The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: 2021

  • Sir John Major’s Statement Following the Death of F W de Klerk OMG DMS – 11 November 2021

    The statement issued by Sir John Major following the death of F W de Klerk on 11 November 2021.

    F W de Klerk was a man who realised that Apartheid was morally and politically wrong, and acted to bring it to an end. He freed political prisoners, including Nelson Mandela, ended racial segregation and faced down hostility in his own Party.

    He worked with Mr Mandela to fully dismantle Apartheid and return South Africa to democracy and the community of nations.

    He deserves to be remembered as a brave politician who helped change the future of his country for the better.

    London

    11 November, 2021

  • Sir John Major’s Interview on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme – 6 November 2021

    The transcript of the interview conducted by Nick Robinson on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme on 6 November 2021.

    Nick Robinson

    Good morning to you.

    Sir John Major

    Good morning, Nick.

    Nick Robinson

    Sir John, what do you say to those listening who may be a little weary of the story? They may say, look, a mistake was made, a mistake was acknowledged, a u-turn was executed. The MP in question has now quit the House of Commons. There is nothing left to say.

    Sir John Major

    I really wouldn’t agree with that. A mistake certainly was made and I think rather a bad mistake. The problem is that it isn’t a mistake on its own. There have been a whole series of missteps, so I think it’s necessary to address them now in order to put them right in the future, because if it continues in the way it is now it’ll be very damaging for Parliament, for the country and certainly for the Conservative Government.

    I have been a Conservative all my life Nick and if I’m concerned about how the government is behaving, I suspect lots of other people are as well. It seems to me as a lifelong Conservative that much of what they’re doing is very unconservative in its behaviour. There are many strands to this that go way beyond the Standards Committee imbroglio over the last few days. There’s a general whiff of ‘we are the masters now’ about their behaviour and I think this is cutting through to the public. It has to stop and it has to stop soon.

    Nick Robinson

    Now, let me put to you this specific point made by Lord Evans, now chairman of that committee on standards in public life, he said Britain could slip into being a corrupt country. Do you believe that’s a possibility?

    Sir John Major

    Well, it depends on your definition of corruptness. If you mean necessarily financially corrupt on a large scale, well I think we have a long way to go before we do that. Standards in public life generally, I think, and I don’t just mean in the political sphere but across the whole of public life, are as high I think, as anyone in Europe or elsewhere. But if you mean in terms of other aspects of behaviour, then I have a considerable amount of sympathy with what Lord Evans has said.

    What has been happening is damaging at home and to our reputation overseas and that matters. Our reputation overseas matters to us and it should. Let me take a few illustrations, I’ll start with the Standard Commissioner’s report. I think the way the government handled that was shameful and wrong and unworthy of this, or indeed any, Government. It also had the effect of trashing the reputation of Parliament. A number of Conservative MPs rebelled and very well done them, I wish more had had the courage to do so and I suspect they will in future because they were put in a dreadful position by the Prime Minister.

    But there’s a bigger point. Parliament cannot be the plaything of any Prime Minister or indeed any government. This government has done a number of things that concern me deeply. They have broken the law, I have in mind the illegal prorogation of Parliament over which I went to the Supreme Court. They have broken treaties, I have in mind the Northern Ireland protocol, they have broken their word on many occasions. The one that I find most odious was the cut to overseas aid, which was a statutory requirement and was cut long before Parliament gave permission for it. Whenever they run up against difficulties with anybody, whether it is the Supreme Court, the Electoral Commission, the BBC, they react not with an understanding, not trying to placate what has gone wrong, but actually in rather a hostile fashion. That’s why I say it is profoundly unconservative and something I dislike intensely.

    Nick Robinson

    I want to come to some of the examples you’ve raised. I want to put to you in a second the fact that many people think you are still fighting an old battle, the battle over Brexit in what you’ve said. But before we move to those things, let me ask you specifically about this week, something you said was shameful and wrong. Do you blame the Chief Whip, do you blame the leader of the House of Commons, Jacob Rees Mogg. And if not, who?

