UK: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council

[webfact]

Exclusive: Jeremy Corbyn snubs the Queen, saying he is too busy to be sworn in to the Privy Council
By Christopher Hope, and Gordon Rayner

Labour leader had been expected to be sworn in at the meeting, the first since he became Labour leader last month

LONDON: -- Jeremy Corbyn has snubbed the Queen by refusing to be sworn into the Privy Council on Thursday, as it emerged he could use a loophole to join the advisory body without ever meeting Her Majesty.

The Labour leader, a lifelong republican, is known to have reservations about kneeling in front of the Queen and kissing her hand as he swears an oath of allegiance to her, which is the normal process when a new Privy Councillor is sworn in.

And having refused to sing the National Anthem at a Battle of Britain 75th anniversary service last month, Mr Corbyn tried to dodge the issue by saying he could not attend tomorrow’s meeting due to unspecified “prior engagements”.

he Telegraph has learnt that Mr Corbyn could choose to avoid meeting the Queen altogether, using a mechanism called an Order in Council, by which the Privy Council, including the monarch, agrees to appoint a new member without them being present.

For that to happen Mr Corbyn, who has never met the Queen, would still have to confirm that he had taken the oath, but would avoid kneeling before the sovereign.

Full story: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11917496/Exclusive-Jeremy-Corbyn-snubs-the-Queen-saying-he-is-too-busy-to-be-sworn-in-to-the-Privy-Council.html

-- The Telegraph 2015-10-08

[Soutpeel]

Off with his head, what a dipshit

[ggold]

Does labour really think this fool is going to get them the government in 2020? This is the end of the labour party as a force in UK politics, following the demise of the Libdems. This leaves the conservatives and UKIP!

Anyone voting Tory next election?

[SheungWan]

The problem with the schoolboy explanation that he was too busy is that it invites the question as to whether he offered to discuss alternative dates. If he was a man of principle then he would have declared that he wasn't going to do it and therefore create a mini constitutional crisis. The interesting bit now is whether he does declare an oath in order to complete the process of being the Leader of the Opposition and also whether he does it prior to the Cenotaph events next month.

[OMGImInPattaya]

Hip...hip...hip...hip...hooray...way to go Jeremy...and for not singing for her saving either.

[Jonmarleesco]

;The Labour leader ... is known to have reservations about kneeling in front of the Queen and kissing her hand as he swears an oath of allegiance to her ...' As would I; and, no doubt, a few others.

[Always18]

The one redeeming feature about this pathetic excuse for a man is that he will be the final nail in the coffin of the "socialist" movement in the UK.

I can sincerely say "I wish you all the best in your work, Jeremy"...................

[Usernames]

There's not much that I see about this man to like. But I do like this. No Englishman being should ever be forced to kneel in obeisance before another.

[z42]

Good for him. I have no time for unearned elitism. His excuses are pretty pathetic but the fact he stands by his principles is good

[Always18]

There's not much that I see about this man to like. But I do like this. No Englishman being should ever be forced to kneel in obeisance before another.

No one is being "forced" to do anything of the sort.

This is a time-honoured and traditional way of a British subject showing that he respects the Sovereign's position as being that to which he swears to serve.

[tigermonkey]

Good for him. I have no time for unearned elitism. His excuses are pretty pathetic but the fact he stands by his principles is good

"Stands by his principles" ? What principles ? -- that he'd rather lie that he is "too busy",. than tell the truth and state his objections. Truly a man of honour, worthy of our respect. He is very close to winning the race to the bottom amongst English politicians.

Edited October 8, 2015 by tigermonkey

[SheungWan]

Now who can name the first MP who refused to be sworn in to the House of Commons on a bible?

[tigermonkey]

;The Labour leader ... is known to have reservations about kneeling in front of the Queen and kissing her hand as he swears an oath of allegiance to her ...' As would I; and, no doubt, a few others

The Queen is the Head of State of the United Kingdom. In that role, she is the symbol of the country itself, and not merely a privileged old lady. That is the way that it is, and it cannot be changed except by consensus of the people. Whether you like it or not, and obviously you don't, refusing to swear an oath of allegiance to your own country ( represented by the Head of State) is an act verging on treason.

