Will/Should the monarchy survive the death of the Queen?

[Ken L]

We've had Prince Harry’s comments about the future of the monarchy and now we've got Charles' dodgy deals.

 

Is it time for a serious discussion on the future of the monarchy before the emotional rollercoaster ride that will come with the queens death or loss of faculty?

[Phone]

All,

 

There should NEVER be even a casual, much less serious, discussion about the future of the monarchy in the UK.

 

Phone

[ayjay]

All,

 

There should NEVER be even a casual, much less serious, discussion about the future of the monarchy in the UK.

 

Phone

 

Absolute begonias!! Up against the wall with the lot of them.

 

If someone can explain to me in a satisfactory manner why I should respect the Royal Family I might consider it, until then I'll continue with my view that they are only the Royal Family because their ancestors were bigger murdering bastards than my ancestors. This is not something that warrants my respect.

[chesters1]

I have pictures of me and my gran standing outside buck palace ,we made the effort to get there they didnt even wave out the window they should go and let that fine council house be filled with more waving people.

Not romanians though they would still whine its to small for their scrounging family ,we just got rid of one!

On the other hand at less than a quid a year from the masses the income from tourists wanting to be waved at could make them a nice investment although most coming ofcourse will be bloody foreign as well !

The crown estates though should be altered and the masses should have rights over them but government shouldnt sell them ,why should councils have deny access to things they think they own but only look after for the people worse still sell it!

Edited November 8, 2017 by chesters1

[Norm B]

Only if Charles is bypassed as he put his own interests, Camilla, before his duty to his country, Diana, William and Harry. That was his main job in life to provide a queen and heirs for the country and he blew it. .

[John S]

Should the Monarchy survive? YES!

[Ken L]

I confess to being at least a little torn.

 

On one hand, I don't agree with hereditary power and I'm an ardent believer in the separation of church and state, so the idea of a hereditary monarch who is simultaneously, head of government, head of the military and head of the state church s anathema to me.

The tourism argument doesn't sway me in the least either because French tourism manages very well out of the Château de Versailles and other relics of their monarchy despite cutting their royals down to size years ago.

 

On the other, constitutional monarchies are undoubtedly among the most peaceful and stable forms of government and we may well benefit from having a positive national focus in a post EU and post multicultural world.

 

I think on balance, I'd opt to bring the monarchy to an end but do it gradually, reducing the role of whoever takes over from Liz over a space of 10 or 20 years - but yes, we absolutely should be having the discussion.

[Huge_Vitae]

Only one point to make, Take any of these names, Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, Osborne, May and Corbyn.

 

Put 'President' in front, except in the case of the latter when 'Comrade Chairman' should be used!

 

And then decide.

[Ken L]

Only one point to make, Take any of these names, Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, Osborne, May and Corbyn.

 

Put 'President' in front, except in the case of the latter when 'Comrade Chairman' should be used!

 

And then decide.

 

You are conflating a loss of monarchy with a loss of parliamentary democracy.

[Huge_Vitae]

 

You are conflating a loss of monarchy with a loss of parliamentary democracy.

Well, it was a tongue in cheek statement and I have no intention of going down the rather complicated subject of democracy. But, if you replace or remove The Monarch, we are no longer a Constitutional Monarchy and by definition, Head of State is also Head of Elected Govt. we become a Presidential Democracy.

 

Since the Prime Minister is not Head of the Upper House, and considering that visiting heads of State are guests of and welcomed by The Monarch it would require a change otherwise the Prime Minister becoming Head of State would be considered by some to be unequal in rank and standing.