    Sir John Major

    I don’t think it’s my responsibility to apportion blame. My understanding of what happened is that the instruction came direct from the Prime Minister, that is certainly what I’m told by backbench Members of Parliament. Where the Chief Whip and the Leader of the House are certainly to blame is it is their responsibility to make sure the Prime Minister understands the mood of Parliament and plainly either they told him the mood was wrong and he brushed their concerns aside, which may have happened, or alternatively, they were not in touch with Parliament, in which case they’re certainly culpable. But I don’t know which of those options is the correct one.

    Nick Robinson

    We are hearing now that there is a possibility that Owen Paterson could be offered a peerage by Boris Johnson, No. 10 have neither confirmed nor denied it. How would you feel if he was?

    Sir John Major

    There have been some extraordinary elevations to the peerage in recent years, quite extraordinary, quite apart from the over large number of peers that have been put there. I think it would be rather extraordinary if that happens. I’m not at all sure it would be approved by the House of Lords, or by those who vet peerages.

    Nick Robinson

    Our political system, as you know too well as someone who had a rather small majority, gives enormous power to Prime Ministers who have a decent or a big majority. Can restoring trust in the way that you want, in the way the public seem to want as an extraordinary poll in the Daily Mail today, carried out by JL Partners where 57% of people agree with the statement ‘Britain is in danger of becoming a corrupt country’, can tackling that be entrusted to this Prime Minister?

    Sir John Major

    This is the Prime Minister we have and he will have to tackle it. It can start with the way he treats Parliament. I’m afraid the government with its over large majority do tend to treat Parliament with contempt and if that continues it will end badly. They bypass Parliament at will, the Speaker has expressed his frustration about that on many occasions and rightly so, but they also behave badly in other ways that are perhaps politically corrupt. They brief the press, or a part of it, well in advance of any announcements to the public. They then make announcements to the public and then at that late stage after briefing their friends in the press and the public, they then tell Parliament, which completely diminishes the role of the House of Commons. Parliament must react to that.

    Parliament must make sure that the Government’s behaviour is responsible, because they have the power to do so. The Parliament at present has given the Prime Minister a very large majority, but he would be very unwise to forget that he got his extraordinary majority of 80 seats with less than 30% of the people who are entitled to vote, 29.3 or 29.7, I think is the actual figure. If he wishes to bring even the electoral system into total disrepute he has to recognise that he does not have the majority opinion at his side that the majority of 80 in the House of Commons would seem to imply, he has nothing like that and he should tread very carefully.

    Nick Robinson

    People listening to this will be in no doubt about your passion, no doubt I think about your anger. But I think there will be some who think this is personal animus, you lost the argument on Brexit, Boris Johnson won the argument on Brexit. And there will be plenty of people who voted leave, saying please don’t lecture us about standards, the establishment, of which they would see you as a part, tried to overturn the votes in a democracy. They tried to overturn the result of that referendum. And, yes, Boris Johnson broke the law or broke treaties. He had to do it because there was a conspiracy to overturn a democratic result in a referendum and you don’t like it?

    Sir John Major

    He had to break the law? That is absolute nonsense. Never in the history of British politics has a Government had to break the law and tried to justify it in the way this Government has attempted to do. I am very well aware that the extreme Brexiteers will say well there is a bitter old Remoaner. That old mantra will be repeated. And let me say it’s partly true, I am old and I’m most certainly a Remainer. But I’m not bitter – what I am is disappointed and angry at the way the Government has behaved. I’m angry about the trashing of our reputation, I’m angry because I care about the upholding of general decency by the Government and international law.

    As for ‘Remoaners’, to use that sneer against half the country, half the country that voted against leaving Europe, is pretty arrogant. When you consider what is happening with Brexit, even more arrogant.

