On borrowed time - the royals

I have an idea that this kind of conversation took place when Queen Victoria grew old, nobody could imagine how Bertie could be King but in the event he was found to be an excellent King during his short reign. I am afraid there will be no time for conversations as Charles is one heartbeat away from being King.

After the queen has died a public conversation should take place about our head of state. It’s ridiculous that in a 21st century democracy the people do not get to vote on who the head of state should be and also that we do not have a proper constitution. I read a suggestion that each country in the union should be able to vote for their own head of state and between the four they would be able to make sure that no prime minister can act unlawfully. The House of Lords is another institution that requires democratising and should be part of the conversation.

nadateturbe I could use you here! I am sure that you recognise the need to have a detailed new system prepared well before abandoning the old one, but some of the Republican enthusiasts on here do sound as though they just would line up everyone with Windsor blood against the wall and machine-gun them, then start the planning.

The heir is not ignoring the other one, he has stopped giving them money and the other one is out for revenge because he couldn’t have everything his way, a tantrum is best ignored

Grandma70s not bitterness just pointing out to royalists that maybe the RF are not as good or a proper functioning as its meant to be Head of State that people are led to believe in the fawning royal press coverage. We could get a lot better for less.

And we would have a properly written constitution that people can read about what our country stands for.

Agree with most of this. QE has been an exceptional Head of State, can't think of anyone who could succeed her, can't imagine anyone bowing, curtseying, and paying homage to King William.

The whole idea of kingship with Princes, Dukes, Earls, Knights, Dames etc. is positively medieval. We need to bring the system up-to-date.

But how? ?

Elegran how kind of you to explain reorganisation of your husbands filing system so well because as a retired civil servant I wouldn't know anything about that.

No one is suggesting doing anything rash.

*Here you go Grandma70s:

James Rogers, The Dictionary of Clichés (1985) has this:

Bow and Scrape. Behave obsequiously or with great deference. The term refers to the habit, in former times, of the excessively servile to bow while simultaneously scraping a foot backward. It had appeared in print by 1646, in Jeremiah Whitaker's Uzziah: "Have you not known some in a low condition, to bow and scrape"?

Bowing I understand, but what exactly is scraping?

I always find the anti-royal threads rather mean-spirited and sad. There often seems to be an unreasonable, and to me inexplicable, degree of bitterness in them.

Yes, I agree with some others. QE has done a good job. But I think we should finish with her.

IF there was an OK replacement waiting for her in the wings, I would think we should go on with a monarchy, in the way some other countries have them. Very minor positions. HUGELY reduced public funding.

However, I don't think Charles fits the bill. And although I used to feel William did, am beginning to think he also is not up to the job. Persistant rumours of ongoing affairs. Problems with his brother. I fear he is a chip off the Charles block.

So I think ultimately, end the monarch when the Queen dies.

Anniebach

the only royals carrying out public duties are the children of the monarch, Charles, Anne and Edward, the heir has one child William, yes the wives of Charles , Edward and William
also carry out public duties, 7 members who carry out public
duties . Which of these should go ?

Anne, Edward, and his wife.

Actually, William and Kate too - they are of working age and could be continuing in their careers while Charles gets ready to take over.

BTW - the heir has 2 children, he's just ignoring the other one.

trisher

If they are a tourist attraction well let's make them just that. Let's cut all their ties with government and power and let them parade around in coaches, open their castles to tourists and have a proper financial arrangement where they pay tax on all the cash they have. Actually I think if you did that you would find they would b*** off of their own accord.

True if they had to open up everything for tourists they would soon scarper haha true.

The queen could open Buckingham palace all year round like the popes residence after all it has over 700 bedrooms lots of room for one RF but the Queen outright refuses. The money earned could pay for the palace upkeep. Anyway why didn't the queen and Royals make sure of the palace upkeep instead of letting it get into disrepair they have been given money for this over the years.

The numbers signing the petition for ministers to debate monarchy is gaing steady yay ?

