Talk of Queen Elizabeth II’s abdication has been spiraling uncontrolled because the previous few months.
And whereas it has but to be confirmed what’s true and what isn’t, royal professional Marlene Koeing thinks the monarch isn’t one to simply surrender the throne.
During a chat with Express UK, Koeing claimed that ‘abdication’ is sort of like a ‘dirty word’ within the eyes of Her Majesty who may be very unlikely to step down.
“Go again to when Princess Elizabeth turned 21 years previous. She gave a speech, I’ll paraphrase it, she mentioned whether or not my life is lengthy or quick I will probably be there to serve you. Abdication is a unclean phrase for the British monarchy,” mentioned Koeing.
She went on to say that the abdication would additionally imply that Parliament must get entangled.
“Secondly, abdication takes an act of Parliament. Edward VIII couldn’t abdicate with out an act of Parliament, Parliament needed to go the act and he signed it and the Duke of York turned king as George VI,” she mentioned.
“It is not only like saying hey you possibly can have the throne as a result of there’s a complete course of that you need to undergo. That would possibly contain different issues as effectively but it surely definitely requires an act of Parliament,” she added.
While some have instructed that resulting from COVID-19, the Queen is anticipated to surrender her throne, Koeing thinks it has change into all of the extra purpose for her to not.
“There are different issues occurring within the United Kingdom. You have gotten lockdown once more, welcome to our world within the US. Do you actually assume Parliament goes to need to deal with any of this? It would take an act of Parliament,” she mentioned.
The solely method she sees it occurring is, “if the Queen becomes ill, the 1937 and 1953 regency acts come into play.”
“Prince Charles would then be the regent simply because the Prince of Wales was regent for George III and was often called the Prince Regent,” she added.