    Nick Robinson

    In today’s Daily Telegraph editorial, time is running out and the Government should not hold back from doing what is necessary. They are calling for, as you will well know, the use of what is in that jargon called Article 16, which means in reality suspending large parts of the Brexit agreement as part of the row between the UK Government and the EU. How would you feel if they did that?

    Sir John Major

    I think it would be colossally stupid to do that. To use Article 16 to suspend parts of the protocol will be absurd. This protocol is being denounced week after week by Lord Frost and the Prime Minister. Who negotiated the wretched protocol? Lord Frost and the Prime Minister. They negotiated it, they signed it, and they now wish to break it. If they do that, firstly, it will be seen as very bad faith, it will be seen as irresponsible, there will undoubtedly be severe consequences. It would add to destabilisation in Northern Ireland, it would seriously damage relationships across the whole of Ireland, North and South, and the UK. It would erode relationships between Europe and the UK, it would damage relationships between Washington and London, because Washington, the United States is very much behind the protocol.

    At the moment, we are negotiating over the protocol with all the subtlety of a brick. What is happening week after week is that Lord Frost goes into the negotiations, he gives away nothing, he takes something from the European Union. He goes away, blames them for the fact that nothing at all has happened. They are preparing, I think, to trigger Article 16 after the COP meeting has ended and I think if they do, they will come to regret it because this runs alongside other things in Northern Ireland, like the possibility of the destabilisation of the power sharing executive if the DUP withdraw from it. This is a very difficult and dangerous road to go down, it’s not just a question of trade difficulties. It could – we’ve seen what’s happened in Northern Ireland before – it could become much worse. They should be very, very careful about this. This is silly politics to placate a few extreme Brexiteers, and the price will be paid by businesses, people in Northern Ireland and the reputation of the United Kingdom.

    Nick Robinson

    I think they would say if they were here, if Lord Frost was here, it works – the French back down on fish, the EU back down on lots of controls that were being used in Northern Ireland after Brexit, we have to, they argue, throw our weight around in order to be taken seriously and for people to listen. John Major’s nice diplomacy doesn’t get you anywhere.

    Sir John Major

    Well, if they think that the way of negotiating is to be a bully, then I think they will come adrift in due course, and it may be on this occasion. It’s certainly true that the European Union obeys the normal laws of diplomacy and this country wouldn’t seem to recognise them at all at the present moment. But there will come a moment when it will stop. There’s come a moment in the House of Commons in the last week when many missteps by the government have suddenly exploded into a general anger. The same thing may happen over Northern Ireland if they proceed down the route they’re going.

    Nick Robinson

    Now you talk about general anger, there will again be some people listening who say well, it’s a bit rich for Sir John Major to talk about sleaze, wasn’t that the thing that drove him from office in many ways, a cash for questions scandal I mentioned, arms for Iraq, Jonathan Aitken, not to mention a host of ministers who were forced to resign during your period in office. Are you really qualified to talk about this?

    Sir John Major

    I think that’s a perfectly fair point for you to put. We did face so called sleaze in the 1990s, it was immensely damaging, it was embarrassing, it hurt the government, it hurt Parliament. It involved a relatively small number of people who misbehaved, the worst of which was cash for questions. There was no excuse for that. A small number of MPs were paid for asking parliamentary questions, it was a form of paid lobbying, and completely unacceptable. But here’s the difference. When that happened, I set up the Nolan Committee on Standards in Public Life to stop it, which has been a huge success. The striking difference is this, in the 1990s I set up a committee to tackle this sort of behaviour. Over the last few days we have seen today’s government trying to defend this sort of behaviour. Sleaze is unacceptable, was unacceptable when I was there, and I suffered a great deal of pain and anguish over it. It’s as unacceptable today, and it needs to be stopped.

    Nick Robinson

    You have described the Prime Minister’s behaviour, the behaviour of this Government, as unconservative. Now, our votes are a private matter but do you ever have nights, do you ever have moments when you look in the mirror and think I’m not sure I can vote for this man to remain as Prime Minister?

