With reference to the debate on the Queen (British) retaining her
position as head of state of former colonies.
I can understand that particular countires want a Head of State that was
more representative of their own country and not a foriegn monarch. Two
questions I'd like to ask.
Would the sentiment of Australia, Canada or any other commenwealth
country be the same if there had been a tradition of direct involvemnt
by the monarchy in their country. For example, if members of the Royal
Family were entitled Prince of Australia and were sent to live and
represent those people (like the Prince of Wales to a certain extent),
would the view's of the Australian or any other commenwealth country be
more supportive or the monarchy retaining its head of state role???
(Silly question and probable different in each country)
The second question is that with the removal of the British Head of
State from a commonwealth country would that mean the end of links with
Britian. Should there be strong links with Britian anyway (this leads
onto the idea of a more robust and effectual Commonwealth). What are
peoples view on these types of question??
Regards
Matthew Weaver
P.S I'm a Brit but not particular monarchistic.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|