Barbados to Quit The Queen?
The world’s top monarchist asks them to think again with dire warning.
The Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, announced earlier this week that her one party Labour Parliament would seek to abolish the Monarchy of Barbados in favour of a republic. These words were spoken by the Governor General of the Kingdom of Barbados, who is the Queen‘s representative within the island nation, during the Throne Speech from the Barbadian Parliament on Tuesday 15 September . It has been speculated that the Labour government, that took all 30 seats in the island’s Parliament during the last election, will seek to impose this constitutional change without referendum, thus denying the people of Barbados a say in which style of government they prefer or want for their future. Of course there would not be an announcement of this magnitude without the offerings of Royal expert, commentator, and “Mr. Monarchy” himself, Thomas Mace-Archer-Mills, Founder of the British Monarchists Society.
In an open letter to the people of Barbados, which was carried this afternoon by media outlet Barbados Today, Mace-Archer-Mills offered his care and concern for the people of the tiny island nation, whilst outlining what could possibly befall the country should it favour a republic over its current monarchy. Political corruption, tyranny, and even the silencing of the people were dire warnings contained within his letter, and it looks like he may not be far off the mark with the direction the government of Barbados seems to be taking. Mace-Archer-Mills made an impassioned plea to the people to demand a referendum on their future and “to do the right thing”. He ended the letter by pulling at the emotions of Barbadian monarchists by writing, “We implore the people of Barbados to defend themselves, defend their nation, defend their constitution, and defend their future by defending their Queen, for her love is the nation’s love. We ask that the people demand the government to provide a supervised referendum, to which you can vote with your heart about this life changing decision, for Barbados will be ever changed. If the Queen of Barbados is allowed to be removed, and the Barbadian Crown is abolished, there will be no going back. We trust that our Barbadian brothers and sisters will do the right thing, and that is to support and defend their Queen and their Crown”.
Helping to put some direction to the understanding of the governments possible plan to outline the road to a republic, Political Scientist, Peter Wickham, rubbished the idea that a referendum would be given to the people, citing that it would be a “mistake” for the government to do so. Describing what he thought the government may do, not what they have stated they would do, Wickham went on to say, “My sense is that we will have to go the road of Trinidad and Tobago or Dominica – that’s a Commonwealth – where we have a president that is selected, either selected directly by the Prime Minister or alternatively elected by an electoral college within Parliament, which is what Trinidad and Tobago has done. That is the easiest route to go within the short space of time, and my sense is that we will do that as a first step and then later we start a conversation about the other mechanics of how it can go. But that is the direction we are likely to go.” He further stated, “The reality is that all the referenda in the Caribbean in recent times have failed . . . and the failure has to do with the fact that a referendum presents an opposition and an opportunity to oppose.”
Looking to shed reality on the points that Whickham shared, Mace-Archer-Mills asked, “Why is there a sudden rush to shove a republic down the throats of the people without sampling the mood and taste for a republic amongst the people. Something is not right with this process. It also begs the question, why wont the government allow people to directly elect a President or Prime Minister rather than having someone from within the party select one?” This is subverting the will of the people and not very democratic at all.” Mace-Archer-Mills continued by asserting that the government did not want to offer a referendum because they, “know they will lose the vote and it allows time for an opposition to be organised and grass roots efforts to support The Crown”.
Disgusted with the “political perversion” of The Crown and the poorly supported explanation offered by Political Scientist Peter Whickam, Mace-Archer-Mill went on to say, “This is exactly what one party politics sets the stage for – tyranny. To deny the people of their vote and and to steal their destiny, shameful. Will Barbados turn out to be the Zimbabwe of the Caribbean?” He later offered, “It seems somewhat ironic that the Queen has stated she will let the people decide their fate without interference, but the politicians are the very ones interfering and are set to deny the people that very right. This is why I always say that in constitutional monarchies such as the UK, Australia, Canada and even Barbados, true freedom wears a crown. It is The Crown, guaranteeing the rights of the people, not the politicians.”
As Barbados’ Head of State, and existing as a Kingdom, Queen Elizabeth II is the current monarch of the Kingdom of Barbados, and has been since the country gained independence from Britain in 1966. Constitutionally created as the monarch of Barbados, the islands constitution make provision for the Queen to act in her capacity as a Barbadian, but the constitution itself is easy to amend. Seeking to always defend, protect, and serve The Crown, Mace-Archer-Mills outlined a series of distressing issues facing the people of Barbados, specifically the governments intention to impose a republic, rather than let the people decide their fate as to whether or not to retain their Crown. We reached out to Mace-Archer-Mills for comment and explanation about what has befallen one of only 16 Realms within the Queen’s domain.
