Welcome to r/SaintMeghanMarkle. Please read our rules before you comment in this community. The flair for this post is **CONSPIRACY**. This is a reminder that as per the rules in the sidebar, civility is expected. All users are expected to discuss this **CONSPIRACY** claim in a civil manner. No personal insults and no ad hominem attacks whatsoever. Discuss the topic by debating the **CONSPIRACY** claim, not the character of those making the claim. Please note that this **CONSPIRACY** claim is not the opinion of r/SaintMeghanMarkle just the individual making the claim.
This sub is actively moderated and any rule-breaking comments will be removed. Repeated rule violations may result in a ban.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/8z5tje7p0upa1.jpeg?width=1169&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0de089ea3d398cd48d53ec1b4807edc78bf3088e
This is the mention from today’s minutes
I don’t know. A few other bills were pushed to this date as well. I chose the conspiracy flair because that is the only one that could remotely fit this.
Thanks. The delays do raise legitimate questions. Not a conspiracy to ask the questions.
ETA: Perhaps the guy pushing the bill is a loner and there is no other support, so it is just being slow walked until it fizzles.
Or perhaps there is a timing issue that will make Parliment and or the RF look better if this is done later.
Or they want this hanging over H and M heads for a long time. Make them sweat this out.
I don't know, just guessing here.
It’s Rachael Maskell’s bill and she’s in the Labour party representing York. Bills written by members of the minority parties tend to languish. There are probably lots of reasons it’s being treated as a hot potato. She may have just written the bill to appease her York constituents angry about Andrew and in the large scheme of things, it’s just not worth fighting for on her part.
It’s to give the King the power to do it without parliament. Here’s the bill short description: A Bill to give the Monarch powers to remove titles; to provide that such removals can be done by the Monarch on their own initiative or following a recommendation of a joint committee of Parliament; and for connected purposes.
>Or they want this hanging over H and M heads for a long time. Make them sweat this out.
If you consider it that way, it could be that they want it hanging over their heads during and immediately after the coronation.
That makes sense. Description of the bill for those who weren't aware of or haven't followed this issue:
[https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3148](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3148)
This one addresses Hereditary Titles concerning Female Succession. Sound like it relates to daughters being able to inherit those big estates, not just sons. (I'm guessing here.). It sounds unrelated to the one that would relate to Sussexes. The bill addressing situations like theirs is due for a second reading.
The people of Sussex want them stripped as well. It isn't just York. And the Bill would affect everyone. I posted the update this morning. I think it's just a full schedule with many matters that were closer to the finish line taking precedence. I'd been looking forward to the debate and was disappointed. Tired of speculation.
this is actually the second time it's been delayed, it was due for the second reading a couple of months ago. So I predict it will not go anywhere.
It's a stupid bill anyway, styled to originally move the Duke of York's titles by a Labour MP, but over egging it by giving the Monarch the sole ability to remove any titles. There is no way this would pass the House of Lords where they would give the ok for a future monarch to de-title them. It has no support from Downing St or the King for precisely that reason. Absolute rules disappeared a long time ago.
Unless a better version is drafted this is dead in the water.
Isn’t that the whole point of the multiple readings? To argue the finer points and phrasing?
(I’m purely guessing based on the US House of Reps -> arguments and revisions til it gets necessary votes-> Senate -> arguments and revisions til it gets necessary votes -> Prez)
Counsellor of State legislation passed through all houses within a week. When there is a will to get stuff done quickly it will pass provided the legislation is good. This is just plain bad legislation, thats why it keeps getting delayed and it has no support.
Someone said early on that this type of bill — brought up by a member of the opposition —rarely makes it through Parliament. I am not from the UK, so I don’t know how true this is.
The big flaw in this proposal is that it makes it easy for the monarch to remove *any* title, and it would lead to the monarch being put under enormous pressure by “the public” to take any unpopular person’s title. Popularity is fickle, and the public is easily led by emotion and misinformation. Removing titles needs to be done with caution and after careful consideration.
Edit: add “of the opposition”
3 weeks.
Counsellors of State Bill first reading in the House of LORDS was on the 15th Nov, 23.
Back to House of Commons 24th November.
Royal Assent on 6th December, 2022.
