As part of a UK Channel 4 series called ‘On Tour with The Queen’, presenter Kwame Kwei-Armah has been retracing the steps that The Queen took on her tour of the Commonwealth in 1953.
This clip, from the first programme in the series, shows how callers to Jamaica’s famous Breakfast Club radio talkshow with host Professor Trevor Munroe view Jamaica’s relationship with the Queen. The question provoked some surprising results! What do you think?
On Tour with The Queen finishes 31st August, 9pm, on Channel 4.
‘Commonwealth” is not a word I ever used, growing up in Colombo. There, in the late 1950s, it would have meant little more than New Zealand lamb and Anchor butter at the cold stores. Or perhaps a cricket almanac: a set of fixtures around the world with a common set of complicated rules understood only by the select few. Even “empire”, out of which the Commonwealth was invented, was not in my ordinary vocabulary. Rock’n'roll, more likely.
Kaye Whiteman, a writer and journalist and former Director of Information at the Commonwealth Secretariat says more needs to be done to prevent abuse of media freedoms in the Commonwealth.
Following on my ‘starter’ on July 30, let me go into greater detail on the matter of freedom of expression, one area in which the Commonwealth could engage to sharpen its somewhat bland image. I am aware that, for an organisation which is an association of states, and therefore of governments, this poses a number of problems, but we also have to be mindful that it is a ‘Commonwealth of peoples’.
The Commonwealth played an exceptional role in furthering the political emancipation of both Zimbabwe and South Africa in the last quarter of the 20th century, which highlighted its unique qualities and potential as an international agent of freedom. It was a role that led directly to the Harare Declaration of 1991 on democracy and human rights: the fine words on Southern Africa had to have a more universal application if the Commonwealth was to continue to be taken seriously.
Savage, a co-founder of the New Zealand Republican Movement has written the following contribution to the Commonwealth Conversation:
There is a belief perpetuated in Britain and other Commonwealth countries that the British Empire was of benefit to the world. The greed and racism are forgotten. The invasions, wars, political oppression and genocide are downplayed. The poverty and inequality it created are conveniently ignored.
The damage caused by Britain’s imperial project is not something many British people want to accept. The overall approach is a self-deluding calculation. Weighing up the positive and negative, the overall achievements were positive. The empire was a good thing.
This ongoing debate about the Empire’s historical merits is relevant to the commonwealth conversation. It reminds us of the attitudes and values the Commonwealth has been left to deal with. Self-delusion was an integral part of the imperial project. Institutional inequality and a commitment to democracy could only co-exist if elaborate self-delusions were maintained. Without the historical fictions and cultural myths, the contradictions inherent in the whole project would have been exposed. The fa?ade of civility and ‘progress’ would have crumbled.
The post is written by Carl Wright, Secretary-General, Commonwealth Local Government Forum.
The Commonwealth should take a more active role in supporting and promoting local government. As an organisation it should return to what it does best: fostering partnerships and positive links. It is on a local level that the future success of the Commonwealth will be seen.
Local government is often viewed as the poor relation to its glamorous national associates, but it is through us that thriving, safer communities are developed, and the Millennium Development Goals will be delivered. It is best placed to provide basic services such as water, sanitation and primary health care for its people. It is closest to them and knows their needs and concerns. It is where involvement and consultation can be focused and effective channels for the engagement of local people and other stakeholders in the wider work the Commonwealth does can be built.
Why then is this crucial element of modern democracy all too often ignored by heads of Government in important international discussions?
When I was asked to write this article, I rang up friends and family and did a quick vox pop: “What did it mean to you to grow up in the Commonwealth?” There were lots of silences. Then: “The Commonwealth? You mean Jamaica/Australia/Barbados/Kenya/India/Canada?” The question seemed bizarre to all of us. I dug further: “No, the Commonwealth. What does that mean to you?” The words flooded back: archaic, meaningless, colonialism, imperialism. And repeatedly: “What does it mean to me? Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.” I suspect it means very little to a lot of English people as well. . .
Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, former President of Zambia and Rt. Hon. Malcolm Fraser, former Prime Minster of Australia, said it was time that the Commonwealth engaged proactively with the new Zimbabwean government and welcomed her back into the Commonwealth family.
Fraser said that ‘if Zimbabwe was one of the Commonwealth’s greatest successes, it is also one of its greatest failures’. Kaunda said that the ‘road to recovery that we are now witnessing in Zimbabwe shows that she belongs to the Commonwealth’. Neither predicted that the country to which the Commonwealth gave birth in 1979 would end up leaving in 2003.
In interviews conducted by the Royal Commonwealth Society, Fraser and Kaunda said that the Commonwealth can achieve great things if only leaders would make better use of it and take it seriously as a forum to enact change.
It used to be that travelling through the Commonwealth was quick and easy.
In Canada in the 1960s the Commonwealth was shown on world maps and my passport was marked with ‘British Subject’ alongside ‘Canadian Citizen’.
When I visited the UK in 1971 there were three queues at the airport UK passports, Commonwealth passports and All Other passports.
That all came to an end in 1973 when the UK joined the then EEC, now EU.
Now when I travel to the UK, people from countries with no historical ties speed through quicker than Canadians and Australians who share the Queen as head of state! It’s an outrage.
Citizens of the EU can also stay and get jobs, while I cannot. I am luckier than some other Commonwealth visitors that I do not need a visa to visit the UK, while many others do. People today say ‘what is the point of even having a Commonwealth if it carries no privileges for ordinary people when travelling among its member countries?’ It is on this personal level that the Commonwealth is losing its relevance.
This article was written by James Alcock. Do you agree with his viewpoint? Should the Commonwealth ease mobility between its members?
RSS Feed
The full version of this article by Romesh Gunesekera appeared in 
Kaye Whiteman, a writer and journalist and former Director of Information at the Commonwealth Secretariat says more needs to be done to prevent abuse of media freedoms in the Commonwealth.
When I was asked to write this article, I rang up friends and family and did a quick vox pop: “What did it mean to you to grow up in the Commonwealth?” There were lots of silences. Then: “The Commonwealth? You mean Jamaica/Australia/Barbados/Kenya/India/Canada?” The question seemed bizarre to all of us. I dug further: “No, the Commonwealth. What does that mean to you?” The words flooded back: archaic, meaningless, colonialism, imperialism. And repeatedly: “What does it mean to me? Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.” I suspect it means very little to a lot of English people as well. . .
Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, former President of Zambia and Rt. Hon. Malcolm Fraser, former Prime Minster of Australia, said it was time that the Commonwealth engaged proactively with the new Zimbabwean government and welcomed her back into the Commonwealth family.
