close
Advertisement
Can't connect right now! retry

add The News to homescreen

tap to bring up your browser menu and select 'Add to homescreen' to pin the The News web app

Got it!

add The News to homescreen

tap to bring up your browser menu and select 'Add to homescreen' to pin the The News web app

Got it!

Entertainment

Web Desk
November 22, 2020

Queen Elizabeth’s abdication: ‘It’s almost a dirty word in the British monarchy’

Entertainment

Web Desk
Sun, Nov 22, 2020

Talk of Queen Elizabeth II’s abdication has been spiraling out of control since the past few months.

And while it has yet to be confirmed what’s true and what isn’t, royal expert Marlene Koeing thinks the monarch isn’t one to easily give up the throne.

During a chat with Express UK, Koeing claimed that ‘abdication’ is almost like a ‘dirty word’ in the eyes of Her Majesty who is very unlikely to step down.

"Go back to when Princess Elizabeth turned 21 years old. She gave a speech, I will paraphrase it, she said whether my life is long or short I will be there to serve you. Abdication is a dirty word for the British monarchy,” said Koeing.

She went on to say that the abdication would also mean that Parliament would have to get involved.

"Secondly, abdication takes an act of Parliament. Edward VIII could not abdicate without an act of Parliament, Parliament had to pass the act and he signed it and the Duke of York became king as George VI,” she said.

"It is not just like saying hey you can have the throne because there is a whole process that you have to go through. That might involve other things as well but it certainly requires an act of Parliament,” she added.

While some have suggested that due to COVID-19, the Queen is expected to give up her throne, Koeing thinks it has become all the more reason for her not to.

"There are other things going on in the United Kingdom. You have got lockdown again, welcome to our world in the US. Do you really think Parliament is going to want to tackle any of this? It would take an act of Parliament,” she said.

The only way she sees it happening is, “if the Queen becomes ill, the 1937 and 1953 regency acts come into play.”

"Prince Charles would then be the regent just as the Prince of Wales was regent for George III and was known as the Prince Regent,” she added.