Are You Republican or Royalist?

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

.... me i am a republican, and things like this just get my goat

[Mandryka]

I would describe myself as a 'monarchist', rather than as a royalist.

The monarchical system works well....because we have a constitutional head of state, that head of state can represent Britain abroad without any of the opprobrium attaching to them that might attach to an elected head of state.

Would we seriously have been better off with previous 'heads of state' like Thatcher and Blair, etc? I think not.

I don't have any illusions about the current royal family, or previous ones. None of them are profound thinkers, or particularly intelligent and at least one of them (Andrew) ought to be farmed off somewhere where he can only do minimal damage; but the principal of a contitutional monarchy is a sound one and I'm happy to support it.

The Guardian's 'Republican' agenda is bogus and discredited: you only have to take a cursory glance at that wretched and dishonest organ to realise that its so-called republicanism is really a form of slavish pan-Americanism (witness the egregious Jonathan Freedland). Sooner Prince Charles, for all his faults, than Rusbridger, Preston, Freedland and all their cohorts....

[Serial_Apologist]

I would describe myself as a 'monarchist', rather than as a royalist.
Would we seriously have been better off with previous 'heads of state' like Thatcher and Blair, etc? I think not.

This "straw person" argument is always dragged up by those who favour the status quo. Why would the British public choose discredited politicians as their presidents? Are we more stupid than the Irish, who, demonstrating their collective wisdom for a second time in succession when it comes to choosing, have just opted for a socialist poet?

I don't have any illusions about the current royal family, or previous ones. None of them are profound thinkers, or particularly intelligent and at least one of them (Andrew) ought to be farmed off somewhere where he can only do minimal damage; but the principal of a contitutional monarchy is a sound one and I'm happy to support it.

But in a sense it is surely illusory to believe in the inherent superiority of an abstract symbol over a real human being, with all his or her faults? What I found particularly depressing listening to Today this morning, was hearing a Austrailian "spokesperson" speaking up for the Queen, claiming her to be a much-needed reminder of Australia's cultural closeness to the UK, now that things are so bad with the world.

S-A

[amateur51]

.... me i am a republican, and things like this just get my goat

Mine too, Calum - goats everywhere I was once told that if one dies intestate with no dependents, your estate goes automatically to the Duchy of Cornwall. Perhaps a lawyerly member could advise on the truth of this - I was out next morning to WH Smith buying a DIY Last Will & Testament Pack, I can tell you!

[amateur51]

This "straw person" argument is always dragged up by those who favour the status quo. Why would the British public choose discredited politicians as their presidents? Are we more stupid than the Irish, who, demonstrating their collective wisdom for a second time in succession when it comes to choosing, have just opted for a socialist poet?
S-A

I followed the Irish Presidential Election quite closely and I was impressed by the clarity with which the winner and one or two others saw the (limited) role of the President.

As a person, I think that Elizabeth Windsor has been exemplary and I am amazed at her energy and commitment but for the rest ... well enough said. Good luck to President Higgins - I hope that we shall have people of his like and merit to choose from when the time comes, which I sincerely hope will be soon.

First job for the new President? - restore the much-missed

[Chris Newman]

The Royal Family is a waste of taxpayers' money. They creep to anything and anybody to get our cash

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_iLElHqv-w

[amateur51]

The Royal Family is a waste of taxpayers' money. They creep to anything and anybody to get our cash

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_iLElHqv-w

[Mary Chambers]

I tend to be Wrong but Wromantic, as opposed to Right but Repulsive.

(Google it if you don't get the reference )

[Curalach]

As a person, I think that Elizabeth Windsor has been exemplary and I am amazed at her energy and commitment

I agree and I wish her well. I just do not believe that the position of Head of State should be hereditary.
Ireland has elected a President and that is what they will get. What they will not get is a family firm which heads up an aristocracy with all the subserviant bowing and scraping that goes with it. As S-A says, the straw man argument is false. There are various models of Presidency.

[ahinton]

.... me i am a republican, and things like this just get my goat

First of all, in direct answer to your question - no.

