6th February, 1649, after the execution of Charles I, the monarchy was officially abolished by parliament. It was written in the Journal of the House of Commons:
“Resolved, &c. That it hath been found by Experience, and this House doth declare, That the Office of a King in this Nation, and to have the Power thereof in any Single Person, is unnecessary, burdensome, and dangerous to the Liberty, Safety, and publick Interest of the People of this Nation; and therefore ought to be abolished: And that an Act be brought in, to that Purpose.”
Is this still true? Does experience show that the monarchy is unnecessary and burdensome? Does it limit our liberty? And is an act of abolishion still required?
By law, MPs are not allowed to discuss the monarchy on the floor of the House of Commons, so it is up to us.
In some other countries the public figures always swear allegiance to the people or the constitution. However members of parliament and other figures in Britain must swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen. This gives many MPs a moral dilemma, they have been elected by people who live in their constituency, is not there first allegiance to them?
In the swearing in ceremony, some MPs are forced to be dishonest and cross their fingers behind their back or speak in such a way that shows their disgust. Even worse, some Northern Irish elected MPs have been not allowed to enter the parliament because of this ceremony, their constituents are effectively disenfranchised.