The Queen was said not to be amused when republican curmudgeon Gordon Brown suggested changing the Act of Succession to allow Roman Catholics to become King or Queen. Had the reform taken hold, men would no longer have had precedence over women. Political correctness would rule the Kingdom.

Her Majesty must be breathing sighs of relief that a nice boy from Eton is now in Number 10, and his deputy is as far from that scourge of Royalty, John Prescott, as can be imagined.

Nick Clegg is a nice boy from Westminster School who can be relied upon to behave well on all social occasions. God is in His Heaven and all’s well at the Palace.

The gender question has never been relevant since women have occupied the Throne for 71% of the time that the United States of America has been in existence. Why discriminate against men even more?

Yesterday, Nick Clegg made it clear that Brown’s destructive agenda has been scrapped. His deputy, Mark Harper, the Conservative Minister for political and constitutional reform, told Parliament that “There are no current plans to amend the laws on succession.”

With Pope Benedict due to visit Britain in the autumn, an event soured by Labour’s incompetent handling of the occasion, relations with the Vatican will not be enhanced by the change of policy on succession. Let us hope the Pope has a sense of humour.

He is said to be rather right-wing in political terms. If he is wise, he will savour the mangling of the whole Gordon Brown/Labour agenda, and the return of two nice public schoolboys to the top of British politics.

The Crown Estates, now generating £226 million annually for the Treasury, could partly be used to fund the Monarchy and its annual expenditure.

The Estates were ceded to Parliament in 1760 by George III, in what must be one of the worst business deals in history.

Nominally, the Queen now pays 96.5% tax on the Estate, receiving just 3.5% of its income as a grudging Civil List award.

The Civil List is currently £7.9 million and has been frozen for 20 years. In real terms, the Palace now receives only 20% of the revenue granted in 1991. No wonder bits are beginning to fall from the roof of Buckingham Palace.

Thirteen years of a Labour government have deliberately worn down the Queen’s annual income, even during the years of a wildly booming economy. The spite of Gordon Brown against the Monarchy is fully revealed in his treatment of the Queen during his long years in office.

Sir Alan Reid, the Queen’s treasurer, is reported to have informed Government officials that the Monarch’s expenditure is now running at around £7 million more than the annual allowance, despite hefty savings over the years.

Conservative MP Edward Leigh, former Chairman of the Commons’ Public Accounts Committee, which scrutinises the Royal finances, said, “The Queen needs substantially more money to carry out her duties and responsibilities.”

In Tuesday’s Emergency Budget, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, once again froze the Civil List at £7.9 million for one year, driven by his own injunction that “everyone will suffer equally”.

He could hardly excuse the Queen. However, a rider was carefully added. The Civil List is to be scrapped and a new mode of funding the Monarchy to be introduced.

There is some speculation that the Palace could be funded directly out of the Royal Estates, now known as the Crown Estate, subject to review by the National Audit Office.

This leaves the way open for a dramatic increase in revenues for the Royal Family and the Palaces.

Not before time.

The Queen has acted promptly to head off a constitutional crisis following Gordon Brown’s inept attempt to win over a few Catholic votes in Scotland by threatening to butcher the 1701 Act of Settlement.

The Act of Settlement 1701

Buckingham Palace has indicated that the Queen will not even consider consenting to any carve up of the constitution until all Dominion Parliaments have agreed to it. That could take years, by which time Brown will just be an unpleasant memory in recent history.

Brown’s party politicking with the Monarchy reveals the depths of this man’s chicanery. Set to be comprehensively bundled out of office by the electorate, any device is now fair game to him. He is a dangerous, out-of-control head of government who could do even more damage to the country before he is sacked by the people.

Some months ago I called for him to be impeached. Today, Simon Heffer in the Telegraph makes the same demand.

The Queen can no longer cry, “Off with his head!”, but a constutional equivalent is available to her. Such is the state of the country’s finances, with even the Governor of the Bank of England making the short journey to the Palace to confer with her last week, it should not be difficult for Brown to be sacked, or for Parliament to be dissolved pending a swift General Election.

