Politics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
The Queen of England has passed today and it appears that Prince Charles will assume the throne. Will this have any practical effect on their governing or nothing more than a change of figurehead? Is it like the THE WHO's lyric "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" ?
QUESTION: Will the crowning of King Charles have any practical effect on UK government?
Very little.
Bits of paperwork will need to be amended: It is now "His Majesty's Government" and so forth
There are transitional matters to arrange. The funeral and coronation are state affairs and are organised by the government - and of course members of the government will not be doing other business when they are attended these events.
The Queen has a weekly audience with the Prime Minister. It is clear that she has not always been well enough to receive the Prime Minister. Surely the King will want to hold these meetings.
Other matters which had been done by her household or by members of her family will now be done in person by the King. The King will open parliament but he already did this. Next time, he gets to wear the silly hat crown.
Similarly, the government uses the royals to project soft power: "Be nice to Britain, and we'll let your head of government have dinner with the King". (Trump, for example was flattered by having a State reception with the Queen). The Queen has been too unwell in recent months to attend such events - which were anyway impossible during the pandemic. The new King can resume a more active diplomatic role.
Finally, Charles has different priorities and interests from Elizabeth. He is personally much more concerned about the environment, for example.
This is not like the Who lyric, because there is no claim of being radically different. The Who are criticising politicians who claim to represent radical change, but do nothing. The monarchy represents continuity not change.
Yes but the difference is soft power rather than hard. The Queen, by dint of her long reign and association with meeting with a great many important figures of the past century meant that she was a significant draw for many around the world. Whether you're the President of the US, the Chancellor of Germany, or the Sultan of Brunei, meeting Queen Elizabeth II carried a significance that meeting other royalty around the world didn't to the same extent. King Charles III does not have the same level of cachet that the Queen had, and is unlikely to develop it during his remaining lifespan.
This made the Queen a more powerful tool of diplomacy than King Charles III will be, and that loss of power will weaken the UK's ability to project influence overseas. It is also likely that some of the remaining Commonwealth Realms (those which still have the British monarch as head of state, not to be confused with the wider group of Commonwealth Countries) will change to being Republics now that the Queen has died; this will also reduce British influence.
Of course, we shouldn't exaggerate the importance of this. The UK's influence around the world is grounded much more in it's economy, military, history, and alliances than it is in the Monarchy.
In terms of day-to-day matters, most differences are mere trivia, but it is notable that the PM still meets with the Monarch weekly. What happens at these meetings is entirely secret, but various PMs have commented on the value of these meetings with the Queen, and some of that comes from the Queen's wisdom and knowledge from the decades of these meetings. King Charles III will not have the same experience to draw on, nor are his words likely to carry the same weight with the PM. However, because of the private nature of these meetings it is completely unclear what level of difference this will make.
