I give you Walter Bagehot

a British journalist (1826 - 1877).  Bagehot is the man who famously laid out the "rights" of the monarchy. 

He said these were three

          (1) the right to be consulted

          (2) the right to encourage (advise)

and    (3) the right to warn.

There is an article in this morning's newspaper which attributes none of those rights to a monarch. It is, naturally enough, written by a republican who claims that the monarchy wields no power and the UK, along with the rest of us, should simply be rid of it.

My response is that those three rights, if they exist, actually give the monarchy considerable power.

Let me explain. The late Leslie Zines, my Constitutional Law lecturer, was no lover of the monarchy but he did respect it. He also respected the present monarch and told me, more than once, that she is an astute constitutional lawyer. Over many years she has acquired, and been required to use, a great deal of constitutional law.

And yes, at present, it would seem that the UK is in a state of constitutional crisis. Their PM had the right to advise the Queen that parliament should be prorogued but it can be argued that he has done it for "political gain" - i.e. to stop the debate about Brexit. It is also being said he has done it simply because, after three years of getting nowhere (or almost nowhere), he wants to force MPs to make a decision - deal or no deal. If they don't want to do that then he has said they must go back to the people. Both those things have failed and MPs are asking for yet another extension of time. 

My response has been, what would happen if the EU says something like,  "No more time. You are out"? 

Johnson is correct when he says that the actions of the UK parliament have irrevocably weakened their bargaining position. It would have been better to go along with his wishes and see what could be done and then, if necessary, try negotiating for an extension later rather than sooner.

There seem to be mixed feelings about Brexit on both sides of the House and that isn't helping matters either.  Johnson has, in the words of TS Eliot given in to

         "the last temptation  (which) 

          is the greatest treason

          to do the right deed

          for the wrong reason".

That is yes, he should have prorogued parliament but done so with the words, "I am giving you all time to talk about this away from the house, to cool down, to know we have to make a decision. I want you back here on this date ready to tell me what you and your constituents want. Now get out there and do it." It wouldn't have been easy but it would have been better than the current mess. As it is his actions look like an act of avoidance. 

In all of that the Queen has no apparent power but a huge responsibility. We will never know her true feelings about what is going on but a lot is being asked of her. The monarchy does have a role to play in all this - and it is not an easy one.

(My own view? Brexit should never have been the subject of a referendum in the first place.)