| Republic or Monarchy 10:27 - Apr 10 with 15809 views | QPR_John |
Reading the Prince Philip thread and some suggesting a republic set me thinking. I was going to post this on that thread but decided to open a new one. I'm interested in the reasons of those that want a republic. Do they also want to get rid of the title "Head of State". If so then leave it to the Prime Minister and you have an argument. If we do carry on the HoS how is he or she appointed. Just nominated by someone or some group or elected. Lets forget the former. If elected surely they would want some power which then sifts how we are governed. When would they be elected, at a General Election or a fixed term. If no political power who would vote even the General Election gets poor turn outs. Where would they live, Buckingham Palace or some two up two down in Railway Cuttings. How much would the office cost more or less than the monarchy. Do people who want a republic just want it because they do not like the idea of a monarchy or have they given it more thought |  | | |  |
| Republic or Monarchy on 11:10 - Apr 11 with 1839 views | MrSheen |
| Republic or Monarchy on 10:52 - Apr 11 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Semantics really.
Legislation passes or falls at the hands of unelected clergy, as it does with JC, or any other independent or cross bencher, or minority party.
It’s not ethical and certainly not democratic to have unelected clergy in our Parliamentary system, however you want to label it. If we are rightly going to attack Iran for it we should get our own house in order. |
They sit in a chamber that is wholly unelected, so there is nothing particularly outlandish about their presence, which is 3.3% of the total. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 11:22]
|  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 11:26 - Apr 11 with 1799 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Republic or Monarchy on 11:10 - Apr 11 by MrSheen |
They sit in a chamber that is wholly unelected, so there is nothing particularly outlandish about their presence, which is 3.3% of the total. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 11:22]
|
We’re not democratic, but neither is everyone is a bold defence I’ll grant you that. |  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 11:52 - Apr 11 with 1764 views | Cliff |
| Republic or Monarchy on 11:08 - Apr 11 by Clive_Anderson |
The monarchy isn't exactly perfect, but I'm not sure people would actually be happier with the head of state being President Blair, Cameron or Boris or whoever the latest politician is. |
Remember if Andrew had been the first son instead of the second, we'd be looking at him being the next king. I'm not sure people would be happy with that either.
Also we don't need a separate head of state, a good number of other countries seem to get away with the prime minister / president taking on that role. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 12:19]
|  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 12:12 - Apr 11 with 1738 views | DannyPaddox |
I think we should continue with a monarchy but run it as a timeshare. Winners of a National Lottery-style National Lottery become the Royal Family for a whole year. Every year the Royal Family changes keeping the institution fresh and exciting. Except of course if no one wins then it’s a rollover year (I haven’t thought about this part yet - maybe the sitting Royal Family get another year - or maybe they’re publicly beheaded - under 25s to be spared). And in the spirit of the tradition of the robber-baron people in prison are allowed to participate. |  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:18 - Apr 11 with 1690 views | Dorse |
Interesting ideas all round but I think we need to be careful about constitutional reform, if only because we might have to change our name to Republican Park Rangers. |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:27 - Apr 11 with 1680 views | kensalriser |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:18 - Apr 11 by Dorse |
Interesting ideas all round but I think we need to be careful about constitutional reform, if only because we might have to change our name to Republican Park Rangers. |
The word queen has more than one meaning. |  |
| |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:35 - Apr 11 with 1668 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:18 - Apr 11 by Dorse |
Interesting ideas all round but I think we need to be careful about constitutional reform, if only because we might have to change our name to Republican Park Rangers. |
Ayatollah Park Rangers
‘We’re the finest football team, the infidels have ever seen’ | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 14:01 - Apr 11 with 1615 views | BucksRanger |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:35 - Apr 11 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Ayatollah Park Rangers
‘We’re the finest football team, the infidels have ever seen’ |
I've lived in the land of the ayatollahs.
There will be a fatwa slapped on you if you aren't more careful what you say.  |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Republic or Monarchy on 14:31 - Apr 11 with 1602 views | Dorse |
| Republic or Monarchy on 14:01 - Apr 11 by BucksRanger |
I've lived in the land of the ayatollahs.
There will be a fatwa slapped on you if you aren't more careful what you say. |
Things have moved on a bit. These days, if you're on a diet, they could slap a thinwa on you instead. | |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| Republic or Monarchy on 15:20 - Apr 11 with 1551 views | izlingtonhoop |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:17 - Apr 10 by SonofNorfolt |
We missed the chance in 1649 to be the Worlds first republic and have been bowing ever since.
No one should bow to anyone else. Except possibly to Stan? |
Problem was - and someone may already have said this, I've just started from scratch reading this thread - what replaced it was worse, as Distort mentioned the Aussies fearing.
Cromwell was one miserable fuc ka.
