Future of the Monarchy

Sorry I rushed that out because I’m pruning roses before it rains. Just having coffee. So it not very well put together.

Hope you can make sense of it.

The many threads on the whole shebang on Mumsnet demonstrates the demographic difference and bears out what you say I’m enjoying reading them and posting there. Very refreshing

I think it would be a very great pity if the monarchy should end.
I am far more worried about the effect Starmer will have on this country if he manages to survive to the next General Election, as he plans to do.

This thread is not going to be a real discussion is it? I’ll go back to the similar one on MN

It will probably be a happier life for Prince George if he doesn't become king in the same way as his father. A more European style of monarchy perhaps, and a useful profession

I'm not sure. We tried a republic before which morphed into a dictatorship. I'm not a fan of the royals en masse, but have a lot of time for Princess Anne who is generally well thought of in Scotland. What would they be replaced by? The current inhabitants of the White House don't inspire confidence.
I also suspect the Charles and William will fight tooth and nail to keep the existing order. I'm already seeing PR involvement about how caring they are etc on Social Media.

I do think that there is a case to re-think our constitution.

I think we’d end up with someone like Farage as president .

“Whilst the Monarch occupies the highest office of State,
no one else can
While he is Head of Law, no politician can take over the
Courts
As Head of State, no General can take over the Government
As Head of the Services, no coup can turn the Army against
the people

The strength of the Monarchy does not lie in the power it
gives to the Sovereign
but in the power it denies anyone else”

This was the official description in 1969.

Perhaps more of Swedish or Norwegian monarchy?

I do think that there is no case for the monarch to be above the law.

I do think the royals could scale things down as royal families in other European countries have. They could sell off vast swathes of land and many palaces/mansions, and allow the great unwashed to enjoy the land and looking round the palaces as part of our national heritage. Also affordable housing could be offered on royal estates within reason whilst the rest could become a national park open to all people to enjoy.
The royal family could then simply live in one house each costing less to the taxpayer, and the palaces and land would create their own revenue from visitors.
I think this would work.

You would choose to share a home with your,children,grandchildren, brothers,sisters, nieces and nephews?

King Charles has reinstated the British Monarch as a viable and justifiable head of state. His attitude towards the affairs of his brother Andrew is faultless and an example for the US of good leadership.

I think it is all completely vulgar when you consider nurses and teachers need to use food banks (and that is not the only example) The bloke was riding about on his horse and living in a bloody palace paid for by us idiots

The monarchy is a much better option than anyone else just now.
I am in favour of having an elected president for foreign affairs and a prime minister for home, as in France.
For a country which appointed Mandelson to high office, I would much prefer King William followed by King George.

SORES

“Whilst the Monarch occupies the highest office of State,
no one else can
While he is Head of Law, no politician can take over the
Courts
As Head of State, no General can take over the Government
As Head of the Services, no coup can turn the Army against
the people

The strength of the Monarchy does not lie in the power it
gives to the Sovereign
but in the power it denies anyone else”

This was the official description in 1969.

Good reasons to keep the monarchy I think.
Slimmed down as a RF as much as possible.

SORES

“Whilst the Monarch occupies the highest office of State,
no one else can
While he is Head of Law, no politician can take over the
Courts
As Head of State, no General can take over the Government
As Head of the Services, no coup can turn the Army against
the people

The strength of the Monarchy does not lie in the power it
gives to the Sovereign
but in the power it denies anyone else”

This was the official description in 1969.

“Whilst the Monarch occupies the highest office of State,
no one else can
While he is Head of Law, no politician can take over the
Courts
As Head of State, no General can take over the Government
As Head of the Services, no coup can turn the Army against
the people"

As checks and balances are concerned in a constitutional democracy, the system in the UK works well as demonstrated above.

We need to separate out our Constitutional Monarchy from the Royal Family as a whole in our minds. I think that, whilst the Monarch might need support in many of the duties expected of him or her, we have tended over the last century to expect our Royal Family to become 'ours' , to be on demand and parade for whatever we expect of them, even their private lives.

As far as I am concerned, a Constitutional Monarchy is preferable to a President who might try to seize powers as described by SORES. A different kind of Monarchy, though, one where the wider family can live private lives away from the intrusion of publicity.
One where the line of succession can be changed or successors removed without such lengthy procedures too.

JaneJudge

I think it is all completely vulgar when you consider nurses and teachers need to use food banks (and that is not the only example) The bloke was riding about on his horse and living in a bloody palace paid for by us idiots

Nurses and teachers do not have to use food banks and if any do it’s ‘cos they’ve got themselves into debt big time.
How do you think millions of others who don’t earn what nurses and teachers do and don’t use food banks either, manage?

MayBee70

I think we’d end up with someone like Farage as president .

That’s my general feeling, too.
I’d rather stick with the RF for heads of state.

I think William will modernise the monarchy to some extent. To me he’s shaping up pretty well so far.

Anniebach

You would choose to share a home with your,children,grandchildren, brothers,sisters, nieces and nephews?

Don't forget visiting Heads of State and all their entourages!

Queen Camilla getting flustered in the kitchen, trying to knock up a banquet for 200 on a four ring hob and single oven.
Charlotte saying she'll need to be paid at least minimum wage to be waiting on.

It just wouldn't work! 😂

Witzend

MayBee70

I think we’d end up with someone like Farage as president .

That’s my general feeling, too.
I’d rather stick with the RF for heads of state.

I think William will modernise the monarchy to some extent. To me he’s shaping up pretty well so far.

You're right, Maybee

Apart from the occasional black sheep, who needs to be dealt with as any other person would be, the status quo works well.

JaneJudge from information gleaned, ( I’m prepared to be corrected!)
Andrew’s mounts are not his, but from the Royal stables at Windsor Castle.
Andrew telephoned ahead to I guess to the Head Groom, a horse was prepared for him, groomed, tacked, led out.
All he had to do was mount and I hope he said thank you.

Once he had finished hacking and waving to peasants the reverse applied, he dismounted, horse is led away, tack removed, rubbed down, watered and returned to a thoroughly mucked out clean dry loose box smelling sweetly of clover hay.
Andrew drives home.
Andrew is not there anymore, small steps.

It’s about time Nurses and Teachers had a raise it’s true.

“Let them eat cake” as a riposte is so imbued in our psyche
and informs our sense of fair play, which of course, Andrew and his ilk, on the other side of the fence, cannot possibly
understand let alone empathise.

Andrew never actually DID anything did he, never put in. I know he served his country in the Falklands but that was 40+ years ago and after resting on his laurels for a while became self serving which brings us back to the beginning.

You are quite right it is vulgar but the zeitgeist is having its say.

Oreo

JaneJudge

I think it is all completely vulgar when you consider nurses and teachers need to use food banks (and that is not the only example) The bloke was riding about on his horse and living in a bloody palace paid for by us idiots

Nurses and teachers do not have to use food banks and if any do it’s ‘cos they’ve got themselves into debt big time.
How do you think millions of others who don’t earn what nurses and teachers do and don’t use food banks either, manage?

Sandringham is a private estate not funded by us, the taxpayer.

So far, I understand, Andrew M-W is having difficulty finding any staff who want to work for him.

Successive Governments are responsible if people are forced to use food banks.

Anniebach

You would choose to share a home with your,children,grandchildren, brothers,sisters, nieces and nephews?

Who is sharing an enormous home with relatives?