On borrowed time - the royals

Elegran, that’s right. Money and power. Without mentioning any president’s names, if you look them up, they all have money and power. Who will have the most say in who stands for election? Those with money or the rest of us?

Lisagran

Quite an interesting, balanced opinion piece in the Guardian by Jonathan Freedland

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/12/meghan-harry-monarchy-end-republicans-royals

Do you have a death wish ? ????

Quite an interesting, balanced opinion piece in the Guardian by Jonathan Freedland

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/12/meghan-harry-monarchy-end-republicans-royals

Elegran theoretically you’re right but isn’t there a bit of chicken and egg here? Whilst we allow the HofL to remain in its current form and allow peerages based on how much you donate to political parties or who your brother is , it means you have a certain sort of institution closed in reality to the vast majority of the population. If we moved to a different way of selecting members and a different composition then we would in theory attract a different type of representative The first things we could easily do is limit the term of office and reduce the numbers.

Charles has a wife. He remarried when his status changed from divorced to widowed. That is permitted both legally and in very religious circles. It has been said that marrying your mistress just creates a vacancy, but I have not seen any mention of Charles recruiting anyone to fill that vacancy.

Russia is a banana republic with no meaningful democracy.

Anniebach

Who is Charles mistress ?

Indeed Annie? I hadn’t heard he had one.

Elegran

The most difficult things to reform are the personal qualities of those in or near to positions of power, whether that power is political, financial, religious or royal. The perks of the job can be too tempting for some (cash for influential preference, contracts for friends, presidential pardons for dodgy supporters, trusted access to altar boys,increased opportunities to indulge a questionable or unsavoury lifestyle.)

If we could crack that, we could be sure of integrity and humanity in ALL public life. Then we could stucture the institutions as we wished, knowing that no-one would misuse their position in them.

Hallelujah to all that. You’ve got right to the heart of it all. Money and power. Well said ??

The royal family has changed tremendously during our lifetimes and continues to do so. I hope that modernisation will be maintained.

They bring in billions to the economy. I can't see a president doing that.

So....the royal family is basically a tourist attraction now? A jolly expensive one! Let us hope that the tourist money that it attracts exceeds the costs of keeping them in the manner to which they are accustomed.

All this curtseying lark is just nonsense.

Who is Charles mistress ?

I have huge respect for the Queen. She has done a magnificent job but the thought of Charles and his mistress lording over us in the future is unthinkable.
The world has changed, the RF is an anachronism and plans should be made to put these extremely rich and privileged people out to grass.

suziewoozie

Ashcombe

If it came to a choice between the current system and a republic, then I would find it difficult to make a decision. Currently, we have no leaders with integrity. Who would be President? There have been a few disastrous ones in recent times.

Please say which ones you mean who have been disastrous . Please bear in mind the issue here is replacing an inherited head of state ( not government) with an elected head of state . Examples which include French and American presidents do not count as they are also heads of government. Thank you. ?

Putin.

The most difficult things to reform are the personal qualities of those in or near to positions of power, whether that power is political, financial, religious or royal. The perks of the job can be too tempting for some (cash for influential preference, contracts for friends, presidential pardons for dodgy supporters, trusted access to altar boys,increased opportunities to indulge a questionable or unsavoury lifestyle.)

If we could crack that, we could be sure of integrity and humanity in ALL public life. Then we could stucture the institutions as we wished, knowing that no-one would misuse their position in them.

Good god you can all talk first thing in the morning! I hardly know my name till I’ve drunk a pot of coffee!

What does ‘slim down the monarchy’ mean ? No family member must have more than child ?

What uproar Meg and Harry caused because their cash flow was stopped. They have chosen to opt out but still want paid security and titles.

Anne has two children, four grandchildren, they are part of the royal family but live private lives.

I remain convinced they’re waiting for Liz to pop her clogs and then it’ll all change. Chaz has ideas to modernise the family set up. They’ll reduce in both size and interest. They’re a good tourist attraction and keep us entertained now and again but aren’t important in the grand scheme of things. Reforming HoL much more important- but then that’s what Cummings wants isn’t it. Then HoC decisions can’t be questioned.

We are not governed by the monarchy though are we?
Nor are they responsible for laws which we all abide by.

That of course is the government which we elect every five years.

I am all for a slimed down monarchy though and most people would probably be in agreement with which particular members should be culled, (two of whom have recently flounced!) but like NanKate I love the spectacle and pageantry of Royal occasions.

Speaking to people from other nationalities on holidays it always surprises me just how fascinated and envious so many people from all over the world are with our Royal family.

I also agree with a complete overhaul of the H of L.

I love all the traditions and pageantry of the Royal Family. Some of them do an excellent job ie the Queen, Princess Anne.

We often visit Windsor and it always has many tourists spending their money, visiting the castle and enjoying everything royal.

Whenever there is a royal occasion I put up the bunting, prepare some nice food (well M and S really) and join in the fun.

I appreciate others on this thread have a different view and that’s fine.

LLTQ ??

Spice101

Whitewavemark2

Elizabeth Windsor has done a sterling job throughout her long life.

But the whole institution is an anachronism, that underpins a type of class and privilege that should no longer exist in a modern country.

But a type of class and privilege does exist in many modern countries without that institution. Getting rid of the Royals will not change class or privilege.

No one thinks it would reduce class and privilege - it would simply mean that the institutions that determine our laws and govern us were run by people who were elected not there simply because of birth.
But who knows? Maybe becoming a fully functioning grown up democracy might even lead to a more equal society as we realised what nonsense we had put up with for so long.?

Alon = ???

We could think of an alternative but imo there are too many powerful forces that will prevent us going down that path at least for a goodly while. What I’d rather do is concentrate on HofL reform as Urm suggests. If that happened, then it might eventually pave the way to a deeper appreciation of what democracy really means. Imagine having checks on the power and lobby fodder of the HofC. It would be so good for democracy.

At the same time, we could work on reforming and slimming down the monarchy itself. Cutting some of its more ridiculous aspects - lots of ideas for this ?
Alon

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.

Urmstongran

Would he/she be voted in or just foisted upon us? I’d like a choice of non-political candidates to choose from to be our representative if we don’t have the monarchy. I’d also like an overhaul of the HoL.

You could look at how other countries do it. We wouldn’t have to reinvent the wheel. In this Utopia ( which will never happen) we would hardly be likely to replace one foisted upon us HoS with another though would we? Actually though, you are absolutely spot on re Hof L and no matter how anyone feels about the monarchy there is, imo, not one excuse on god’s earth for this sorry excuse of a second chamber. Johnson has finished it off re any vestige of credibility it retained - his brother , Claire Fox, Ian Botham. ???

Whitewavemark2

Elizabeth Windsor has done a sterling job throughout her long life.

But the whole institution is an anachronism, that underpins a type of class and privilege that should no longer exist in a modern country.

But a type of class and privilege does exist in many modern countries without that institution. Getting rid of the Royals will not change class or privilege.