    Sir John Major

    Well, I wouldn’t be, I would be voting for my local Member of Parliament. So in fact, it’s not quite as simple as that. But it will be a dilemma for many people. I mean, the Government cushions itself with this majority of 80: the 80 was partly a vote for the Conservative Party, but I fear in significant part it was a vote against the fact that the Labour Party did not seem credible to form a government. That is why I think a little humility would be entirely appropriate to the government in the present situation in which they find themselves.

    Nick Robinson

    Sir John Major, thank you for joining us.

  • Sir John Major’s Statement Following the Death of General Colin Powell KCB – 18 October 2021

    The statement made by Sir John Major on 18 October 2021 following the announcement of the death of General Colin Powell KCB.

    Colin Powell was one of the finest men I ever met. And, perhaps, one of the finest Americans never to be President.

    Both in the military and in government he led with calm authority, and was an inspiration to all those who served alongside him.

    During the first Gulf War – as Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff – we could not have wished for a stronger ally, nor one who commanded such affection and respect from our own Armed Forces.

    Throughout his long and exceptional career, Colin served with honour and distinction. He was a true public servant, who I was proud to call a friend.

  • Sir John Major’s Statement Following the Murder of Sir David Amess MP – 15 October 2021

    The statement issued by Sir John Major KG CH on 15 October 2021.

    This is truly heartbreaking news of a good and decent man who – for over 30 years – was a dedicated public servant.

    My heart goes out to his family.

     

  • Sir John Major’s Statement on the Death of Pat Hume – 3 September 2021

    The statement made by Sir John Major on 3 September 2021 following the passing of Pat Hume.

    Pat Hume was a huge support to John throughout his political career and, most especially, his remarkable efforts in helping to secure peace in Northern Ireland.

    All my thoughts and warmest wishes go out to the Hume family during this time of such sadness.

    3 September 2021

  • Sir John Major’s Statement on Overseas Aid – 13 July 2021

    The statement issued by Sir John Major on 13 July 2021.

    The Government has blatantly broken its word, and should be ashamed of its decision.

    It seems that we can afford a “national yacht” that no-one either wants or needs, whilst cutting help to some of the most miserable and destitute people in the world.

    This is not a Conservatism that I recognise. It is the stamp of Little England, not Great Britain.

  • Sir John Major’s Comments on Overseas Aid – 4 June 2021

    The comments made by Sir John Major on 4 June 2021.

    I strongly support Britain maintaining her statutory promise to commit 0.7% of our GDP to overseas aid.

    Whilst I fully recognise our own budgeting difficulties, I do not believe it is morally defensible to ease our own financial burden at the expense of some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in the world, who have nothing – and nowhere else to turn for help.

    I made my own views on this clear to the Government, privately, some weeks ago and – even at this late hour – I hope they will honour their better instincts and let compassion prevail to aid those in dire need. Only then can we re-establish ourselves as a nation that keeps its word, and begin to repair our reputation as a global force for good.

  • Comments from Sir John Major’s Spokesperson on European Super League – 20 April 2021

    The comments made, on 20 April 2021, by the spokesperson for Sir John Major in relation to the plans for the European Super League.

    Sir John’s view is that it is an extremely bad idea, which he hopes does not come about.

  • Sir John Major’s Interview on the Andrew Marr Show – 11 April 2021

    The text of Sir John Major’s interview on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show on 11 April 2021.

    ANDREW MARR:

    1992 was famously the Queen’s annus horribilis. The failure of three of her children’s marriages, and then the fire at Windsor Castle. Now, the prime minister at the time, the man who had to help support the royal family and sort of difficult financial problems was my next guest, Sir John Major. He was later appointed special guardian to princes William and Harry, and from all of that, of course, he dealt with the late Duke of Edinburgh pretty regularly. Sir John, welcome. Fondest memory?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    There are so many, but perhaps for this moment I could give you an early memory. I had just been elected leader of the Conservative Party and I bumped into Prince Philip and he came up looking extremely mischievous and he said, “I see your party are electing outsiders now.” He knew what it was like to be an outsider.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Of course he did.

