Queen Camilla takes the lead.

 

Her Majesty Queen Camilla takes the lead in this Monarchy, wearing Her Majesty the Queen's George IV Diadem.  Compared to some of Her Majesty's tiaras, this looks small.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-67344490

Here is the link to the BBC coverage of the royals in pictures.

YouTube has the full speech.  

The State Opening of the British Parliament is one of the few times the king wears the crown.  In most other monarchies, including all the European ones, the crown rests on a table and is not worn, because those monarchs are now crowned or announted but only sworn in.

 

Republicans lose lawsuit against king’s involvement in the legal system

The Headline in DutchNews.nl

The Dutch Republican movement tried to claim that the participation of the king in Judicial matters, including having His Majesty's picture in every courtroom and swearing in Judges prevented a fair trial.  

‘The fact that the king as head of state has certain powers, that special procedures apply and that there are traditions surrounding the King (such as the portrait of the King in courtrooms) does not mean that the right to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial court is violated,’ the court said in a statement, according to  DutchNews.nl

 

This has Australian implications, as our Monarch has a similar role that does not impinge on anyone's rights. I suspect than no Australian Courtroom now has a picture of the king, just a coat of arms.  It is not the person of the king that is being hagiographised (?) but the Crown at the pinnacle of our Political, Legal, Social, Strategic and Cultural Systems and all the ideals of good governance that it stands for.

 

The Voice is Dead: a Preamble instead.

Democratic Monarchists have always preferred the symbolic Constitutional recognition of Australia's First Nations within a Preamble.   It is better than the attempt at recognition as a consequence of the formation of  a new Executive Government Department to echo the collective desires of Aboriginal individuals, language-groups and localities as a single Voice that can be heard by the Parliament.  Our Parliaments already contain Aboriginal voices.

A Preamble would turn the Constitution into a Treaty of two parts. Part A recognises Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Sovereignty as having existed for over fifty thousand years and still exists where Native Title has not been extinguished.  It acknowledges custodialship of Country, and possibly a lot more.  Part Be is the British Law we call our Constitution.

Such a Preamble could be voted into Law in a Referendum at considerable cost, but might not need to be under Constitutional Law, because it does not change the Constitution.  It would be restoring something that should have been there when the Constitution was signed into Law by Her Imperial Majesty Queen Victoria, one of her last acts.  It could signed into Law by His Majesty King Charles III as one of his first acts.

After the Coronation, the Government should hold a Plebascite with the chance for a voluntary vote of confidence in our new king and queen.  If people don't want to vote yes, then they can just stay away, but there should be the option for people to voice their negative vote, and if there is only one choice on a ballot paper, it feels as if our Free Will is being denied us.

The Voice is dead in its present form, and a good thing too.  If it were to succeed, it would be done and dusted for Aboriginal issues and any trickle-down benefits would be slow in coming.  The losers will be the Federal Bureaucracy that would have grown by another Department and also had regulatory leverage into the State Executives via boundary-transcending investigative powers.  The Legal System would also have been involved in the inevitable challenges that must arise from such a fundamental innovation.