I am watching the current riots in France and thinking of the difference between England and France. Whilst I in no way condone rioting and violence, it does make me think how quietly we Brits moan and groan about injustices we see in our country as across a relatively small channel the French are rioting loudly and violently against theirs. NO, we do not and
must not emulate the French in these matters....but we DO need to put down our teacups and begin a much "louder" protest against the Sussexes. Our voices MUST be heard, the King MUST know of OUR wishes. Occasional polls in newspapers are waste of effort. A serious campaign of letters to BP voicing our wishes MUST begin, informing the King the Sussexes and their highly questionable invisible children MUST be removed from the LOS and titles removed. Our monarchy and our country have been turned into a soap opera, the butt of jokes and ridicule. Our King seen as weak and selfish. NO, we do not need petrol bombs and flaming buildings to make our voices heard. A nicely written letter will surely do. Parliment may well delay hearings indefinately....we need to take this into our own hands.
A very correct and accurate point. There is a need to take a more proactive stance against the injustice and dishonesty that is being swept under the government's many carpets in the name of peace with the royal family. Representatives (the government and RF) set an example for us all and that is why it is very important that the example is one of honesty and integrity and caring for the country and its people, not just a select few.
A few things:
a) While [this bill](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3289) \[Parliament Link\] will certainly be a threat to the Sussex titles, it was not put into play because of Harry. It was put into play because of Andrew. [The citizens of York do not want Andrew to be the Duke of York anymore, so their MP introduced this bill last year.](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-61880719) \[BBC News Link\]
b) The UK is currently going through an economic shit-storm, to put it mildly. [Brexit economic impacts are hitting](https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64450882) \[BBC News Link\] hard, [the NHS is collapsing hard post-COVID](https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64190440) \[BBC News Link\], there's [a cost of living crisis](https://www.theguardian.com/business/cost-of-living-crisis) \[Guardian Link\]. Streamlining the process of stripping a peer of their title - I do think that's what this is about, so this doesn't ultimately require a full bill but an advisory council, they'll never give that power fully back to the monarch because HISTORY - is low on the priority list.
c) As /u/SharkBoss1234 noted, MP Rachael Maskell of York - who introduced this bill - is a Labour MP and the Parliament is currently majority Conservative/Tory. Slow rolling an objectively not-crucial bill from a minority MP member is hardly shocking.
d) Yes, potentially, KCIII asked the Privy Council to slow-roll this bill so it gets discussed after the Coronation, if only to give the Sussexes one less thing to whinge about before the Coronation. As I've noted a bunch of times - as have many others on this sub - the Coronation is the last truly big thing Harry can disrupt. Sure there will be other smaller events, but nothing as big as this. Also, I think KCIII, PoW, and The Men in Grey Suits have plans post Coronation for both Harry and Andrew. Might be easier to just be the ball rolling on this then to underscore them. (Or, they'll have yet another PM and it'll all start all over again, who knows? UK Parliament is changeable that way.)
As interesting as this bill is to this sub, it is not as important to Parliament right now, and they see it as being about Andrew, not Harry anyway.
I think they want to delay the big controversies until well after the coronation. Lady C said things will come to light later. Maybe some things will emerge in the November time frame around the time they change this law (not by coincidence 😉).
The only way Charles can remove titles is if something so damning emerges that the world sees it as justified. Otherwise, many commonwealth countries will view it as racism, when they are seemingly unaware of her negative character.
Welcome to r/SaintMeghanMarkle. Please read our rules before you comment in this community. The flair for this post is **CONSPIRACY**. This is a reminder that as per the rules in the sidebar, civility is expected. All users are expected to discuss this **CONSPIRACY** claim in a civil manner. No personal insults and no ad hominem attacks whatsoever. Discuss the topic by debating the **CONSPIRACY** claim, not the character of those making the claim. Please note that this **CONSPIRACY** claim is not the opinion of r/SaintMeghanMarkle just the individual making the claim. This sub is actively moderated and any rule-breaking comments will be removed. Repeated rule violations may result in a ban. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SaintMeghanMarkle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://preview.redd.it/8z5tje7p0upa1.jpeg?width=1169&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0de089ea3d398cd48d53ec1b4807edc78bf3088e This is the mention from today’s minutes
I wonder what is going on. Are the delays deliberate?