Citing a poll which was operated by Barbados Today, 25 March 2020, 64% of Barbadian people polled wished to retain the Queen as their Head of State, therefore keeping the monarchy in place. Mace-Archer-Mills stated, “The governments position to impose a republic on the people of Barbados, despite 64% of the people wanting to keep the Queen is absurd. Such actions by any government are in direct violation of what democracy is and stands for, and further proves the corrupt dealings of power hungry politicians.” Aggravated by the way the statement was delivered with the Throne Speech, Mace-Archer-Mills went on to grieve his frustration and annoyance with the Barbadian government in purposely antagonising supporters of The Crown, by making the Queen’s representative within the nation utter the words “become” and “republic”. In his frustration Mace-Archer-Mills stated, ” How disrespectful is it that the Queen’s own representative within her own Kingdom is forced to outline a direction which is clearly advising one of ones impending abolition. This was done on purpose and without remorse by the politicians who not only drafted the speech, but chose to include it without a clear consensus from the Queen’s own subjects. This action is treasonous and furthermore without majority support of the people. A referendum must be offered to the people of Barbados”.
Normally a referendum would be granted to people living within a democracy, however the question as to whether one will be granted or not to the people of Barbados has yet to be seen. Though an announcement has been made for the governments intention to turn the nation into a republic, little has been conveyed as to exactly how the government will achieve this. Such questions which have not been presented or answered, and has left many feeling anxious and confused by the Labour governments statement without substance. It remains to be seen which model of a republic the one party government will decide on. Infuriating Mace-Archer-Mills were the comments made by Barbados Political Scientist Peter Wickham who stated, “There is no need to [hold a referendum] and I don’t think it makes a lot of sense. We had a situation where since 1999 this [political party] indicated its desire to go in the direction of a republic. The Opposition has always supported it . . . . So, I think there is enough cohesion in that regard to go with it.”
Mace-Archer-Mills fought back pointing out that if the opposition agrees with it, then they are not really an opposition at all. This is all one party politics and trickery, one party seeking to usurp the power of The Crown and deny the Barbadian people as a collective a fair and meaningful vote to decide which direction is right for their nation. It is about self determination, but in order for it to be valid, it needs to be supported by the majority. Something as big as tearing up a constitution and abolishing their Crown should be for all the people to decided, not a small ruling political elite that obviously has an underlying agenda. We know that in republics there is nothing to stop overzealous politicians that want to make a name for themselves from seeking ultimate power at any cost, and these actions prove such.” Surprisingly, Wickham defended Mace-Archer-Mills’ position stating, “I think the critical thing now is that we have a leader who is anxious to distinguish herself in a fairly significant way, and as it stands now there are really not a lot of options out there to distinguish oneself. So, I think yes, we are going to become a republic. The question is what type of republic.” Wickham went on to illustrate that it may have been possible for Barbados to make the switch to a republic “a long time ago” but that there was not enough political support for it. Wickham further went on to assert that he believed that this was an opportunity that the Prime Minister would not let pass her by.
Providing which possible direction Barbados may go in deciding which style of republic they would impose on the population, Wickham explained, “My sense is that we will have to go the road of Trinidad and Tobago or Dominica – that’s a Commonwealth – where we have a president that is selected, either selected directly by the Prime Minister or alternatively elected by an electoral college within Parliament, which is what Trinidad and Tobago has done.That is the easiest route to go within the short space of time, and my sense is that we will do that as a first step and then later we start a conversation about the other mechanics of how it can go. But that is the direction we are likely to go.” Ever the defender of monarchy, Mace-Archer-Mills offered a bit of history and education as to the republican cause in the Caribbean, and explained that referendums on republicanism within Caribbean monarchies have failed greatly, “St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Grenada, and Antigua and Barbuda are some examples of republican referendums that have failed miserably, and there is more to these referendums than just a simple “yes” or “no” answer for the people to decide. There may have been very good reasons for these nations to ask the question of a republic to their people, but the other reasons for the answer they gave were more important to the greater public. Each monarchy within the Caribbean is uniquely its own. It does not belong to anyone but the people of that independent nation. It is who they are, it is their identity, a jewel amongst the coal that is the modern world of republics.”
The British Monarchists Society seeks to defend, protect, and support The Crown, through education, moderation and debate. Mace-Archer-Mills is the Founder and Director of the London based organisation and his open letter can be read in full on the link below:
Thomas Mace-Archer-Mills can be reached as Founder and Director | British Monarchists Society and Editor-in-Chief and Director | Crown & Country Magazine
223 Regent Street, 601 International House, Mayfair, London, W1B 2QD
@themrmonarchy – Twitter and Instagram
For PR and/or Media Queries:
001 (212) 777 6727 ext. 200