King Charles's coronation plans include Windsor concert

My opinion is that it should be starring current British talent like Ed Sheeran Harry Styles Coldplay Clean Bandit Adele etc as well as Tom Jones and Shirley Bassey. There are many who are not still with us but I am sure that technology could make a compilation of previous stars such as the Beatles in their prime. I would like it to reflect King Charles musical favourites.

Volver as you are undoubtedly aware Scotland was an independent country, with its own monarchy until 1603, therefore it was, I think, fairly obvious that I was not referring to Scotland when talking about his unification of various English kingdoms under Athelstan. Coronations have been held in Westminster Abbey for over one thousand years.

I would like to believe that any event surrounding the King's coronation will reflect his taste and wishes.

No-one else will be fully satisified whatever he chooses, of that we may all be certain.

Jaberwok

Volver as you are undoubtedly aware Scotland was an independent country, with its own monarchy until 1603, therefore it was, I think, fairly obvious that I was not referring to Scotland when talking about his unification of various English kingdoms under Athelstan. Coronations have been held in Westminster Abbey for over one thousand years.

Scotland had its own monarchy beyond 1603, the date when the King of Scotland took over the throne of England.

He will do it his way, just hope H and M don’t attend though.

Yes you're right there gJ! I'm afraid this king can't do right for doing wrong with lots of people. All he can do is do his best and hope for the best. I believe him to be a good, sensitive, kind compassionate person, certain preferable to an ex minister with an eye to the main chance, and counting the financial reward. Only my opinion of course.

He was still crowned in Westminster Abbey as were his successors.

His predeccecors

They came before him

His son Charles I was also crowned in Holyrood, because the Scots insisted on it, and Charles II was crowned in Scone.

James VI was crowned as a baby in Scotland before he was crowed in England.

No Scots King or Queen was crowned in England before James VI.

before he was crowed in England.

before he was crowned in England. 😜

I would like to see him contribute some of his vast fortune towards his coronation. After all he didn't have to pay death duty when the Queen died.

James V1th predecessors, Scottish kings, and Queen were not crowned in Westminster Abbey, his successors were.

Apologies Volver of course it was the present King’s father who started the DoE scheme and I mistakenly thought our new king would take this over but obvs not

👍🏼

I am really looking forward to the Coronation
I watched the Queens on our first TV
.I like Charles and I believe he will be a good King.
I only hope the 2 whingers don't go.
I would like to see Michael Buble.amongst the singer's
Rod Stewart. too,not Cliff Richard
Didn't the King just give £52 million to the country.or maybe £152 million not sure now
I have nothing against Camilla and he loves her, he is entitled to his happinesd. H& M will ruin the atmosphere if they turn up

I saw Rod Stewart perform not long back and he was fantastic. The difference was he was not suffering from Covid and was singing his own songs. I would quite like to see him redeem himself.
I've just spent a weekend listening to some old timers who can still perform beautifully. John Verity from Argent and Del Bonham from Stray have joined to become the Verity Bonham Band and they can give a performance which is just brilliant despite their age.

Just not Paul McCartney, please. So boring and smug.

Cossy Prince Edward does a great deal with the D of E awards I believe. When Prince Philip died it was said that he had wanted Prince Edward to take the title and become Duke of Edinburgh, but that seems to have quietly been shelved - perhaps temporarily.

For those of us who are struggling to pay household bills at the moment, I can't help but feel a three day celebration is rubbing out nose in it. Who's paying for it, less than a year after his mum's Jubilee. The country, in fact all countries of the world, are on the verge of a total, global, banking system crash and we're expected to celebrate.

I think it's a shame we're not celebrating the coronation of William and Catherine. There would be so much more interest and joy than with this tedious elderly pair.

It would have more meaning were it done quietly and at minimal cost. Anything to save us from that simpering pillock Nicholas Witchell.

It is hard enough funding the salaries of ex-prime ministers.

Perhaps Charles and Camilla should dress up in smart clothes (nothing new - they both have lots of smart clothes) and go along to Westminster Abbey alone, to meet the Archbishop of Canterbury, and perhaps a couple of other witnesses or whatever is required by law.

If they need two witnesses William and Kate might do the witnessing, then they should go through the required rigmarole, crowning etc, and have the whole ceremony televised by the BBC for worldwide distribution (at a cost) to other broadcasters and we might even make a profit!

Why not choose our own Head of State

The Royal Family costs the UK £345 million. Money that could be better spent.

What do we get back, nothing. I’ll explain.

1 The Royal family do only a few engagements a year mainly near where they live so minimal time spent travelling then back to their days of leisure, they spend public money day in day out on their own interests and pastimes using helicopters which are very polluting to the environment.

2 The Royals do not do much if anything for charities. An Independent Report was published by Giving Evidence looking at whether or not charities benefit from royal patronage and it was evident that charities shouldn’t bother seeking it thinking they will help much.

3 Royals have little affect on tourism, the Palace of Versailles has many more tourists, they have no royals, much better to open up the palaces to the public they could see the art that’s hidden and this would become a world heritage site bringing in money and tourism.

4 The royals have 20 grand homes castles and palaces for their own use all at tax payers expense.

5 Charles vets legislation to benefit his own private interests. In public office for private gain.

6 A president or Head of State has checks and balances in place if a PM broke any of the laws of our constitution they would step in. Our king cannot do that he can only do what the PM asks. What is the point of a king who cannot step in to stop a rogue PM.

7 Royals are secretive above the law unaccountable and have exempted themselves from the freedom of information act. What have they got to hide.

8 Both king and heir get over £22 million! each from the two Duchies nice job if you can get it. This money should go to the treasury.

9 But no one can be Head of State it is given from birth to one family, the power and privilege it’s undeserved. It’s not right it’s not democracy.

A British Head of State a president we choose would be a parliamentary Head of State similar to Ireland Michael D Higgins a well respected man and accountable to the people. Ireland’s President costs £4 million.

Charles wants a pointless coronation at a cost £100 million in cost of living crisis. He has not paid any inheritance tax why? The public have to pay inheritance tax at 40%

Would you sign a petition to have a referendum on the monarchy?
actionstorm.org/petitions/notmyking?ref=572639

For more information
www.republic.org.uk/

You make a very good case for a republic Grany

But how do we safeguard ourselves and our country from the dire prospect of a President Boris Johnson???

Can I answer that one? I’m sure Grany will come along later and give her view.

In the highly unlikely event that Johnson would want to stand for a role that would have no political power, and a majority of the population want him to be President, why would we have to safeguard ourselves against that? What would be so dire that we had better stick with the medieval model instead?

So Johnson gets elected President. He turns up at official events and gets to shake hands with powerful people. He gets to feel important. He visits Heads of State in other countries. How would we notice the difference from what he does now? He has to abide by an (as yet unwritten) constitution that says his power is mostly in making sure that the constitution is followed. The real power in the country stays with the PM and Parliament – as it has been for decades, maybe centuries.

And if we think President Johnson isn’t very good at the job, we don’t vote for him next time. Whereas right now, if we don’t think the Head of State is very good at the job, tough luck, we’re stuck with him till his son takes over. And we won’t have to support President Johnson’s extended family in their multitude of fancy houses and he doesn’t get to have his own laws about inheritance or tax. Unlike what we have now.

What on earth do we have to “safeguard” ourselves from??