The monarchy is popular – so we need reasonable Republicanism

By Mark Ferguson / @markfergusonuk

Let’s be clear about something from the off. I’m a Republican. I believe that the people should be sovereign. I don’t believe that inherited social position or political power should play any part in our democracy. I don’t care if the power of the crown is technical or theoretical. A constitutional monarchy to me is an anachronism. The monarchy should have no control, of any kind, over our political system.

Yet I don’t pretend that Republicanism is in any way a viable political movement in Britain. As Sunder Katwala rightly noted on LabourList this morning, Republicanism has been perhaps the least successful political project in British history. Support for the monarchy is as strong as ever. It ranges across political viewpoints, geography and social class. That is – at present – an unassailable political fact.

But that doesn’t mean that the Republicans should put aside their beliefs and stop campaigning. Instead it means that we need a “reasonable Republicanism”.

Watching the royal wedding today – initially under duress before becoming sucked in – it’s easy to see the appeal. I felt the same conflicting emotions today that I feel when visiting Oxford or Cambridge, or when I see Black Rod and other parliamentary figures striding around Westminster dressed like lost Elizabethans. Britain does old fashioned, traditional (and dare I say it impressive) pageantry better than any nation on earth. This very traditionalism – a by-product of our class system – is both attractive and repulsive at the same time. It attracts because it is supreme spectacle, yet it repels upon deeper consideration of what it represents.

I’m starting to sound like a dour and miserable lefty, which is precisely what I wanted to avoid, so I’ll cut to the chase.

British Republicans will not remove the monarchy. Nor should they seek to. It is contrary to the wishes of the overwhelming majority, and they refuse to be persuaded. The existence of the monarchy is the settled will of the British people.

Reasonable Republicans therefore should drop the rhetoric, and focus on what is important, and also potentially acheiveable. There should be no place in our democracy – even theoretically – for an unelected monarch to be able to dissolve a government against the wishes of the people. The “royal prerogative” should be formalised as a power of parliament, separate from the crown. The royals – who after all are incredibly wealthy – should be encouraged to be more self sufficient, and state subsidies should be phased out.

I object to the existence of any institution which promotes hereditary priviledge. The royal family is the perfect example of that. But I’m not against the royal family as an institution per se. As a reasonable Republican, I want to remove the technicalities and theoretical power of the crown from our democracy. I want the people to have real sovereignty, and I don’t want to divert money from the state to one of the nation’s wealthiest families. I don’t think that’s too much to ask for, and it could all be dealt with as part of a wider constitutional reform package – including Lords reform – in the coming months.

Republicanism won’t be a popular in my lifetime, but reasonable republicanism is something we might be able to form some consensus around. And with the enduring popularity of the monarchy, only this type of gradualist reform has any possibility of success.