He’s the man who helped guide the Monarchy through the crisis of the Abdication and was on hand during the difficult days of World War Two. He died forty years ago and yet, suddenly, he is at the heart of a new drama. Tommy Lascelles, right hand man to George VI, could yet decide who governs the country in the year that the King’s daughter marks a record breaking Jubilee.
In the fevered 24 hours that have seen the UK Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, rocked by a series of resignations in his Cabinet and constant calls from members of his own party for him to quit, the Lascelles Principles which he set out before The Queen’s record breaking reign began have suddenly become the subject of huge interest. The Principles are the conditions in which a Monarch can refuse a request from the Prime Minister to dissolve Parliament. And at a time when nothing in British politics seems certain, they have taken on a new lease of life.
The Lascelles Principles were set out in 1950 when debate began around the role of King George VI in a political maelstrom which followed a general election which had seen Labour retain power but with a wafer thin majority. Sir Alan Lascelles, usually called Tommy, had been the King’s Private Secretary for most of his reign. As April came to an end, he wrote to The Times under the pseudonym ”Senex”, Latin for ”old man.” By then, he was 63 years old and had been in royal service for the best part of three decades.
His letter was short and to the point and began by stating ‘‘It is surely indisputable (and common sense) that a Prime Minister may ask—not demand—that his Sovereign will grant him a dissolution of Parliament; and that the Sovereign, if he so chooses, may refuse to grant this request.”
He then went on to set out three reasons why the Monarch could deny a request to dissolve Parliament. They were if parliament was ”still vital, viable and capable of doing its job”, if a General Election would be damaging to the national economy and, lastly, if the Monarch was able to find another Prime Minister who could continue in Government for a reasonable period ”with a working majority in the House of Commons.”
The letter is also interesting for its spotlight on the role of the Monarch within the constitutional process. Lascelles wrote that deciding whether to grant a request to dissolve parliament ”is entirely personal to the Sovereign, though he is, of course, free to seek informal advice from anybody whom he thinks fit to consult.”
He also described a wise Sovereign as one ”who has at heart the true interest of the country, the constitution, and the Monarchy”.
It is a powerful letter, despite its brevity. It is also worth remembering that it is the work of a man who was held in high esteem by George VI and his whole family. The Queen has never shied away from expressing how much she valued her father’s example as a constitutional Monarch. There is little doubt that Senex wrote with the full support of his master.
Tommy Lascelles words now echo to us through history. Whether he yet has a say in the future of the country he served so long remains to be seen.
