• Dear Guest, and welcome to RailUK Forums. Our non-railway discussion forums are currently restricted until members have five or more posts, and you will not be able to make a new thread or reply to an existing one in this section until you have made five or more posts elsewhere on the forum.

Jamaica Plans to End Queen's Role As Head of State

Status
Not open for further replies.

NY Yankee

Member
Joined
26 Mar 2012
Messages
487
Location
New York City
The Queen has received an unpleasant birthday surprise from Jamaica – a plan to drop her as Head of State.

Governor-General Patrick Allen said Her Majesty could be replaced with a ‘non-executive President’ during the opening of the country’s parliament. The Queen, who turns 90 on Thursday, retained the ceremonial role after Jamaica gained independence from Britain in 1962. She last visited the Caribbean country in 2002 as part of her Golden Jubilee celebrations.

If Her Majesty is replaced, Jamaica will retain links with the British Crown through its membership of the Commonwealth
This is the second time in four years the country has considered breaking links with the monarchy.

In 2012, the former prime minister Portia Simpson Miller said she would sever colonial-era links by abandoning the Queen and adopting a republican form of government. Her Majesty is Head of State in 15 Commonwealth countries, including Australia, New Zealand and Canada. However, Barbados plans to drop the Queen as Head of State later this year, ahead of its 50th anniversary of independence from British rule.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3543821/Jamaica-plans-end-Queen-s-role-Head-State-Monarch-receives-unpleasant-90th-birthday-surprise-Caribbean-country.html#channel=f108db3311c563&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk

This is definitely sad news. Why would a country want to sever ties with such a great country like the UK? Practically all of the people in Brixton are from the West Indies (I happen to live in a West Indian neighborhood in NYC). The only consolation is that this was more of a honourary position than an official position. She didn't have any actual power. I thought that West Indians love the UK- during the Bank Holiday, they have the Notting Hill Carnival where both White Brits and West Indians party and have a good time. Nevertheless, Jamaica will remain in the Commonwealth and Jamaicans will be free to emigrate to the UK.

Regardless of what happens, the UK will remain the world's greatest superpower. The sun never sets in the UK.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Railops

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2016
Messages
352
I fear that they may be blowing this out of proportion.

Your prejudice against the paper is irrelevant.

In this years published Jamaican legislative programme is :
A Constitution (Amendment) Bill
to replace Her Majesty
The Queen with a Non-Executive President as Head of State.

How is the paper blowing it out of proportion ?
 

GrimsbyPacer

Established Member
Joined
13 Oct 2014
Messages
1,803
Location
Humberside
Now it's time the UK did the same. A monarchy which uses birthright for picking who gets the job (and Richard III's DNA test proves the line was broken) should never be used, a King and Queen should always be the best person for the job, not just a relative.

I want a true democracy, no monarch, no first past the post, no prime minister with all the power etc.
 
Last edited:

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,636
Why would a country want to sever ties with such a great country like the UK?
...
I happen to live in a West Indian neighborhood in NYC

So do you think the Queen should be head of state for the USA?

To me it sounds like Jamaica is wanting the same sort of relationship with the UK which the USA has.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
29,824
Location
Yorks
The Queen would have been the head of state of the USA (had it not been for that unpleasantness over tax a couple of hundred years ago):lol:
 

Dave1987

On Moderation
Joined
20 Oct 2012
Messages
4,554
Considering that Wills and Kate are on a free holiday of India on the taxpayer, sorry a "business trip", to butter up the Indians even though we still send billions of £'s of foreign aid there I suspect the powers that be are very worried about it happening more widespread. New Zealand were going to abolish the Monarch as head of state until a very convenient tour was arranged for the Royal family in New Zealand.

And before people start the whole being a Royal is tough nonsense they always have the option to abdicate if they want to but funnily enough they never do!

Good on Jamaica they will get what many many people long for in this country!
 

NY Yankee

Member
Joined
26 Mar 2012
Messages
487
Location
New York City
So do you think the Queen should be head of state for the USA?

To me it sounds like Jamaica is wanting the same sort of relationship with the UK which the USA has.

If it was up to me, the USA would still be a British colony. It would have less crime, less racism, less poverty, and a better education system.
 

Phil.

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
1,323
Location
Penzance
Considering that Wills and Kate are on a free holiday of India on the taxpayer, sorry a "business trip", to butter up the Indians even though we still send billions of £'s of foreign aid there I suspect the powers that be are very worried about it happening more widespread. New Zealand were going to abolish the Monarch as head of state until a very convenient tour was arranged for the Royal family in New Zealand.

And before people start the whole being a Royal is tough nonsense they always have the option to abdicate if they want to but funnily enough they never do!

