The changes to the rules governing the line of succession to the British and Commonwealth throne will be brought into effect in the coming weeks once Western Australia has passed its bill bringing the changes into law.
In 2011, the Commonwealth realms agreed upon changes to the laws governing succession to the crown which, among other changes, include allowing females equal rights to succeed to the throne (known as absolute primogeniture) as opposed to younger brothers having priority over them, and stopping the exclusion of royals who marry Catholics from the line of succession.
This agreement, which became known as the Perth agreement, initiated the start of a long legislative process to ensure the laws in all the countries where Queen Elizabeth II is Head of State are brought in line with each other.
Under the Perth agreement, the changes can only be brought into force when all the countries have brought in legislation which would effect the same changes as the British law. Since the starting of this process in 2013, each of the Commonwealth realms has now either passed laws or asserted that a change isn’t needed by their parliament, with the exception of Australia.
Last Thursday, royal assent was given to South Australia’s bill to effect the changes meaning only Western Australia remains to pass its Succession to the Crown bill.
Whilst there is a legal challenge to the law in Canada which is ongoing, there’s nothing to suggest this will impede the law being invoked across the Commonwealth realms once Australia has finalised its legislating.
The objective of the law change was to eliminate the gender discrimination in the line of succession in order to bring the Monarchy ‘up-to-date’ with modern values.
The changes the law will make in full are:
Once all the realms have introduced the legislation (if required), an order in council will be given by the Lord President of the Privy Council (currently Nick Clegg, the UK’s Deputy Prime Minister) to bring the laws into force.
Whilst there are still very much some ‘loose ends’ to this law such as the status of the Duchy of Cornwall (the traditional title and land holding of the eldest son and heir of the Monarch), there is a bill in Parliament currently which seeks to update the laws to mean it is the eldest child and heir who will hold the Duchy.
Similarly, the changes leave hereditary titles (such as peerages) two steps behind with most only allowing males to succeed to them. A bill is also being introduced into the House of Lords to address this (read more about that here).
The effect of the law will not be felt for several generations and many decades yet since the birth of Prince George meant the possibility of a first-born daughter being usurped in the line by a younger brother is no longer a threat for now. In fact, the most senior members of the Royal Family to be affected by the introduction of absolute primogeniture at the moment are Tane and Senna Lewis (grandchildren of the Duke of Gloucester) – currently 28th and 29th in line to the throne respectively – who will swap places as Senna was born after 28th October 2011.
The provision would however affect Zara Tindall should she have a son, that son will not take her daughter Mia’s place in the line of succession.
The removal of the exclusion on spouses of Catholics will also not have an immediate resonance on any senior royal, with George, Earl of St Andrews (son of the Duke of Kent) being the most senior member of the Royal Family to be affected when he is restored to the line of succession (at 34th).
Once Western Australia has enacted the changes, it will be down to the Australian government at a federal level to do the same as a formality before the changes can be invoked.
photo credit: UK Parliament via photopin cc
I always enjoy it when I have the honour of making the first comment on a new article!
This may be a bit off topic, but I’ve read that Queen Mary converted to Roman Catholicism in the later part of her life. Supposedly this was kept quiet for obvious reasons, and it made me wonder what the consequences would have been if this became public.
I found this rather surprising when I read about it, since most sources agree that King George V kept a tight control over all his family; she described her life as “dignified slavery.” Several authors have quoted her as having said she often became so bored that she “would have turned cartwheels for sixpence.” The writer of the book I read this in wrote that Queen Mary was fascinated by the rituals and ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church and found great comfort in religion.
If this was true, would have disqualified King George V from his position as sovereign for being married to a Roman Catholic?
If anyone knows more about this, I’d be interested to hear their thoughts.
Enquanto muitos parlamentares discutem sobre a lei de sucessão da Coroa, O Trono de Deus continua ocioso, sem poder em sua plenitude defender a vida humana, o estabelecimento do Reino Humano na Terra, a Construção do Paraíso. Sabe-se que o Senhor do Trono de Deus tem feito um excelente trabalho em prol da humanidade. Que nossa realeza acorde! que nossa Gloriosa Rainha Elizabeth II seja reconhecida e ascenda ao Trono de Deus. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN DEL MUNDO!!
Es gusta me mucho la que Usted escribe, y estoy muy feliz porque Usted viene.
Pero pregunto: Isobel la segunda es la Reina de Inglaterra, si; pero Reina del todo mundo?
(Pardon mi Espanol, pero no hablo Portuguesa.)
To receive the latest Royal Central posts straight to your email inbox, enter your email address below and press subscribe.
Join 389 other subscribers