You can change it if you like -- that is what parliament is for. Until then enjoy peeing on the Union Jack.

[tigermonkey]

Now who can name the first MP who refused to be sworn in to the House of Commons on a bible?

This is about swearing allegiance to your country, represented by its Head of State, not about the Bible.

[smudger1951]

How long is this guy going to last if he can't follow protocol and bow to our traditions ? The

jacket this jerk wears is two sizes too large. I can't wait to see what he wears to the cenotaph. Cameron may have done things with a pigs head but this man licks terrorists <deleted>. This is the real labour not new labour. God help us.!

[Soutpeel]

Good for him. I have no time for unearned elitism. His excuses are pretty pathetic but the fact he stands by his principles is good

Put bet he will have his nose up Putins a@ae brown nosing him

[Soutpeel]

How long is this guy going to last if he can't follow protocol and bow to our traditions ? The

jacket this jerk wears is two sizes too large. I can't wait to see what he wears to the cenotaph. Cameron may have done things with a pigs head but this man licks terrorists <deleted>. This is the real labour not new labour. God help us.!

Not very long one suspects

[emilymat]

We have to be careful with the way things are now being reported in the UK press. Indeed, most of us are scepics anyway.

The PM, in his speech yesterday referred to Corbyn saying it was a tragedy that Bin Ladin was killed. True in a way, but he failed to continue with the quote and say 'it was a tragedy he was killed and not brought to justice in front of a court.'

Also the PM referred to a letter from an 82 year old who said he was now voting Tory because of the stupidity of Labour who he had supported all his life. Sky news tracked him down and reported this morning that the guy had voted Tory since 1980' something.

Years ago Michael Foot was lambasted for wearing a 'donkey jacket' at the Cenotaph. An investigation later revealed it was a rather expensive top of the range short overcoat.

I cannot blame the young for finding his message attractive, as they can't remember the Kinnock/Militant Tendancy years in the 80/90's which cleared the way for Labour to win three elections from 1997. Idealistically it often seems better to be in permanent opposition than in government, providing you make no compromises on principle.

Labour is now in a mess and I voted for another of the candidates. I do not believe for one moment that Corbyn will be leader for more that 2/3 years tops. I have no problem with his pri nciples but a true leader has to show some flexibilty and compromise to reflect different opinions in his party.

Whatever party UK TVR posters support, I think we should be able to agree an effective opposition is a 'must have'. The way things are now developing, the Tory party must be thinking they are guaranteed power to at least 2025 with George running the show.

[OMGImInPattaya]

Good for him. I have no time for unearned elitism. His excuses are pretty pathetic but the fact he stands by his principles is good

I don't really have a dog in this fight but I admire the man for expressing his true feelings and not engaging in mindless ritual (if he doesn't believe in them). I suspect he is also an atheist and the Queen is the titular head of the Church of England so he would probably want to avoid swearing anything to her on that basis as well. At least he doesn't have to use money inscribed with the idiotic phrase "In God We Trust," so he should at least be happy with that.

[Chicog]

No doubt his Iranian friends will give him a big pat on the back for that.

[RickBradford]

If he doesn't want to do it for religious, political or personal reasons, fair enough. If he hates tradition that much, fair enough.

But at least be man enough to say it, rather than saying "I'm too busy".

That is a boorish, infantile and quite unnecessary snub. I think the man knows he's going to get removed in short order, so he's making maximum publicity while he can. History will not be kind to the sneering, cant-filled piece of nastiness that is Jeremy Corbyn.

[jesimps]

There's not much that I see about this man to like. But I do like this. No Englishman being should ever be forced to kneel in obeisance before another.

As the figurehead of the people of England he'd be kneeling before the people not an individual. Can't you people see past the politics of envy?

If he refused to do that here, he'd be carrying his head in a sling.

Once a commie always a commie.

Edited October 8, 2015 by jesimps

[metisdead]

A post bringing the Thai Monarchy into the debate has been removed:

1) You will not express disrespect of the King of Thailand or any one member of the Thai royal family, whether living or deceased, nor to criticize the monarchy as an institution.

