Well, I am not certain but it seems she served as as symbolic sovereign rather than take the allotted role in governance.
Even though there was a constitutional monarchy, The king can be king and have a voice
Even though there was a constitutional monarchy, The king can be king and have a voice
No, they can't. You misunderstand how it works. The Monarch is not allowed to have a voice separate from their government. This is why "The Queen's Speech" given at each State Opening of Parliament is written by the Prime Minister (or rather by the Prime Minister's Staff) and the Queen merely delivers it). That is her allotted role in government.
The Reserve Powers of the Crown do exist, but are only used in very defined circumstances, which rarely arise. The Queen has used her reserve powers on a few occasions in appropriate situations, but she has always acted according to the Constitution.
She has the right as monarch, to be kept informed, to be consulted, to encourage, and to warn. This is why she has a weekly private meeting with her Prime Minister. At those private meetings, the Queen is allowed to tell her Prime Minister whether she agrees with him or does not, to present her ideas, and to warn against policies she disagrees with - but this is done entirely in private, and the Prime Minister does not have to listen - and it should never be done in public.
It would be interesting to know how much she did through back channels. Perhaps it wasn’t her style to be up front about things. None the less, I can see an argument for her doing things in the open, to make sure the perception you came away with, wasn’t the main take away from her years as Queen.
In retrospect she may fail on style points, referenced in this manner because that’s all it may wind up being when all is said and done, and the next leader’s style winds up being different.
Nothing has been canonized as for the King or Queen’s role, during her reign along these lines. At least, I’m not aware of it if it has been.
Perhaps the King to follow will be more outspoken. Ceremonial does have it’s advantages, not causing hostility. And I’m not sure butting heads would be all that productive. And if the King were to take strong public stands, that’s what it would ultimately lead to. And that could cause the King’s role to be diminished, him not being able to rule by edict, but to be subjected to an also ran position at the end of the day.
Perhaps the dignity of the court is thus strengthened by appearance, due to a non-confrontational stance. Admittedly it does cause the sovereign to be somewhat limited in power, but then that is by design is it not.