A republican constitution is the last thing the public wishes for. As historian Andrew Roberts puts it: “… the Act of Settlement is not the bigoted, irrelevant and obsolete law that Downing Street presents it as – it is one of the key pieces of legislation that has defined what Britain was and still is. … Britain is a Protestant country today largely because of the Act of Settlement. It secured the Hanoverian succession 13 years after the Glorious Revolution replaced the Catholic King James II with the Protestant William III (of Orange) and Mary II.” — Link to article.

Any politician who thinks that the Constitution can be made a political football should be dismissed from his post, no matter how lofty it is.

The Queen clears her diary
An inside source is saying that the Queen has cleared her diary of engagements for the holiday season at Balmoral in case Prime Minister Gordon Brown falls on his sword and resigns from office.

Such is his plight — poll ratings dropping like a brick, conspirators plotting against him from all sections of his party — that the Queen reportedly feels she should be prepared for any eventuality. It’s the convention that a Prime Minister resigns directly before the Queen at Buckingham Palace.

A courtier is quoted as saying, “The Queen is spending most of the summer at Balmoral but we aren’t putting any visits to far-flung tropical islands in her diary. If Brown comes a cropper, she must be able to get to Buckingham Palace sharpish.”

The source does not mention the PM’s annual pilgrimage to Balmoral when the Sovereign entertains her chief minister and spouse while being briefed on all the latest Westminster gossip.

According to various reports, on these occasions the Royal Family serve their guests and even clear away the dishes themselves after dinner. Cherie Blair was said to be speechless when this happened to her.

Perhaps that’s why the Queen does it.

Is Kate Middleton receiving free designer dresses?

A weekend newspaper report suggested that Kate Middleton was being gifted free or heavily-discounted outfits from the Brazilian couturier, Issa.

The haul included the astonishing coral pink number (pictured) that she wore to the Boodles Ball, on which we commented fulsomely here at Royal Anecdotes. The implication of the piece was that Kate may be using her Royal connections to obtain freebies.

However, the designer herself said that Kate is a “private client” and that was all there was to it.

I don’t know how these things work so can’t really make much sense of it. It may be that the designer “lent” her a dress or two for a big occasion because of her patronage in the past.

Kate’s signature “look” seems to come from this talented designer. But she must beware of any hint of free-loading. Once that hits the headlines, the public and press will never let go and every transaction she makes will be examined for the slightest discount or favouritism. The Duchess of York is a salutary example — and I won’t even mention the Blairs.

Judging by the style this Brazilian lady has given Kate, would I be amiss in suggesting she might be perfect to design her wedding dress?

But for Kate’s sake it should be paid for in full … plus a generous tip!

Are Royals infiltrating politics?

We know that some senior politicians, especially in the Labour Party, secretly covert the Crown. Their attitude is, “why should they get all the glory while we do all the work?”

But are the Royals hitting back — in the best traditions of Tudor skulduggery?

It seems the new Mayor of London, former Tory Minister, Boris Johnson, is a direct descendant of King George II and a distant cousin to the Queen. Having displaced Red Ken Livingstone in the May elections, Boris is perfectly placed to turn City Hall into a minor Royal Palace.

The revelation comes in that excellent BBC programme, Who Do You Think You Are?, which examines famous people’s family trees.

Amusingly, the show was held back during the election in case it dented Boris’s man-of-the-people image. As an Old Etonian with the poshest accent on record, that might have been water off a coot’s back.

And if you think that’s a one-off, think again. Conservative leader and the next Prime Minister after a general election, David Cameron, is a direct descendant of King William IV. The Royals are on the march.

Of course, the Labour Party could hit back by encouraging some of its young bloods to marry into Royalty.

Watch out Beatrice and Eugenie!

The Boris edition of Who Do You Think You Are? will be shown on BBC1 on August 20.