The monarchy in Britain has been central to our existence for centuries. However, as the world has gradually shrunk, the focus of real power has been ceded to parliament. The politicians have taken the position that market forces should effectively dictate policy and strategy, and that a monarchy has no effective role. What is left over is a constitutional monarchy where no real power belongs to the monarch who is only nominally head of state.
As we progress into the 21st century, the British Monarchy will be seen as a lesser reflection of Britishness and to some extent, this is already happening. The Queen has served her country well for what is the major part of her life and she has upheld a great dignity, but she will be aware of the future potential for problems. Her son, Charles is not well liked by the public, nor is he well liked by the media. This, in part, is due to his dual role of trying to be regal whilst actually having to do something with himself in the meanwhile. This dislike of him by the media and the public has created a rift between the monarchy and the people which is driven by the media. The Britishness I spoke of has changed beyond recognition as Britain has. There is no longer the same feeling about royalty that there was, for example, in WWII. Continued imigration has watered down the old hard core British sense of the value of monarchy and imigrants either do not understand the significance of the monarchy or do not care. What they want is a healthy benefits system to get a flying start and opportunities to progress themselves. Probably, the most damaging enemies of the monarchy are the politicians. It has been made abundantly clear that certain politicians feel that Prince Charles should stop his 'constant meddling' in politics. His idealistic opinions do not fit in with the market force politics of the 21st century yet the politicians cannot deal with him as if he were a serious politician and openly riducule him, because of his royalty. Charles may or may not understand this factor but his future is now in doubt as is the future of the monarchy.
Sooner or later, the Queen will regretably pass on the crown. There is already a groundswell of opinion against Charles succeeding her as monarch and both he and she will, no doubt, be aware of this. Whilst, generally, the focus has gone on to William, Charles' son, there is no wide consensus that he will be the next King. The British public tend to take the view, as they do on many issues, that they will wait until the matter arises and give it due consideration when it does. This problem is not going to go away and it is clearly not going to get better. Whether Charles realises or not, he is in for a rough ride. When the fateful day arrives, it will be manipulated by the media and the politicians who together make a formidable opponent.
Something very important has stopped the Queen from retiring and taking a well earned rest and we would do well to look at that and see what it tells us. She certainly deserves a rest, and the mechanism already exists for her to remain a much loved and respected mother of the monarch as her own mother did. She has chosen not to do that and she works into her 80's with the same effort as ever and it seems clear that she intends to 'die in the saddle' as it were. Had it been a family business, she would have no doubt passed on the significant areas of control years ago whilst she was still in a position to offer guidance should it ever be required. I think she would understand that Charles is unlikely to lean on her in that way and her stepping aside would only provide the opportunity to the politicians to deliver the blow. Effectively, if she did step aside, she is almost assured of being a 'commoner royal' within a couple of years.
There are three main aspects of Charles' accession which cause concern. His 'political aspirations', the fact that many believe him to be 'rather odd' and his damaged marriage to Princess Diana and subsequent remarriage to Camilla, a divorcee. There is little doubt that when the occasion arises, he will seize the crown as is his right. This is the moment that the machinery for the dissolution of the monarchy will commence. The Prime minister will, no doubt, take Charles to one side and remind him of the importance of supporting the wants of the people. It would be 'much better for Charles' to allow the air to be cleared by putting the matter to the public, particularly as he has such responsiblities toward them. Even if Charles were to say at that time that he would rescind his right in favour of William, the point will have already been made and the process of putting the decision before the people will start. Of course, it will be dealt with by opposing parties and opinions on the political side and given a straight vote it might go either way but what of the campaign and the other potential?
The other potential is that of republicanism. This would make the whole process a deal more interesting for the politicians and might even sway a few that were teetering. The Prime Minister at the time will no doubt see the potential of being the first (albeit temporary) President of Britain and the temptation may be too much even if they happened to be a royalist. Robust arguments will follow from both sides but in the end, the people make the decision and if the media and the politicians can make it look sufficiently exiting, there is no doubt about the outcome. When we look at the changes in the makeup of the British electorate over the last 50 years and the strong anti royal faction already in existence it might even seem a waste of time going through the process. Charles may just as well have given his notice in on the day his mother passes away.
All we have to do in this sad tale is to calculate a date. The Queen is healthy and reasonably robust and has lived a healthy lifestyle, unlike her sister who died early. Her mother lived to a ripe old age but it is difficult imagining our current queen still being there at 101. My calculations suggest that the succession issue will in 2017 (+- 5 years) but my personal feeling is that the issue will occur at the early stages of the envelope rather than the later. This puts the issue as early as 2012 and even that should have it's own envelope of say 2 years each way. I have therefore included this event in the region 2010 - 2014 and have it centered on 2012.