I have no goat to get, but I do have some sympathy with what you write about this; that said, what puzzles me is that, whilst this story has been publishable as a direct consequence of a Freedom of Information Act (FOI) enquiry, it would appear that such enquiries are not always possible to make, given that, for example,
"A spokesman for the Prince of Wales would not comment on whether the prince has ever withheld consent or demanded changes to legislation under the consent system. "Communications between the prince or his household and the government are confidential under a long-standing convention that protects the heir to the throne's right to be instructed in the business of government in preparation for his future role as monarch," he said."

Since we now know of these particular powers that the Prince of Wales possesses as a direct consequence of an FOI enquiry, it seems bizarrely inconsistent that members of the electorate nevertheless remain barred from ascertaining whether and/or how and to what extent the Prince might have exercised them. The article also omits mention of why it is that the prince's interests as a landowner appear to be behind the granting to him of the ability to challenge potential laws on the grounds of possible adverse impact on his businesses and, although it does at least lay open that question, it's one that needs answering. There is also insufficient detail in the article about how, when and by whom these (presumably) exceptional rights were granted to the prince, despite the dispensation of this privilege having presumably been part of the due process of law (i.e. it would - at least I most certainly hope that it would! - seem untenable that the prince had been granted such privileges outside the law and beyond the reach of Parliamentary involvement and assent); to give a parallel example, a statutory immunity from prosecution in all cases other than human rights breaches and what in legal terminology are called acts of bad faith was granted years ago to one - and ONLY one - of UK's industry regulators but, since it has been established under another FOI enquiry how, when, by whom and on what alleged grounds this privilege was granted, it is clear that it was done through Parliamentary channels. It seems to me quite extraordinary that this occurred and still applies today, given that there is no legal barrier against the issuing of legal proceedings against the PM, the Prince of Wales or even the Queen.

To return to the issue concerned, it does on the face of it appear to be undemocratic for such unique privileges to be accorded to the Prince of Wales and it makes one wonder whether the same or similar ones are accorded to anyone else.

[ahinton]

Mine too, Calum - goats everywhere I was once told that if one dies intestate with no dependents, your estate goes automatically to the Duchy of Cornwall. Perhaps a lawyerly member could advise on the truth of this.

I'm not a lawyer but can confirm that what you write here is not quite correct, although it's pretty close to being so; what's wrong is your citing of the term "dependents"; one would have to die intestate and without any living relatives up to six times removed for one's estate to pass to the Duchy upon one's death. I do not know how many such estates have passed to the Duchy under this provision or what their total value per annum might be, but I sispect that it's not very many or very much.

[Nick Armstrong]

First of all, in direct answer to your question - no.

????? What question?

It's certainly not a very enlightening answer to the one in the thread heading...

[Serial_Apologist]

????? What question?

It's certainly not a very enlightening answer to the one in the thread heading...

People who answer "yes" or "no" to questions such as, "are you this, or are you this?" really get my goat.

[ahinton]

I agree and I wish her well. I just do not believe that the position of Head of State should be hereditary.
Ireland has elected a President and that is what they will get. What they will not get is a family firm which heads up an aristocracy with all the subserviant bowing and scraping that goes with it. As S-A says, the straw man argument is false. There are various models of Presidency.

There's less bowing and scraping these days compared to what there once was - and the Queen has at least agreed to subject herself (and, I think, by implication and assocation, her successors as monarchs) to income tax (though not to any other taxes). Some people's objection to the monarchical system is that it gives the electorate a "family firm" and subjects them to certain of its actions, but I don't see this as especially different in effect to any alternative firm that would inevitably replace it were it to be replaced. Whether or not the position of Head of State should be hereditary is of course open to argument and disagreement; however, the extent, if any, to which perceived or actual bowing and scraping and the subjection and subjugation of citizens to the interests of the ruling firm, whilst also open to argument, is probably far less amenable to disagreement, at least in the sense of how it would broadly come to represent a case of plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

[Nick Armstrong]

People who answer "yes" or "no" to questions such as, "are you this, or are you this?" really get my goat.