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    And he often came out with very cryptic remarks like that.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now, one thing that you shared, I know, is an enthusiasm for cricket, which involves sitting down for many, many hours and watching test matches, sometimes together. What kind of conversations were you having? I think it could be fairly intimidating to be sitting next to the Duke of Edinburgh for that long?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    It wasn’t intimidating at all, because we either talked about cricket or we watched the cricket. Nothing is more irritating in life than somebody sitting at your side babbling away when you’re trying to enjoy a cricket match. I felt that way and so did the Duke. But what did happen about cricket, frequently, when we met on occasions, he would sidle up to me with a grin on his face and say, “what’s the cricket score?” if there was a test match or an important game on. He was an off-break bowler, he had an interest in it. He’d been President of the MCC twice, I think, and he maintained that interest in cricket, as in other sports, throughout his life.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now, I mentioned the annus horribilis there of course. 1992. You had a lot of engagement with the royal family, lots to talk about, lots of difficulties happening, including over money, and I wonder to what extent, people talk about this being almost like a joint monarchy, he was very involved in its decisions. Did you get an impression that he was engaged from the palace side in taking decisions, in negotiating a way through?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    He wasn’t so indiscreet as to talk about it in quite that clarity, but I had not the slightest doubt from my discussions with the Queen and with him that he was very much involved with what was happening. It was of course an annus horribili, there was more than one of them. He had them and they rather coincided with mine. I had the odd difficulty at the same time, I recall, with a little help from my friends. And of course we discussed those issues and there was no doubt about the depth and concern of Prince Philip for what the monarchy was facing, and in particular, the Queen.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now, he was very involved, as you said, in understanding politics, took a close interest in politics. There was a famous moment, I think, in Ghana, when he was asked about the Ghanaian parliament, and he was told there were 200 Ghanaian MPs and he said something like – I’ve got it here – said, “quite right, that’s about the right number. We have 650 and most of them are a complete bloody waste of time.” Does that really reflect his view of parliament, do you think?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I’m not sure. You’d have to ask someone who knows him better than I do. But I rather agree with him about the number of MPs, I think there are too many and there are certainly far too many in the Lords. I think that is self-evident. But often those remarks that he made, those that were regarded as gruff and sometimes caused offence, I think they were remarks to put people at ease more than anything else. It wasn’t intended to be offensive. He was trying to put people who were nervous at meeting him at ease. If you’re meeting the Queen or Prince Philip for the first time, if you’re a normal person you’re nervous. His determination was to put people at ease and by saying something from left field, something that’s a bit anti-establishment, because parliament is the establishment of course, that does create a different perception in the mind and eyes of the people he’s meeting. It relaxes them, and I think that is what he’s about. He often suffered extremely bad headlines and stories as a result of that.

    ANDREW MARR:

    And offended people too presumably?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    Indeed, and I think that is what he was about.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now, apart from cricket and apart from some of the aspects of politics, what do you think really drove him in terms of his, as it were, broader political passions? What excited him?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I think he was excited by things that worked and things that had an element of compassion underneath them. I think that was the driving force for the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award. It really was a remarkable thing that he began, and of course it was aimed, not exclusively, it was aimed at all young people, but I think it was particularly aimed at young people who weren’t sure they could meet their potential. He wanted to show them that they could meet their potential, here were things that they could learn to do that perhaps they thought they couldn’t do. And if in doing that it gave them confidence, helped them mark out what their future might be, well so much the better. It was amazingly successful and his compassion for that was absolutely genuine. And of course it spread, I think, probably far further, far wider and for far longer than he possibly imagined. But it was indicative of what lay underneath the gruff, the occasional gruff manner. It was the real
    Philip, I think, who appeared when he pursued that.

