King Charles III wields one of the British monarchy's few remaining personal prerogatives through his power to appoint a new prime minister, a constitutional function that represents a distinctive aspect of Westminster governance rarely seen in other democracies. The monarch's role in this process stands apart from most other official duties, as it requires no ministerial advice and demands no prior consultation, granting the sovereign unusual discretionary authority in a system otherwise built on parliamentary supremacy. This appointment power will soon come into play as Keir Starmer prepares to resign as Labour Party leader and prime minister, triggering the formal machinery by which the King will invite his successor to form a government.
The exercise of this prerogative, however, operates within clear constitutional boundaries that effectively constrain the monarch's choices. While King Charles technically holds broad discretion on paper, practice dictates that he must appoint someone capable of commanding the confidence of the House of Commons, which in practical terms means the leader of whichever party holds an overall majority of seats. This convention transforms what appears to be unfettered royal power into a largely predetermined outcome, as the parliamentary arithmetic effectively determines who can govern. The King cannot simply appoint a favourite politician or personal ally; instead, he must respect the democratic will expressed through electoral results and parliamentary composition.
In navigating this responsibility, the monarch enjoys guidance from multiple quarters, though he remains under no obligation to seek such counsel. Constitutional convention permits King Charles to consult the outgoing prime minister, opposition leaders, senior members of the Privy Council, or indeed any advisors he deems appropriate, exercising judgment bounded by prudence and caution. This consultative network serves an important function, allowing the sovereign to gather intelligence about parliamentary arithmetic, party dynamics, and the viability of potential candidates before making his appointment. The process remains deliberately informal and flexible, allowing the monarch to adapt to unprecedented or complex situations where the conventional choice might be unclear.
The transition from Starmer to his successor will unfold according to time-honoured ritual that blends constitutional formality with ceremonial pageantry. Starmer must attend a personal audience with the King to formally tender his resignation, a face-to-face meeting that marks the end of one prime ministerial tenure. This encounter carries symbolic weight within the British system, as it represents the direct relationship between sovereign and first minister that underpins the entire governmental structure. Immediately following this audience, once Labour members have elected a new party leader, that individual will meet the King in person to receive the formal invitation to form a government, completing the appointment ceremony.
The appointment ritual itself involves a practice that has evolved significantly over recent decades, though its name remains unchanged. The term "kissing hands" refers to the formal ceremony of appointment, yet the physical act has become far more restrained than historical convention would suggest. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair recounted in his autobiography a humorous mishap during his 1997 appointment, when an official warned him that the ceremonial kiss involved merely brushing the monarch's hands with his lips. Blair's nervous energy and a piece of carpet conspired to transform this delicate gesture into something far more enthusiastic, prompting Queen Elizabeth II to remark on his apparent eagerness. More recently, David Cameron abandoned even the pretence of a kiss when appointed in 2010, simply taking the late Queen's hand without performing the traditional gesture.
The actual kissing of hands has effectively migrated to a different setting within the constitutional calendar. Rather than occurring during the initial appointment audience, the formal act now typically takes place later during a Privy Council meeting, where newly appointed Privy Counsellors and the incoming prime minister take their oaths of office as First Lord of the Treasury. This separation of the appointment from the formal hand-kissing reflects modern sensibilities while preserving the ceremonial language and traditions that bind the British constitution together. The Court Circular, the official daily record of royal engagements, will note that the new prime minister "kissed hands on appointment," maintaining the historical record even as the physical reality has become more subtle.
Conventional protocol surrounding the appointment ceremony also incorporates gendered elements of deference that persist within the formal machinery of state, though executed according to individual preference. An incoming male prime minister would traditionally bow before the monarch, while a female prime minister would curtsy, though these gestures remain optional and subject to personal choice. This aspect of the appointment ritual illustrates how the British system maintains ceremonial practices rooted in historical gender conventions, even as political reality has evolved considerably. The flexibility afforded to prime ministers in executing or omitting these gestures reflects a broader accommodation of modern democratic values within traditional monarchical frameworks.
Once appointed, the relationship between monarch and prime minister enters a new phase defined by regular private audiences that structure the relationship between executive and crown. Every Wednesday following Prime Minister's Questions in Parliament, the prime minister meets privately with the King to discuss matters of government business, a convention that has persisted across numerous administrations and remains one of the few truly confidential interactions within the Westminster system. These weekly audiences represent a crucial mechanism through which the sovereign can exercise his constitutional right to advise and warn his ministers, providing counsel on matters of governance while maintaining political neutrality on partisan questions.
The King's neutrality on political matters forms an essential principle underlying his constitutional role, yet this neutrality does not render the monarch powerless or irrelevant to governance. Rather, it defines the boundaries within which the sovereign operates, permitting advice and remonstration while forbidding partisan engagement or factional preference. This balance enables King Charles III to serve as an elder statesman figure to his prime ministers, offering perspective drawn from decades of knowledge about government and his unique vantage point as a non-partisan observer of political affairs. The weekly audience thus provides a safety valve through which the monarch can raise concerns about government policy or ministerial conduct without violating the principle of political neutrality.
Charles III will become the fourth prime minister to serve under his reign, following the unprecedented rapid succession of Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak, and Keir Starmer. The frequent turnover of prime ministers has tested the flexibility of royal protocols and the King's ability to manage relationships with political leaders who occupy office for brief periods. Each appointment occasion reinforces the continuity of the British state through the unchanging person of the monarch, who endures while governments come and go. This constitutional constancy has become increasingly important during periods of political instability, as the crown serves as a symbol of national permanence transcending the temporary occupants of Downing Street.