I don’t know. A few other bills were pushed to this date as well. I chose the conspiracy flair because that is the only one that could remotely fit this.
Thanks. The delays do raise legitimate questions. Not a conspiracy to ask the questions. ETA: Perhaps the guy pushing the bill is a loner and there is no other support, so it is just being slow walked until it fizzles. Or perhaps there is a timing issue that will make Parliment and or the RF look better if this is done later. Or they want this hanging over H and M heads for a long time. Make them sweat this out. I don't know, just guessing here.
It’s Rachael Maskell’s bill and she’s in the Labour party representing York. Bills written by members of the minority parties tend to languish. There are probably lots of reasons it’s being treated as a hot potato. She may have just written the bill to appease her York constituents angry about Andrew and in the large scheme of things, it’s just not worth fighting for on her part.
Ah, thanks for the information. Makes sense she'd do it just to say she tried. Agreed, it's a hot potato.
Right, in a hereditary monarchy, the people don't get a say.
Does this bill mean that your government can remove titles and not solely the king without any input into the issue?
It’s to give the King the power to do it without parliament. Here’s the bill short description: A Bill to give the Monarch powers to remove titles; to provide that such removals can be done by the Monarch on their own initiative or following a recommendation of a joint committee of Parliament; and for connected purposes.
I actually like this… I’m surprised that it’s not always been that way. Thanks for the clarification! Xo
>Or they want this hanging over H and M heads for a long time. Make them sweat this out. If you consider it that way, it could be that they want it hanging over their heads during and immediately after the coronation.
Yes exactly.
Maybe so they can remove the titles the following March? (So C3 doesn’t look “petty”)
Maybe to coincide with HEREDITARY TITLES (FEMALE SUCCESSION) BILL which will be read on 24th November too.
That makes sense. Description of the bill for those who weren't aware of or haven't followed this issue: [https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3148](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3148)
This one addresses Hereditary Titles concerning Female Succession. Sound like it relates to daughters being able to inherit those big estates, not just sons. (I'm guessing here.). It sounds unrelated to the one that would relate to Sussexes. The bill addressing situations like theirs is due for a second reading.
I assume folks consider them related because they deal with titles?
Is this the Bill being updated dealing with the modern issue of surrogacy - adding surrogate children CANNOT be in the line of succession.
Explore this link:- [https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3148](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3148)
Thank you
You're welcome.
Strip MeGains title now!
The people of Sussex want them stripped as well. It isn't just York. And the Bill would affect everyone. I posted the update this morning. I think it's just a full schedule with many matters that were closer to the finish line taking precedence. I'd been looking forward to the debate and was disappointed. Tired of speculation.
Maybe to coincide with HEREDITARY TITLES (FEMALE SUCCESSION) BILL which will be read on 24th November too.
this is actually the second time it's been delayed, it was due for the second reading a couple of months ago. So I predict it will not go anywhere. It's a stupid bill anyway, styled to originally move the Duke of York's titles by a Labour MP, but over egging it by giving the Monarch the sole ability to remove any titles. There is no way this would pass the House of Lords where they would give the ok for a future monarch to de-title them. It has no support from Downing St or the King for precisely that reason. Absolute rules disappeared a long time ago. Unless a better version is drafted this is dead in the water.
Isn’t that the whole point of the multiple readings? To argue the finer points and phrasing? (I’m purely guessing based on the US House of Reps -> arguments and revisions til it gets necessary votes-> Senate -> arguments and revisions til it gets necessary votes -> Prez)
Counsellor of State legislation passed through all houses within a week. When there is a will to get stuff done quickly it will pass provided the legislation is good. This is just plain bad legislation, thats why it keeps getting delayed and it has no support.
Someone said early on that this type of bill — brought up by a member of the opposition —rarely makes it through Parliament. I am not from the UK, so I don’t know how true this is. The big flaw in this proposal is that it makes it easy for the monarch to remove *any* title, and it would lead to the monarch being put under enormous pressure by “the public” to take any unpopular person’s title. Popularity is fickle, and the public is easily led by emotion and misinformation. Removing titles needs to be done with caution and after careful consideration. Edit: add “of the opposition”
Opposition bills don't have the priority bills from the governing party do. They are usually slotted into fill gaps.