I wouldn't want a Republic, but------a change in the country's leadership would possibly put paid to the obvious division that we have in this country.
Because of where the palace is situated, obviously the revenue that comes in will be/ is allotted to that particular area which is visible by its high-rise hotels etc. and general commerce with the Royals being a great attraction from overseas.

Would all that stop if we were to do away with the RF, I wonder ? Would the same volume of visitors bother coming ? It wouldn't be for the weather that's for sure

Times have changed and in view of the departure of M&H and the backing that they have it leaves the argument of continuing with a Royal as Head of State in this country, debateable, sadly.

nadateturbe

nanna8

Is it a good reason to keep an anachronism just because we can’t think of an alternative ,though? We are in the 21 st century now and all that king and queen privileges stuff doesn’t cut it anymore. It’s rubbish.

Agreed Nanna8.

It is never a good idea to throw out any system before you have a better one to put in its place. At the moment I am engaged in reviewing and updating the filing system that my late husband used up until 10 years ago for all the household paperwork, archives and information, and which I have tried (not very succesfully) to follow. If I had just thrown all the contents of the cardboard files into the bin and started from scratch, I would have lost a lot. Every single thing has to be taken out, examined, assessed, changed or thrown out if it needs to be, updated, labelled and filed again in a different sequence. Whether I will still be able to find anything by the time it is all "improved" remains to be seen. it won't work perfectly for some time.

Babies and bathwater!

the only royals carrying out public duties are the children of the monarch, Charles, Anne and Edward, the heir has one child William, yes the wives of Charles , Edward and William
also carry out public duties, 7 members who carry out public
duties . Which of these should go ?

Here you can read see about the Royals and secrecy NellG And by the way I didn't accuse you of being a sun reader It was a statement about the way people in general pick up news about RF m.youtube.com/watch?v=pSQyDNN4BYg&t=162s

Ithink the present Queen has done a good job but she has been on the throne a long time and is conservative with a small c. It seems to me that the whole system is still stuck in the 1950's.
Change is needed. It should be drastically slimmed down with HRH's restricted to the direct heirs. The rest of the family should make their own way and not live in royal palaces with all the privileges and perks that these give.

A very interesting article, thank you.

Please, I promise to practise my curtesy.
My knees may creak very loudly though.

Callistemon

nanna8

Maybe stop the curtsying, bowing and scraping for a start. Never heard of such nonsense. Straight from the 16 th century.

I've met one or two of the Royal family and didn't bow, scrape or curtsey.

(Posted from my cell in the Tower of London).

Love it. Off with your head, out to the chopping block with you! ?

I agree with Blinko. I think we should keep the monarchy but in slimmed down and modernised form. Only the monarch and spouse and their children should be priviledged. All other members of their family should live as private citizens earning their own keep.
The monarchy, with it's history and continuity, is surely better than various elected heads of state who would probably be after the job purely for reasons of power and financial gain.
And, by the way, I think Charles will make an excellent king.
He is utterly committed to doing his best for this country and always has been.
Whoever said the monarch has to be entirely pure and faultless? They are just human beings like the rest of us and therefore not perfect.

If they are a tourist attraction well let's make them just that. Let's cut all their ties with government and power and let them parade around in coaches, open their castles to tourists and have a proper financial arrangement where they pay tax on all the cash they have. Actually I think if you did that you would find they would b*** off of their own accord.

NellG

This is where it loses credibility Grany, and all the logical things that came before it get lost too.

The monarchy is corrupt using public office for private gain, secretive, more secretive than MI5, unaccountable exempted themselves from freedom of information laws, above the law Andrew FBI?

If it's so secret, you can't possibly know. Sigh.

NellG
???

Grany If you say so, but calling me a Sun reader and failing to cite your evidence isn't going to win me or anyone else over. It's pretty much just spitting up wind.

nanna8

Maybe stop the curtsying, bowing and scraping for a start. Never heard of such nonsense. Straight from the 16 th century.

I've met one or two of the Royal family and didn't bow, scrape or curtsey.

(Posted from my cell in the Tower of London).