    ANDREW MARR:

    There’s one phrase that everybody uses about him, they said he was great support to the Queen. But, I wonder, what could that actually mean?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    Consider the position the Queen is in, she is the head of state. That is a very lonely position in many ways. There are a limited number of people to whom she can really open her heart, to whom she can really speak with total frankness, to whom she can say things that would be reported by other people and thought to be indelicate. Of the handful of people to whom she can speak frankly, her husband Prince Philip was obviously the first one, and I am sure that happened. That is why, I think, the Queen said at a later stage that he was her great stay and support.

    At times of difficulty, he was the person who was there. He was the person to whom she could unburden herself. When you’re facing a sea of problems as she so often was, and sometimes when you’re overwhelmed by what has to be done, someone who understands that, someone who can take part of the burden, someone who can share the decision making, someone who can metaphorically, or in the case of Prince Philip, I think probably literally, put their arms around you and say, ‘it’s not as bad as you think. This is what we have to do, this is how we can do it. This is what I think.’ I think when you talk of him being a great support, that was it.

    If you saw them at receptions together the Queen would lead, Prince Philip would be behind her, but it would be Prince Philip who would often bring people up to meet the Queen who were too nervous to meet her. So in every way I think he was an astonishing support.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Which leads sort of inevitably to the question how will she manage without him?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    Well, it will be difficult. There are no doubt millions of people watching this programme who have lost a partner, a spouse and it is a very lonely time. The Queen and Prince Philip had 73 years of marriage together. That is extraordinary, I can think of no one else who’s had a marriage of that length, in my experience. So it will be an enormous hole in her life that suddenly Prince Philip isn’t there.

    How will the Queen manage? I think there are several things to say about that. Firstly, I hope she will be given some time and space. I know she is the monarch, I know she has responsibilities, but she has earned the right to have a period of privacy in which to grieve with her family. After that I think there are two things effectively to say. Firstly, Prince Philip may physically have gone, but he will be in the Queen’s mind as clearly as if she was sitting beside him. She will hear his voice, metaphorically, in her ear. She will know what he would say in certain circumstances, he will still be there in her memory.

    ANDREW MARR:

    His loud echo is there still.

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    The echo will be there and it always will be, it is with very close relationships. I think after that the Queen is both a stoic and a remarkable public servant. She will return to her work, but I do hope she’s given a little space and a little time and a little freedom to grieve in the way anybody else would wish to do so after having lost their spouse.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Let me ask you about him as a father and as a grandfather. You were special guardian for Harry and William during a very difficult time. Tell us a little bit about the support he offered them.

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I saw more of Prince Charles and the boys than I did of Prince Philip. But, of course, he spoke to me about it and he was deeply concerned to make sure that they were getting proper care, and they were. The first time I went to see Prince Charles in the capacity of guardian ad litem, the two boys were there, they were very young still. If you remember, it was a tragic time in 1997, so they were still quite young, but the affection between Prince Charles and the boys was evident. In terms of being a guardian, I had nothing to do with their emotional care, that was in very good hands with their family, and that included Prince Philip.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now of course there’s been a lot of trouble since then and there is now a funeral coming where the whole family will be together. Cardinal Vincent Nichols, the Roman Catholic cardinal, has said that “many a family gather and get over tension and broken relationships at the time of a funeral, something very profound unites them all again, and that will be true for this family, I am sure.” Do you agree with him?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I’m sure he’s right, I hope he’s right. I believe he is right and I certainly hope so. The friction that we are told has arisen is a friction better ended as speedily as possible. They share emotion, they share grief at the present time because of the death of their father, of their grandfather, and I think it’s an ideal opportunity. I hope very much that it is possible to mend any rifts that may exist.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now, he was a reformer of course, the Duke of Edinburgh, at the beginning of his time. Very active and challenging when he thought it was stuffy protocol in the way things were done now. Do you if somehow he could be back now as a young man again he’d be reforming the monarchy again? Is this an institution that has to keep changing to survive?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I think he was an evolving reformer. He didn’t want to tear things down and start again, he just wanted to ensure that it kept pace with modern times. If you consider not all your listeners will remember the monarchy as it was in the early 1950s, when Her Majesty became Queen, but it has moved an enormous amount, faster in the last 50 years than in any previous 150 at any stage. I think Prince Philip would have been one of the guiding forces behind that. But the Queen too of course. I remember when it was made evident in the time I was Prime Minister, that the Queen thought it was right for her to pay tax. So there is a constant consideration of reform, and I think the Duke, the Duke as a young man, were he still a young man, would be keen to see the monarchy evolve so that it retains its rationale, it retains its centrality, its importance to British life. It is extraordinarily important. You’re seeing it now with the number of people who had never met the Duke, who had never dreamed of meeting the Duke, but they are upset that the Duke has died.

