On borrowed time - the royals

Bridgeit

Ummm this is England/ Great Britain, each country to its its own, & if that means some folks actually like having & want to keep the RF so be it , feel free to leave if you don’t like it .

The RF do not make the UK. It is perfectly acceptable to be a republican supporting Brit.

The Netherlands is the same as us by the look of it - or similar anyway.

www.royal-house.nl/members-royal-house/king-willem-alexander/position-and-role-as-head-of-state

Thank you NellG it does look similar, doesn't it?

Denmark seems a little more ceremonial and token with it's monarchy.

www.thedanishparliament.dk/en/democracy/the-constitutional-act-of-denmark

Now I like that model.

“But it does concern me that we are prioritising experience of what the world was like 70 (60, 50....) years ago with knowledge of how it is now. Look how excited we all get when we learn that the Queen has used Zoom.”

I appreciate that we disagree on this one Alegrias (and nothing wrong in that) my whole point is that it IS current experience and not from some fixed point decades ago, set in aspic!

Look at all the statesmen/women she’s met this century alone - I don’t believe for a second that she’s dismissed them all out of hand as Johnny-come-latelys.

As for Zoom, I suspect that doesn’t figure on most folks essential criteria for Head of State otherwise we’d opt for Bill Gates or some such wouldn’t we?

Sweden again is ceremonial. I do wonder if William will go that route in all honesty. I'm not sure Charles will.

I am happy that we are having a grown up conversation Pantglas2

We couldn't have Bill Gates of course.....what about Tim Berners-Lee?

If you want us all living in some Whovian dystopia Alegrias ?

With all the laws Johnson is breaking giving Tory supporting friends millions for failed test and trace failed PPE ect And the police bill going through second reading. He did put this on page 46 2019 Tory manifesto

A president would have power to stop the government doing anything unlawful Remember when he tried to prorogue parliament and it found the queen should not have accepted his advice?

You see the queen can only do what the PM asks her What is the point of having a queen that can't defend stand up for the people for what's right.

The Queen is there to "“to be consulted, to advise and to warn” in the light of her long connection with the affairs of the country and her conversations with sucessive Prime Ministers and her excellent assessment of personalities. But the legal establishment is the arm with the power to issue a definitive verdict. The (Scottish) legal eagles were there with the cavalry to not only add their advice to the Queen's, but to use their own position as they are entitled to.

The lawmakers, the law interpreters and the law enforcers are three separate prongs in this country, who each have responsibility for one part of the rule of law. The Queen is above but outside those three prongs, carrying out the duties that belong to her. If she made a habit of interfering in any of the three branches, there would soon be outcry. Her remit to rule in person is limited to extreme emergencies, if there is absolutely no-one to take over from a dead or incapacitated Prime Minister and deputy.

The only point of the Queen is to wave, shake hands and to shore up the pretence that the monarch has any power. If she did overstep the mark she would soon be got rid of. This current monarch has toed the line with decorum, but the hereditary principle is no guarantee that the next one will be the same.

But this government is breaking the law in many ways And the courts haven't been able to do anything The Good Law Project tried with some success but government refused to reveal lots more secretive billions out to tender to friends of Tories.

A president would be able to stop this abuse of power

Republic want

When Britain becomes a republic we will at last make sure that our nation's democratic values go right to the top. We will change the political culture and our relationship with those in power. Ordinary citizens will be able to take part in the process of choosing our head of state and even put themselves forward for the job.
Becoming a republic will put a stop to the royals' routine abuses of public money and their daily interference in our country's politics. In a republic the Windsor family will be equal citizens too, with the same rights to take part in the political process as the rest of us, but no special access or privileged status.
A move to a republic will give us the chance to re-balance power between government, parliament and the people. By getting rid of the Crown we can put limits on what our government can do without the support of parliament - and put limits on what parliament can do without the clear support of the people.
A republic will give us an effective head of state, someone chosen by us to referee the political process and champion the interests of the British people.
A democratic Britain will also give a huge boost to 'brand Britain'. Our nation's image abroad will be of the modern, confident and forward looking country we really are. As VisitBritain says in their guide to promoting Britain, we can avoid the cliché-ridden imagery of the past and promote our heritage as a living part of a dynamic, positive and modern nation.

Utopia. Shangri-La.

The person elected to be President, with the power to over-ride what our elected representatives in Parliament decide, "chosen by us to referee the political process and champion the interests of the British people" will still need to be incorruptible and steadfastly non-partisan, with no bias toward his/her own popularity, power base, or chances of being re-elected.

They will need strong ethical views, but no political ones regarding which party is most likely to act in accordance with those views. They will need the memory of an elephant.

They will need to be recruited from those who have no ambition to take on the power that the position will give them, but nevertheless have the knowledge, experience and personality to carry it out without making enemies and the private fortune to rule out any temptation to follow policies which increase their own bank balance diectly or indirectly, or to accept favours from those they may have to discipline in the future.

Good luck finding a suitable candidate who is well-enough known to the public for them to vote for them, but isn't a show-biz celeb.

A president would be at the top of the pile of this abuse of power.

Mohammed Suharto, Marcos, Mobulu Sese Seko, Sani Abacha, Duvalier, Fujimori, Lazarenko, Alemn, Estrada, Putin,

Tip of the iceberg!

This will be an accountable HoS

Because an elected head of state's neutrality is prescribed by law, they can be genuinely independent of government, acting as an impartial referee of the political system and an extra check on the power of government.

The hereditary monarchy is not held to account. That's why they do/have interfered in politics.

Aside from these formal functions, a president represents their country on the world stage and takes a leading role at times of national celebration, uncertainty or tragedy. In carrying out these parts of the job, an elected head of state knows they will be held to account for their words and actions, providing a strong incentive to be unifying and inclusive.

I’m not going to quote your detailed post Elegran as it would be easy enough to go back to read.
I agree, but good luck with finding someone like that and getting enough people to vote and agree that the vote was fair if their candidate didn’t win.
Can someone more knowledgeable remind me who pays for all the election arrangements?

US. Just like we pay for the unelected HoS and her assorted hangers on.

I'd like to see a cost/benefit analysis.

Thanks. I thought it was us, and I feel like that every time we have an election.

Quis custodiet custodies ipsos? Who is watching the nightwatchmen?

If the president has power to over-ride the lawmakers, the law interpreters and the law enforcers, then who has power to over-ride the president if he/she over-steps his/her authority?

US, I hear someone say - but our will is applied via our elected representatives chosen in a general election, or by electing someone else to replace the erring president, or via a special referendum. all these are time-consuming and expensive blunt instruments. By the time they came into action, for example, a prorogation to avoid having open discussion on a controversial Bill would have happened unopposed, the Bill would have become law and a complete change in national trade would have taken place.

I’m sure there are those who would like the Trump family to be monarchs of the USA. ?

Whatever solution we arrive at, power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. There is no perfect answer, but the heads of state of many republics do not give much hope.

Is a wee jaunt to Greece appropriate just now?

www.townandcountrymag.com/society/tradition/a35886831/prince-charles-camilla-royal-tour-greece-2021/

Probably inappropriate, but it must be tempting to leave the country at the moment, with all the inlaw angst.

Not at all appropriate to go to Greece or any where abroad.