Monitor 92, published today, provides an analysis of constitutional events over the last four months. In this post, which replicates the issue’s lead article, Alan Renwick and Meg Russell argue that the government continues to make small strides in areas such as constitutional standards and electoral reform, where instead bold action to renew the health of democracy is badly needed.
Continue readingCategory Archives: Monarchy, church and state
The arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor: is this a crisis for the monarchy?
It was reported yesterday that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (formerly known as Prince Andrew) had been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. The arrest has provoked much comment and many questions, such as will he get special treatment, what constitutes misconduct of office, how long might a prosecution take, and will he be removed from the line of succession? Robert Hazell answers some of those questions below.
Continue readingStarmer’s constitutional timidity

Monitor 91, published today, provides an analysis of constitutional events over the last four months, a period in which the government has announced numerous electoral reforms, created a new standards body, introduced a bill to increase public accountability, and continued progress on legislation to enhance devolution in England. However, in this post, which replicates the lead article from today’s new issue of Monitor, Meg Russell and Alan Renwick argue that many of the reforms fail to go far enough. They say that the government could be seeking to lead, and to set the tone on constitutional standards, but changes instead feel timid and reluctant in the face of serious threats.
Continue readingPrince Andrew and the future of the monarchy
Last month, the royal family announced that Prince Andrew was to have his title and honours removed. Robert Hazell explains what has changed, how it was done, what might still happen, and what this could mean for the monarchy as a whole.
Continue readingPrince Harry, security and RAVEC: does the Court of Appeal ruling really ‘imprison other members of the royal family from choosing a different life’?
Being a member of the royal family has been described as similar to living life in a ‘gilded cage’. Prince Harry has also spoken of feeling ‘trapped’ by the institution. Francesca Jackson argues that senior members of the royal family have no choice but to serve the country because to refuse to do so would pose an existential threat to the institution of monarchy that it might not be able to survive.
Continue reading


