The 19th century tone of the discussions surrounding the oath of allegiance in the UK parliament is entirely appropriate, as it is largely based on legislation from 1868 which specifically referred to Queen Victoria.
What all this has to do with the range of urgent priorities facing MPs as they attempt to represent their constituents, while returning to Westminster after the 2024 general election, is anyone’s guess.
They are all expected to read out a declaration stating: “I do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors according to law.”
The SDLP leader, Colum Eastwood, took exception to this in the House of Commons on Tuesday, saying that, while accepting the process was compulsory for MPs who wished to take their seats, he was participating under protest in what he described as an “empty formula”.
His party colleague, Claire Hanna, read the statement in both Irish and English, with both making it clear that they were really offering allegiance to their constituents rather than King Charles.
Sinn Féin members of course maintain an abstentionist policy at Westminster, and arguments can be put forward for and against this position, but what cannot be disputed is that they have a clear and renewed electoral mandate for their actions.
Individual MPs should be able to decide for themselves whether they declare their allegiance to King Charles or their constituents or dispense with any related form of words
It is also fair to conclude that the presence of an oath of loyalty to the British monarch, which tellingly is not required at Stormont, is unlikely to encourage the republican leadership to review its approach in the near future.
Other parties have previously displayed public dissent over the present regulations, with both Labour and Scottish Nationalist Party members openly crossing their fingers as they made the declaration and one Plaid Cymru representative reading an entirely unrelated statement in Welsh.
Perhaps the bluntest contribution came from the former Labour MP Dennis Skinner, who once declared: “I solemnly swear that I will bear true and faithful allegiance to the Queen when she pays her income tax”.
It should be acknowledged that many Conservative and unionist members still very much value the oath, and want to see it maintained.
This presents an obvious solution, allowing individual MPs to decide for themselves whether they declare their allegiance to King Charles or their constituents or dispense with any related form of words.
Sir Keir Starmer, presiding over an enormous Labour majority at Westminster, would be able to instigate such a reform immediately, even though it would go against his cautious nature.
It is still completely reasonable to propose that, when the next UK general election arrives, the mandatory oath of allegiance will be confined to the history books where it belongs.