Good on Jamaica they will get what many many people long for in this country!
Yep, good on Jamaica. They won't be refusing British aid though will they? No, I didn't think so.
 

Dave1987

On Moderation
Joined
20 Oct 2012
Messages
4,554
Yep, good on Jamaica. They won't be refusing British aid though will they? No, I didn't think so.

Didn't know foreign aid was dependent on having the British Monarch as you Head of State :roll:
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
28,152
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Now it's time the UK did the same. A monarchy which uses birthright for picking who gets the job (and Richard III's DNA test proves the line was broken) should never be used, a King and Queen should always be the best person for the job, not just a relative.

Or even some random European monarch who has the "approved" religious connections....<(
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
I can't imagine why Jamaica wouldn't want our German Royal Family as heads of state. How unpatriotic.
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
28,152
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
I can't imagine why Jamaica wouldn't want our German Royal Family as heads of state. How unpatriotic.

Perhaps they might prefer the other previous European incumbents, William III and Mary II who in 1689 came over here from the Low Counties to "have their turn in the job". A certain advertising campaign of recent years would have been ideal to represent what they stood far..."The future's bright, the future's Orange"...:roll:
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
Perhaps they might prefer the other previous European incumbents, William III and Mary II who in 1689 came over here from the Low Counties to "have their turn in the job". A certain advertising campaign of recent years would have been ideal to represent what they stood far..."The future's bright, the future's Orange"...:roll:

Paul I didn't say I think they are choosing which mad European family they want to be their head of state. I was just saying I am not surprised they don't want ours. :roll:

To put it more simply I find the whole idea of these Royal Families bonkers anyway. And damn me if I'm unpatriotic for not being full of praise for our half Greek half German lot.
 
Last edited:

HMS Ark Royal

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2015
Messages
2,811
Location
Hull
Now it's time the UK did the same. A monarchy which uses birthright for picking who gets the job (and Richard III's DNA test proves the line was broken) should never be used, a King and Queen should always be the best person for the job, not just a relative.

The line being broken is historical fact - people have actually known about this for several hundred years now... Makes me laugh my head off when people sprout off rubbish as there have been several line changes in the past

Not, of course, that I am implying anything towards you

#

This talk of Jamaica leaving happens every few years or so, and I always give the same reply - if they want to be ungrateful little gits, then they can be an independant nation without a charming old lady who has done nothing but put her peoples first and foremost throughout her reign as their leader
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,143
This talk of Jamaica leaving happens every few years or so, and I always give the same reply - if they want to be ungrateful little gits, then they can be an independant nation without a charming old lady who has done nothing but put her peoples first and foremost throughout her reign as their leader

It's effectively a nominal post anyway.

I wonder how much she actually costs that country. If they replace her with a president, with the normal requirement of several palaces, and a garage with one example of each of the world's supercars therein, perhaps they will appreciate her.
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
Jamaica are entitled to decide for themselves who they want as head of state. So is any other country. I'm sure the island and it's people are capable of reaching the right decision for them. I'd say it would be difficult for anyone here in the UK, or the US, to properly understand the perspective of a resident of that island.
 

Phil.

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2015
Messages
1,323
Location
Penzance
Considering that Wills and Kate are on a free holiday of India on the taxpayer, sorry a "business trip", to butter up the Indians even though we still send billions of £'s of foreign aid there I suspect the powers that be are very worried about it happening more widespread. New Zealand were going to abolish the Monarch as head of state until a very convenient tour was arranged for the Royal family in New Zealand.

And before people start the whole being a Royal is tough nonsense they always have the option to abdicate if they want to but funnily enough they never do!

Good on Jamaica they will get what many many people long for in this country!

"....a very convenient tour was arranged...."
Have you any idea at all of the months of planning that these occasions take? H.M.'s diary is full for three years in advance.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
25,565
Location
Fenny Stratford
Perhaps they might prefer the other previous European incumbents, William III and Mary II who in 1689 came over here from the Low Counties to "have their turn in the job". A certain advertising campaign of recent years would have been ideal to represent what they stood far..."The future's bright, the future's Orange"...:roll:

I am not sure that adequately describes the Glorious Revolution of 1688!

It wasnt their "turn". Mary was the heir apparent until James had a son. A Catholic son. It was a standard regal "smash and grab" raid by a pretender only this one worked! This tactic would often be used to limited success by the Stewarts in the next 100 years!

If only James II hadn't been so openly Catholic and such an adherent of the divine right of Kings! Would we have the parliamentary democracy and a constitutional monarchy we have today?

BTW - I am not attempting to justify the awful treatment of religious non conformity (both Catholic and Protestant) of the time. We spent a long time burning each other for worshiping the same god in a slightly different way!
 