Oh, and I'd be rid of them tomorrow. Ridiculous undemocratic pantomime, as has already been pointed out by so many... |  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 15:53 - Apr 11 with 1518 views | Boston |
| Republic or Monarchy on 13:27 - Apr 11 by kensalriser |
The word queen has more than one meaning. |
Indeed...d4 d5 c4, as a chess man you'd be quite familiar with that gambit. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 15:53]
| |
| |
| Republic or Monarchy on 16:56 - Apr 11 with 1470 views | GloryHunter |
Anyone who thinks the Royal Family is not a drain on taxpayers' money should read this book:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Do-You-Royal-Family/dp/1785904914
"The royal family is the original Coronation Street a long-running soap opera with the occasional real coronation thrown in. Its members have become celebrities, like upmarket versions of film stars and footballers. But they have also become a byword for arrogance, entitlement, hypocrisy and indifference to the gigantic amount of public money wasted by them.
The monarchy itself is an important part of our constitution with considerable influence on the kind of nation we are. Yet you will struggle to find much in the way of proper journalism that examines the monarchy in the way that their position and influence merit. Instead, we are fed a constant diet of sickeningly obsequious coverage which reports their activities with breathless and uncritical awe.
In this book, former government minister Norman Baker argues that the British public deserves better than this puerile diet. ... And What Do You Do? is a hard-hitting analysis of the royal family, exposing its extravagant use of public money and the highly dubious behaviour of some among its ranks, whilst being critical of the knee-jerk sycophancy shown by the press and politicians. Baker also considers the wider role the royals play in society, including the link with House of Lords reform, and the constitutional position of the monarch, which is important given Prince Charles's present and intended approach.
What makes this book so unusual is that Baker is himself a member of the Privy Council, the body that officially advises the monarch. By turns irreverent and uncompromising, ... And What Do You Do? asks important questions about the future of the world's most famous royal family." |  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 17:55 - Apr 11 with 1409 views | dmm |
Thanks for your post GloryHunter. I'd not come across this book before. Some of the reviews of this book in the link you supplied are extremely telling. |  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:24 - Apr 11 with 1372 views | GloryHunter |
| Republic or Monarchy on 17:55 - Apr 11 by dmm |
Thanks for your post GloryHunter. I'd not come across this book before. Some of the reviews of this book in the link you supplied are extremely telling. |
To which I would add Prince Andrew crashing his Range Rover through the gates at Windsor in a fit of anger, because the sensor failed and they would not open. Repairs paid for by the taxpayer.
And Prince Charles sending a Canadian airforce jet to pick up his favourite shoehorn, that had been left at the previous stop by his valet.
This book is full of such staggering incidents, which you won't have seen reported in the newspapers. | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:27 - Apr 11 with 1368 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Republic or Monarchy on 14:01 - Apr 11 by BucksRanger |
I've lived in the land of the ayatollahs.
There will be a fatwa slapped on you if you aren't more careful what you say. |
I would love to know why you lived in Iran. | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:32 - Apr 11 with 1336 views | BucksRanger |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:27 - Apr 11 by BazzaInTheLoft |
I would love to know why you lived in Iran. |
Work. Lovely country. Religiously obsessed people. | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:36 - Apr 11 with 1347 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:32 - Apr 11 by BucksRanger |
Work. Lovely country. Religiously obsessed people. |
I am genuinely surprised. Good on you. | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:52 - Apr 11 with 1312 views | Ranger_Things |
| Republic or Monarchy on 16:56 - Apr 11 by GloryHunter |
Anyone who thinks the Royal Family is not a drain on taxpayers' money should read this book:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Do-You-Royal-Family/dp/1785904914
"The royal family is the original Coronation Street a long-running soap opera with the occasional real coronation thrown in. Its members have become celebrities, like upmarket versions of film stars and footballers. But they have also become a byword for arrogance, entitlement, hypocrisy and indifference to the gigantic amount of public money wasted by them.
The monarchy itself is an important part of our constitution with considerable influence on the kind of nation we are. Yet you will struggle to find much in the way of proper journalism that examines the monarchy in the way that their position and influence merit. Instead, we are fed a constant diet of sickeningly obsequious coverage which reports their activities with breathless and uncritical awe.
In this book, former government minister Norman Baker argues that the British public deserves better than this puerile diet. ... And What Do You Do? is a hard-hitting analysis of the royal family, exposing its extravagant use of public money and the highly dubious behaviour of some among its ranks, whilst being critical of the knee-jerk sycophancy shown by the press and politicians. Baker also considers the wider role the royals play in society, including the link with House of Lords reform, and the constitutional position of the monarch, which is important given Prince Charles's present and intended approach.
What makes this book so unusual is that Baker is himself a member of the Privy Council, the body that officially advises the monarch. By turns irreverent and uncompromising, ... And What Do You Do? asks important questions about the future of the world's most famous royal family." |
Organised crime.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-chang
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/25/revealed-police-barred-from-sear
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/how-archaic-process-of-queens-co |  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 19:06 - Apr 11 with 1283 views | johann28 |
| Republic or Monarchy on 16:56 - Apr 11 by GloryHunter |
Anyone who thinks the Royal Family is not a drain on taxpayers' money should read this book:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Do-You-Royal-Family/dp/1785904914
"The royal family is the original Coronation Street a long-running soap opera with the occasional real coronation thrown in. Its members have become celebrities, like upmarket versions of film stars and footballers. But they have also become a byword for arrogance, entitlement, hypocrisy and indifference to the gigantic amount of public money wasted by them.