By law, the Thai Royal Family are above politics. Speculation, comments and discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing HM The King or the Royal family.*

Discussion of the Lese Majeste law or Lese Majeste cases is permitted on the forum, providing no comment or speculation is made referencing the royal family.

To breach these rules may result in immediate ban.

Linking to external sites which break these rules will be treated as if you yourself posted them.

[SheungWan]

Now who can name the first MP who refused to be sworn in to the House of Commons on a bible?

This is about swearing allegiance to your country, represented by its Head of State, not about the Bible.

The similarity is that both required a swearing in, the first to assume the position of MP and the second to be a Privy Seal. Charles Bradlaugh was prepared to declare the issue a matter of principle and went through a number of re-elections before relenting and then successfully changing the law. Corbyn could have said that his allegiance did not require his attendance at the particular ceremony to demonstrate his allegiance to the country or he could have tried to negotiate a more secular ceremony or he could have just come out as a republican. He didn't. He has been evasive with the 'busy' excuse which doesn't fool anyone. It looks as if he does not have a team of advisors who aren't as nutty as him and who he can consult before he puts his foot in it as per the National Anthem mess only days ago.

[nontabury]

Good for him. I have no time for unearned elitism. His excuses are pretty pathetic but the fact he stands by his principles is good

Stands by his principles, you've got to be joking. For all his political life he has been against the EEC and then the EU , then when he is elected the leader of the Labour Party by the Union Leaders, he amazingly changes his stance.

[tigermonkey]

Now who can name the first MP who refused to be sworn in to the House of Commons on a bible?

This is about swearing allegiance to your country, represented by its Head of State, not about the Bible.

The similarity is that both required a swearing in, the first to assume the position of MP and the second to be a Privy Seal. Charles Bradlaugh was prepared to declare the issue a matter of principle and went through a number of re-elections before relenting and then successfully changing the law. Corbyn could have said that his allegiance did not require his attendance at the particular ceremony to demonstrate his allegiance to the country or he could have tried to negotiate a more secular ceremony or he could have just come out as a republican. He didn't. He has been evasive with the 'busy' excuse which doesn't fool anyone. It looks as if he does not have a team of advisors who aren't as nutty as him and who he can consult before he puts his foot in it as per the National Anthem mess only days ago.

I agree that both required a swearing in but he similarity sees to end there, The first involves swearing on a Bible which is a religious matter and not secular. The second is the swearing of your allegiance to your country, which is represented by the Head of State. This has only secular connotations. I have no idea how he could "negotiate a more secular ceremony". As I said before, this is right on the edge of treason, and declaring himself a "republican' as a reason for not participating would render him ineligible for the position. Taking the oath which is the law, and stating that he is doing so under protest, and declaring that he wants to change the law is the honest way to go. Isn't that what Bradlaugh did ?

[MaeJoMTB]

There's not much that I see about this man to like. But I do like this. No Englishman being should ever be forced to kneel in obeisance before another.

No one is being "forced" to do anything of the sort.

This is a time-honoured and traditional way of a British subject showing that he respects the Sovereign's position as being that to which he swears to serve.

What if he doesn't respect her or her pampered position?

How'd she get to be Queen then ...... I didn't vote for her!

This clip sums it up far better than I ever could.

Edited October 8, 2015 by MaeJoMTB

[phil2407]

Would love it if labour win next election - with him as leader - i believe HRM can say no - let's see then if he kneels and kisses her hand ???

[Alan poole]

Something Mr. Corbyn and other republicans (in the European sense) sould consider, including some of you represented here, Is that counterintuitively, the Monarchies of Europe defended democracy with everything they had during WW11. Whereas all of the republics became Fascist and Nazi dictatorships.

Factor in Russia and the USSR (CCCP) Who had recently shot their Royal family the Romanoffs and the case is made even stronger for the monarchies; Britain, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway, with Sweden turning both ways as did France.

So it's not a matter of opinion who is more democratic, the likes of Mr Corbyn or dear old Betty Windsor. It's a matter of historical record.

[jacko45k]

Good for him. I have no time for unearned elitism. His excuses are pretty pathetic but the fact he stands by his principles is good

Like he did wrt The EU! The man doesn't behave like a leader.