Printable version of thread

Posted by: vidcapper 24th October 2017, 06:38 AM

Does it still have a useful role to play in the 21st century?

For me, the alternative - having a politician as head of state, is a very unpleasant prospect!

Posted by: Chop-part-freak 24th October 2017, 11:59 AM

oh OK since no-one wants to bite...

I'm in favour of the monarchy as a tourist attraction as long as they are privatised and the State pays nothing except for the cost of hosting visiting dignitaries and Parliamentary duties.

they should have no actual or theoretical legislative powers, though I'm happy for the Queen to remain as symbolic Head Of State/Commonwealth, a bit like the flag, it's just there for people to point to as a reminder of the days the UK conquered much of the world and helped itself.

The House Of Lords should be abolished and replaced with a second chamber with actual powers elected every mid-term, which will focus the minds of parties in power somewhat if they can't get legislation through the Chamber designed to discuss hasty legislation in more detail (the power-grab of May would likely have been thrown out without needing private individuals to go to the Courts to prove it was illegal, which was breath-takingly and shockingly allowed by the elected representatives of the 2 main parties).

Posted by: Steve201 27th October 2017, 10:45 PM

The monarchy should be disbanded - its an out of date relic and the way many British papers fawn over it does my head in.

Posted by: Hissin🎇Sparkler 27th October 2017, 11:09 PM

It's really only the Daily Mail though from what I can see, although I suppose they are the ones who take it to a particularly extreme level.

Posted by: Suedehead2 27th October 2017, 11:20 PM

And the rest of the tabloids and the Telegraph. That's before we mention the BBC.

It was all that fawning that first turned me against the royals when I was about eleven. Since then my anti-monarchy views have strengthened and gained in coherence. The idea of a hereditary actuary (which would be me as my father is a retired actuary) or GP etc. is nonsensical. By the same logic a hereditary head of state is equally nonsensical.

Posted by: vidcapper 28th October 2017, 06:01 AM

Unfortunately, the only realistic alternative is to have an elected head of state - a decidedly unappealing prospect, especially given the American example...

Posted by: Chop-part-freak 28th October 2017, 08:16 AM

He has power, the Queen is just a figurehead for Parliament (though she has powers in theory in practice it would end the Monarchy if they were ever used). Any nation could elect a parrot and get the same service, though it wouldn't bring in as much tourist revenue for the spectacles of Royal Parrot weddings. Sqwaaaaaauk! I sqwaaauk do.

Posted by: vidcapper 28th October 2017, 09:20 AM

The last thing I'd want is for a British 'Donald Trump' to be head of state though!

Posted by: Suedehead2 28th October 2017, 09:26 AM

At least we would have a choice. If Jug-ears proves to be as bad as some people think, there's nothing we can do about it. We will just have to wait for him to die.

Posted by: vidcapper 28th October 2017, 09:47 AM

But as a mere figurehead, no monarch could do any real harm anyway.

Posted by: Hocus Pokus 28th October 2017, 10:12 AM

Would you want a pair of jug ears on a postage stamp though.

Posted by: vidcapper 28th October 2017, 10:30 AM

Fortunately the heads on stamps are in profile...

Posted by: Soy Adrián 28th October 2017, 10:58 AM

There are countries in the world other than the US who have an elected head of state. Consequently there's a myriad of options if we ever were to abolish the monarchy. Given the way that Parliament currently has a lot of power due to our head of state being mainly ceremonial, it would be an enormous task to write a British Constitution in a way which gave the powers you'd expect to a directly elected head of state and took them away from Parliament. I'd therefore imagine that if we ever do get rid of the monarchy, it would be replaced by something more similar to the German model, where the head of Parliament is the more powerful figure but the president has the power to veto laws if they are deemed unconstitutional.