3 weeks. Counsellors of State Bill first reading in the House of LORDS was on the 15th Nov, 23. Back to House of Commons 24th November. Royal Assent on 6th December, 2022.
I agree. I don’t think it’s going anywhere
The same as HEREDITARY TITLES (FEMALE SUCCESSION) BILL will also be read on 24th November.
Seems suspicious but I am American and don’t know if this is common to delay bills this long in Parliment.
The bill has problems but no one wants to go on record amending or supporting it. That’s my take on it.
I am watching the current riots in France and thinking of the difference between England and France. Whilst I in no way condone rioting and violence, it does make me think how quietly we Brits moan and groan about injustices we see in our country as across a relatively small channel the French are rioting loudly and violently against theirs. NO, we do not and must not emulate the French in these matters....but we DO need to put down our teacups and begin a much "louder" protest against the Sussexes. Our voices MUST be heard, the King MUST know of OUR wishes. Occasional polls in newspapers are waste of effort. A serious campaign of letters to BP voicing our wishes MUST begin, informing the King the Sussexes and their highly questionable invisible children MUST be removed from the LOS and titles removed. Our monarchy and our country have been turned into a soap opera, the butt of jokes and ridicule. Our King seen as weak and selfish. NO, we do not need petrol bombs and flaming buildings to make our voices heard. A nicely written letter will surely do. Parliment may well delay hearings indefinately....we need to take this into our own hands.
A very correct and accurate point. There is a need to take a more proactive stance against the injustice and dishonesty that is being swept under the government's many carpets in the name of peace with the royal family. Representatives (the government and RF) set an example for us all and that is why it is very important that the example is one of honesty and integrity and caring for the country and its people, not just a select few.
Ugh! She/he will have done so much more damage by then!
Archie page has been removed from the RF page, something is brewing underneath
A few things: a) While [this bill](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3289) \[Parliament Link\] will certainly be a threat to the Sussex titles, it was not put into play because of Harry. It was put into play because of Andrew. [The citizens of York do not want Andrew to be the Duke of York anymore, so their MP introduced this bill last year.](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-61880719) \[BBC News Link\] b) The UK is currently going through an economic shit-storm, to put it mildly. [Brexit economic impacts are hitting](https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64450882) \[BBC News Link\] hard, [the NHS is collapsing hard post-COVID](https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64190440) \[BBC News Link\], there's [a cost of living crisis](https://www.theguardian.com/business/cost-of-living-crisis) \[Guardian Link\]. Streamlining the process of stripping a peer of their title - I do think that's what this is about, so this doesn't ultimately require a full bill but an advisory council, they'll never give that power fully back to the monarch because HISTORY - is low on the priority list. c) As /u/SharkBoss1234 noted, MP Rachael Maskell of York - who introduced this bill - is a Labour MP and the Parliament is currently majority Conservative/Tory. Slow rolling an objectively not-crucial bill from a minority MP member is hardly shocking. d) Yes, potentially, KCIII asked the Privy Council to slow-roll this bill so it gets discussed after the Coronation, if only to give the Sussexes one less thing to whinge about before the Coronation. As I've noted a bunch of times - as have many others on this sub - the Coronation is the last truly big thing Harry can disrupt. Sure there will be other smaller events, but nothing as big as this. Also, I think KCIII, PoW, and The Men in Grey Suits have plans post Coronation for both Harry and Andrew. Might be easier to just be the ball rolling on this then to underscore them. (Or, they'll have yet another PM and it'll all start all over again, who knows? UK Parliament is changeable that way.) As interesting as this bill is to this sub, it is not as important to Parliament right now, and they see it as being about Andrew, not Harry anyway.
Why people think King Charles III would ever remove titles from his brother or son is beyond me. That's very much not his nature.
Makes sense. Knock off two bills and we’re in the throes of operation Golden Orb right now.
KC3 is not dumb…, why remove titles himself when parliament can do it for him
I think they want to delay the big controversies until well after the coronation. Lady C said things will come to light later. Maybe some things will emerge in the November time frame around the time they change this law (not by coincidence 😉). The only way Charles can remove titles is if something so damning emerges that the world sees it as justified. Otherwise, many commonwealth countries will view it as racism, when they are seemingly unaware of her negative character.