    You have probably had the same experience that I have. People have phoned Norma and I from abroad to express their condolences to us because the Duke has died, because they know us and they don’t know the Duke. Now, that will have been multiplied right across the United Kingdom, and only I think damped down by the wretched effect of this virus at the present time.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now one thing which doesn’t unite us is that I wasn’t invited to Harry and Meghan’s wedding and you were. I wonder will you be attending the funeral?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I have absolutely no idea. I think funerals tend to be family occasions but I have absolutely no idea who will be attending at all.

    ANDREW MARR:

    We talked about change and reform. Because nature takes its course, inevitably takes its course, we are probably living through the final act of the great Elizabethan age, of this Elizabethan age. Have you any reflections on how the monarchy might have to change in the next period?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I think and hope they’re going to be quite a lot of curtain calls over the next few years. I think it is evolving, the central portion of the royal family has become more evident in the last few years. You can see that gradual change occurring.

    ANDREW MARR:

    So a smaller royal family at the core perhaps?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    A smaller core taking a higher profile and I think over the next few years, for a raft of reasons, not least the Queen’s venerable age, you will see Prince Charles and Prince William and other members of the family taking a greater role. The burden will be spread a little wider, a little deeper than it has been in the past, I think those changes will come. People often overlook how much the royal family has opened up in the last few decades. I think that is going to continue. I don’t think we’re going to become a bicycling royal family, if I can put it in that way, but I do think they are becoming more open, more evident, more aligned to what happens these days. Particularly as the wider members of their family make that difficult step away from the royal centrality and form lives of their own amongst the grandchildren. That will speed it up, I think.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Now you are no longer Prime Minister and therefore when the House of Commons resumes you will not be speaking for the nation as it were about this, but if you were, what would you be saying now to the country about the Duke of Edinburgh?

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    I would be expressing my admiration for the way he has behaved as Consort to the Queen for so long. I would recall a point I made earlier about him being her stay and strength. That is absolutely true and now that stay and strength is no longer there, but the people they have cared about for the last 70 years, the four nations of the United Kingdom, the 50 nations of the Commonwealth, the people within it, their family, they’re still all around. I think it might be a nice legacy for Prince Philip if we began to return to the Queen some of the support that she has given to the country, to the Commonwealth, to the family, to the nation during this difficult period of time. I think it is something we owe the Queen. I think it would be a good legacy for Prince Philip. I very much hope that that is what happens, I think it would be a wonderful tribute to him were it to do so.

    ANDREW MARR:

    Sir John Major, thanks very much for talking to us this morning.

  • Sir John Major’s Statement on the Death of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh – 9 April 2021

    The statement made by Sir John Major on 9 April 2021, following the death of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh.

    It is impossible to exaggerate the role that HRH The Duke of Edinburgh has played in his lifetime of service to the Monarchy and to the United Kingdom.

    A distinguished naval officer, he was – for over seventy years – the ballast to our Ship of State.

    Modest to the core, and hating any kind of fuss or bother, he epitomised the British spirit and remained true to himself right up to the very end.

    The outpouring of affection and sadness that will follow his loss would both surprise and embarrass him, but it will be real and heartfelt.

    Our hearts go out to HM The Queen – and all members of the Royal Family – who have lost a much beloved husband, father, grandfather and great-grandfather.