" and a "pure ceremonial act", and some constitutional scholars also consider its existence "innocent."But from the Guardian’s view, the Queen’s use of this power seems a bit out of the ordinary: this document from the National Archives shows that not only did she and her lawyer first learn about the details of the provisions before the draft entered parliament, but there was even time. Go in secret lobbying activities.Thomas Adams, a constitutional expert at Oxford University, said that the Queen’s influence in the legislative process is “a height that professional political lobbyists can dream of.” The “Queen’s approval” itself seems to have given the British monarch’s “information on the draft legislation”. Significant influence".Tucker, a constitutional scholar at the University of Liverpool, also said that the Queen had two weeks to digest the relevant legislative details before her “approval”, and she could also get the guidance of a lawyer. Compared with the Royal Assent, there is obviously a fundamental difference in mechanism.

Buckingham Palace response

According to the BBC report, Buckingham Palace responded positively to the Guardian report on the 8th, stating that the “Queen’s approval” is only part of the parliamentary process, and it is always “responsive”. Any remarks about “the Queen’s obstruction of legislation” are Is untrue.Royal expert Richard Kay also published a commentary in the "Daily Mail" saying that this "exclusive secret" report by the "Guardian" is actually nothing new: the British royal biographer Morton was more than 30 years ago This has already been mentioned.In addition, the "Guardian" has long held an "anti-monarchy" stance. This time the newspaper aims to create a "plot line" of "an unknown conspiracy between the royal family and the government", but the relevant evidence it provides is not enough. Convincing.

        “唐人街”Fb每日分享澳大利亚精选新闻,让你随时随地知道澳洲最新 @玩乐、@移民、@生活资讯:https://www.fb.com/news.china.com.au/

[Welcome to the news to discuss cooperation! 】WeChat subscription account: news-china-com-au

Related posts

People have appreciated
Literary world

Australia-Behind the scenes of the Super Bowl is a sexy beauty worth over 480 million | Australia Chinatown

2021-2-12 21: 54: 06

Literary world

Australia-convicted former president?Timetable for the Senate "Trump Impeachment Trial" | Chinatown Australia

2021-2-12 21: 59: 08

0 replies AArticle author Madministrator
    No discussion yet, let me talk about your views
Personal center
shopping cart
coupon
Sign in today
New private message Private message list
Search