Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2013 September 24
| Humanities desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < September 23 | << Aug | September | Oct >> | September 25 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
September 24
[edit]When did British monarchs stop authoring the speech from the throne?
[edit]According to our article Proclamation of Rebellion, King George III authored (or at least authorized) the speech from the throne that he delivered to Parliament in 1775. Today, according to our article on the speech from the throne, the speech is authored by government ministers to state their policies, and the monarch simply reads the speech without exerting any influence on those policies. In what year was the last speech from the throne delivered that was initiated or authored by the British monarch rather than the British government in Parliament? Thanks in advance. Marco polo (talk) 20:26, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
- I thought that this would be easy to find the answer to, but I'm not having much success so far. George III was the last sovereign to be heavily involved in government, particularly that of Frederick North, Lord North. I dimly remember being told at school that George refused to read the Speech from the Throne that finally agreed to American independence, on the grounds that he had lost his false teeth. However, I can now find no reference to that story on the internet and I'm beginning to wonder if it was just a history teacher's tall tale. Alansplodge (talk) 13:00, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- I doubt that this can be assigned to a definite point in time, just as there is no definite point in time at which the monarch became obligated to accept the advice of the government concerning appointments and policies. That's one of the consequences of not having a written constitution. Looie496 (talk) 16:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- Changing that may not resolve the issue, Looie. For example, the Australian Constitution has been with us from the start, but it is devoid of any reference to matters such as: the Governor-General commissions the party or coalition that controls the lower house to form a government; the Governor-General acts on the advice of the Prime Minister; there are reserve powers available for use in extraordinary circumstances. During the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis the first two of these conventions were violated, and the third was invoked. To add to the mix, two state premiers also breached convention by appointing replacement federal senators who were not from the same party as the deceased/resigned senators. The lesson was: Anything's fair game as long as the letter of the constitution is upheld. Yet it is very clear that to rely solely on a written constitution for guidance in the affairs of the nation would leave many, many questions unanswered. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 19:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- Two things. (1) George III wasn't the last to be involved in government; see the material on Catholic Emancipation in George_IV_of_the_United_Kingdom#Reign. (2) This is a hard-and-fast thing [who writes a speech is nice and factual, although of course the knowledge could be lost], not an undefinable "when did the government first gain influence over the contents of the Speech". 2001:18E8:2:1020:960:1ACF:434A:32B3 (talk) 19:46, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- You're quite right; however I was thinking that there hasn't been an administration since that of North where government policy and the will of the sovereign were so closely aligned. I stand to be corrected on that though. Alansplodge (talk) 20:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
- Two things. (1) George III wasn't the last to be involved in government; see the material on Catholic Emancipation in George_IV_of_the_United_Kingdom#Reign. (2) This is a hard-and-fast thing [who writes a speech is nice and factual, although of course the knowledge could be lost], not an undefinable "when did the government first gain influence over the contents of the Speech". 2001:18E8:2:1020:960:1ACF:434A:32B3 (talk) 19:46, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
- Changing that may not resolve the issue, Looie. For example, the Australian Constitution has been with us from the start, but it is devoid of any reference to matters such as: the Governor-General commissions the party or coalition that controls the lower house to form a government; the Governor-General acts on the advice of the Prime Minister; there are reserve powers available for use in extraordinary circumstances. During the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis the first two of these conventions were violated, and the third was invoked. To add to the mix, two state premiers also breached convention by appointing replacement federal senators who were not from the same party as the deceased/resigned senators. The lesson was: Anything's fair game as long as the letter of the constitution is upheld. Yet it is very clear that to rely solely on a written constitution for guidance in the affairs of the nation would leave many, many questions unanswered. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 19:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)