Dave1987

On Moderation
Joined
20 Oct 2012
Messages
4,554
"....a very convenient tour was arranged...."
Have you any idea at all of the months of planning that these occasions take? H.M.'s diary is full for three years in advance.

Well considering it wasn't H.M. that went on that tour, and the whispers about New Zealand wanting to get rid of the British Monarch as head of state were starting well in advance of that tour its very very convenient how old Wills, Kate and George ended up on a tour right at the time the idea of ditching the British Monarchy was foremost in New Zealand people minds. No doubt Buck House and the Foreign office are rapidly trying to arrange something with Jamaica right now.

Good luck to Jamaica, and hopefully in 15-20 yrs time we will also come to our senses about the taxpayer paying for one family to live a life of luxury and be guarded round the clock!
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
28,152
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Mary was the heir apparent until James had a son. A Catholic son. It was a standard regal "smash and grab" raid by a pretender only this one worked!

But when that son was born, Mary was no longer the heir apparent, so you then had the situation of a female member of the English royal family who was no longer the heir to the throne then becoming a joint monarch with a member of royalty of another country, William, Prince of Orange, who had no legal claim whatsoever to the English throne in his own right but yet was decreed full joint monarchical powers with Mary, rather than acting as Prince Consort, as was the case when Queen Victoria married her cousin Albert, Prince Consort (Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha).
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,636
George I became King because he was the next Protestant in line to the throne. The idea of a Lutheran non-English speaker becoming King to prevent Catholics taking the throne sounds ludicrous now.
 

TheNewNo2

Member
Joined
31 Mar 2015
Messages
1,006
Location
Canary Wharf
Jamaica, as stated earlier, are entitled to do as they like. However I would point out that constitutional monarchies are the best form of democracy, precisely because the monarch has no democratic mandate.
 

aformeruser

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
30,636
Jamaica, as stated earlier, are entitled to do as they like. However I would point out that constitutional monarchies are the best form of democracy, precisely because the monarch has no democratic mandate.

Hopefully if they have a vote they have a viable alternative, unlike when Australia voted to keep the Queen, or when we voted to keep First Past The Post.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
25,565
Location
Fenny Stratford
But when that son was born, Mary was no longer the heir apparent, so you then had the situation of a female member of the English royal family who was no longer the heir to the throne then becoming a joint monarch with a member of royalty of another country, William, Prince of Orange, who had no legal claim whatsoever to the English throne in his own right but yet was decreed full joint monarchical powers with Mary, rather than acting as Prince Consort, as was the case when Queen Victoria married her cousin Albert, Prince Consort (Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha).

Usurpation is hardly an unknown act in the history of European royal families! The issue for James doesn't appear to have been his Catholicism, at least while his heirs were Protestant. Even a less public show of his faith (and that of his infant son) would have reduced his problems.

His main issue was his interpretation of the divine right of kings theory v Parliaments increasing desire to hold primacy in the country. The two were incompatible - you cant have a king who considers himself a subject to no earthly authority, deriving the right to rule directly from the will of God and an earthly authority who consider it their role to advise and manage the monarchy!

I am not sure appointing judges, overruling bishops, arresting the archbishop of Canterbury, arbitrarily overturning acts of parliament (the Test act for instance) and trying to pack parliament and the army with his supporters was the best way for James to make friends with an already difficult parliament! At least he didn't loose his head like Charles I!

it should also be noted that William was a relation of James (grandson of Charles I) and in the line of succession to the throne. Plus he was a jolly decent protestant who could be relied upon not to get to uppity or friendly with the French! They did introduce the Bill of Rights 1689 which places limits on the powers of the monarch and sets out the rights of Parliament.

Guess who won that one?
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
28,152
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
it should also be noted that William was a relation of James (grandson of Charles I) and in the line of succession to the throne.

I would be very grateful to you if you could tell me what numerical position Prince William of Orange actually was in the line of succession to the throne. We have already established that Mary was no longer heir to the throne.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
25,565
Location
Fenny Stratford
I would be very grateful to you if you could tell me what numerical position Prince William of Orange actually was in the line of succession to the throne. We have already established that Mary was no longer heir to the throne.

3rd, at least until James Francis Edward Stuart came along. After that he dropped down the league table. I will have to check exactly as he was a grandson of Charles I so will have had a claim regardless of marriage.

His mother was the eldest daughter of Charles I and the third child but the second to survive to adult hood (Charles first son died during birth) and to complicate matters Charles II ( her elder brother) had no legitimate children!
 
Last edited:

Busaholic

Established Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
10,531
Jamaica? No, she went of her own accord would develop a whole new meaning!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top