Editorial: Jubilee time to change

Times have certainly changed. When Queen Victoria celebrated her Golden Jubilee in 1887, Britain and her far-flung dominions enthusiastically marked the occasion with pomp and pride. Queen Elizabeth II reaches that same milestone this year amid mild indifference in this country and a major public relations campaign at home to boost the sense of celebration.

Frankly the present Queen deserves better. Set aside the domestic dysfunction that has blighted her family and her reign stands out as one of selfless service to the country over which she nominally rules and to the Commonwealth that she has proudly headed. She has set about her duties with diligence and over the past 50 years has been an astute observer of international affairs to the point where more than one national leader has appreciated her discreet opinions.

Unfortunately, she lives in a different age to that which bore her great-great-grandmother's name. She exerts far less direct influence. Her capital is still one of the great cities but no longer holds sway as it did when English imperial red was the dominant colour on maps of the world. While Victoria was not immune to criticism from the press, there was no doubt in 1887 about the durability of the monarchy as an institution in modern democratic society. There were no anti-monarchy street parties and certainly none with a guillotine as a centrepiece when Britain was still basking in the glory of the Industrial Revolution.

During the decade of criticism that her children visited upon her, Queen Elizabeth was seen by many to be resistant to change, reluctant to acknowledge that the monarchy needed not a makeover but a major rethink if it were to remain relevant and enjoy the support of the public. Compared with their counterparts in Europe, who were much more integrated into their societies, the British royal family were perceived as aloof and somewhat archaic.

Perhaps the jubilee year marks a turning point. There are signs that, in a landmark year that also saw the deaths of her mother and younger sister, the Queen is rethinking the relationship. Certainly Her Majesty is breaking out when it comes to entertainment: a rock concert in Buckingham Palace, a Beatles singalong led by the monarch, and a 50-strong motorbike parade led by a Hell's Angel called Snob. That is change, although it might be arguable whether it is for the better. It is, however, evidence the Queen recognises the benefit of being seen to be on the same level as subjects who no longer reach instinctively for their forelocks.

The Queen would earn even greater recognition of her willingness to change if she publicly lent her support to moves to repeal a provision of the 301-year-old Act of Settlement barring Catholics and other non-Protestants from succeeding to the throne. Given that the matter relates directly to her family, she should surely be permitted a comment which, to the purist, may appear a breach of her constitutional status. It would be symbolic but the symbolism would be powerful. So, too, would an amendment to the act to remove male precedence in succession to the throne, something that is already being considered by a committee for possible submission to Parliament. Such constitutional changes would give substance to the Queen's statement in a speech to both British Houses of Parliament to begin her jubilee year. She said Britain and the royal family must continue to evolve, adding: "Change has become a constant. The way we embrace it defines our future,"

As New Zealand celebrates the monarch's official birthday today - most of Australia does so next Monday - we can be satisfied that Queen Elizabeth will see out her reign enjoying widespread personal support. It will be all the wider if she can use her jubilee year to redefine her role and that of her family. In so doing she may not only define their future but preserve it.