The monarchy itself is an important part of our constitution with considerable influence on the kind of nation we are. Yet you will struggle to find much in the way of proper journalism that examines the monarchy in the way that their position and influence merit. Instead, we are fed a constant diet of sickeningly obsequious coverage which reports their activities with breathless and uncritical awe.
In this book, former government minister Norman Baker argues that the British public deserves better than this puerile diet. ... And What Do You Do? is a hard-hitting analysis of the royal family, exposing its extravagant use of public money and the highly dubious behaviour of some among its ranks, whilst being critical of the knee-jerk sycophancy shown by the press and politicians. Baker also considers the wider role the royals play in society, including the link with House of Lords reform, and the constitutional position of the monarch, which is important given Prince Charles's present and intended approach.
What makes this book so unusual is that Baker is himself a member of the Privy Council, the body that officially advises the monarch. By turns irreverent and uncompromising, ... And What Do You Do? asks important questions about the future of the world's most famous royal family." |
Agree. A quite superb book. The sections of the 'sovereign grant' are truly eye-popping. Amazing for example that because of a deal with Cameron's government, the royals help themselves to no less than 25% of income generated by so-called 'crown lands' (they are in fact owned by the state since the 18th century). Given that much of our coastline counts as crown land, this means, for example, that the royals pocket 25% of the profits of many of our off-shore wind farms. This is indefensible. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 19:07]
|  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 19:20 - Apr 11 with 1247 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
Cameron himself is a descendent of William IV. | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 19:25 - Apr 11 with 1231 views | Ashdown_Ranger |
| Republic or Monarchy on 19:20 - Apr 11 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Cameron himself is a descendent of William IV. |
I heard it was King Cn*t (it wouldn't let me leave in the 'u')... |  | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 20:16 - Apr 11 with 1147 views | BucksRanger |
| Republic or Monarchy on 18:36 - Apr 11 by BazzaInTheLoft |
I am genuinely surprised. Good on you. |
It's good to travel. Most of the time I was up near the Iran / Russian border close to the Caspian sea. Really enjoyed chatting with the locals except the ones that saw my blond hair and thought I was a Russian. The average Iranian does not like Russians. Nice as pie once I told them I wasn't. Rainy season was ridiculous and you couldn't sleep for the noise of the rain hitting the metal roof. Downpours could last up to 5 days without stop. | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 20:23 - Apr 11 with 1153 views | CiderwithRsie |
| Republic or Monarchy on 11:52 - Apr 11 by Cliff |
Remember if Andrew had been the first son instead of the second, we'd be looking at him being the next king. I'm not sure people would be happy with that either.
Also we don't need a separate head of state, a good number of other countries seem to get away with the prime minister / president taking on that role. [Post edited 11 Apr 2021 12:19]
|
This is a fair point so far as it goes, but if Andrew had been Number 1 Son do you think he'd have been allowed to roam around hanging out with low-lifes like Epstein?
Chazza having an affair while in an (arranged) marriage was just traditional royal behaviour (though not sure the present generation would get away with it, that's part of the bargain of being allowed to marry who they want instead of certified virgins); but I think even back then under-age girls would have been spotted as a crisis waiting to happen.
He'd have still been what he is, that's his nature, but I think he'd have been controlled and had more of a purpose and that just maybe might made him a better human being. | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 20:35 - Apr 11 with 1121 views | dezzar |
Republican myself but understand that we should allow the Royalists the chance to grieve . But its the totally over the top sycophantic reaction from the media that grates with me.Oh yes he was so funny when taking the piss out of foreigners , some of it was amusing but if any of us did the same at work ? Telling a 13 year old boy hes too fat to be an astronaut , lovely bloke | | | |
| Republic or Monarchy on 20:39 - Apr 11 with 1114 views | Ranger_Things |
| Republic or Monarchy on 20:23 - Apr 11 by CiderwithRsie |
This is a fair point so far as it goes, but if Andrew had been Number 1 Son do you think he'd have been allowed to roam around hanging out with low-lifes like Epstein?
Chazza having an affair while in an (arranged) marriage was just traditional royal behaviour (though not sure the present generation would get away with it, that's part of the bargain of being allowed to marry who they want instead of certified virgins); but I think even back then under-age girls would have been spotted as a crisis waiting to happen.
He'd have still been what he is, that's his nature, but I think he'd have been controlled and had more of a purpose and that just maybe might made him a better human being. |
Let's call it like it is; Andrew is a nonce and if he wasn't a royal he'd be banged up in the US like Ghislaine Maxwell. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
