Abolish the UK and German Monarchy

[Blamethrower]

What do you guys think?

No Great Britain, no Queen, no German Royal Family, no parliament, no monarchy.

There are many facets to this and many opinions, however I would like to propose that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is abolished and replaced with a republic.

Most reasons will be hearsay, conjecture and I'm fine with that, please go ahead....... unless someone decides that they don't want their belief system questioned

 

[Bletchleyite]

What would we replace it with?

I dislike Presidential democracy as practiced in the USA strongly, as it gives one person far too much power.

Would we elect a figurehead head of state (which would save no money)? Would we make the Prime Minister the head of state?

 

[HSTEd]

Can't run even a figurehead presidency for the price of the monarchy. Even the Irish one costs ~£10m per year and a British one must inevitably cost more. Hell even the elections would average to many millions of pounds per year

 

[telstarbox]

Given that all the living Royals were born in the UK I'm not sure about the relevance of the 'German' bit. I would be happy to get rid of them though.

Most republics still have a parliament...

 

[bnm]

*Yawn*

 

[Tetchytyke]

I dislike Presidential democracy as practiced in the USA strongly, as it gives one person far too much power.

No it doesn't; Obama's spent the last eight years getting filibustered by the Senate.

 

[Phil.]

President Blair, President Cameron.
Dear God!

 

[Senex]

President Blair, President Cameron.
Dear God!

Awful as both would be, they would be better than King Charles III and his brood and successors. Some form of republic is long, long overdue. (And remember, it's crown powers that May is proposing to use to by-pass the elected parliament to set Brexit in motion.)

 

[AlterEgo]

President Blair, President Cameron.
Dear God!

This is not how a presidential system works in most countries. The president is a figurehead and international representative of the nation with little constitutional power, sort of like an elected monarch.

 

[Harbornite]

Why bother? The monarchy may be irrelevant and a relic of the past when people could still claim to have a divine right to rule over people, but it's good to have a ceremonial figure above the prime minister. Leave them in place.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I don't really like the idea of an inherited, symbolic head of state...

... until I look at the alternatives!

Reforming the House of Lords would be a more pressing constitutional reform, possibly switching to a federal system as seen in Germany and the United States, which would give the regions more power to act in the interest of their citizens.

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't really like the idea of an inherited, symbolic head of state...

... until I look at the alternatives!

Reforming the House of Lords would be a more pressing constitutional reform, possibly switching to a federal system as seen in Germany and the United States, which would give the regions more power to act in the interest of their citizens.

Do you think a constitutional monarchy is the best form of government? Would you advise republics to switch (back) to a monarchical system?

There are plenty of good alternatives to what we have at the moment. The presidential system works well in Ireland, though they also have an upper house problem (it's too weak, curiously enough, and was retained in a referendum by a ball hair). The president need not even be a politician, but it should be someone that is elected. This gives them credibility. It is not healthy to have an inheritable position as the pinnacle of society. Britain should be a meritocracy, God knows British people have achieved so much over the centuries.

 

[ExRes]

Let's hope that nobody ever suggests the American presidential system and meritocracy in the same breath

Should we have the French presidential system instead?, that should give those that continually complain about the cost of the British monarchy something to mull over

I think the OP has rather lost his/her way though, Germany doesn't have a monarchy and we seem to be missing his/her suggestion for a replacement to parliament

 

[J-2739]

Nah, too much history.

 

[northwichcat]

Can't run even a figurehead presidency for the price of the monarchy. Even the Irish one costs ~£10m per year and a British one must inevitably cost more. Hell even the elections would average to many millions of pounds per year

A president would effectively do the role of the monarchy and the role of the PM, while some of the president's staff would be existing government staff redeployed in to new roles.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Nah, too much history.

So?

Germany and Portugal had monarchies for many years and the Royal Palaces which remain are some of the biggest tourist attractions in Europe, despite them not being conveniently located in the centre of the capital city.

 

[J-2739]

So?

Germany and Portugal had monarchies for many years and the Royal Palaces which remain are some of the biggest tourist attractions in Europe, despite them not being conveniently located in the centre of the capital city.

I was just thinking, since the UK hasn't integrated well with their continental cousins historically, that they haven't had the problem of rebelling against the monarch to establish a republic...?

 

[90sWereBetter]

Nah, I'd rather keep the monarchy. It would just be change for the sake of change. Plus, apart from Charles, the rest of the Royals all seem a pretty cool bunch anyway.

 

[Dave1987]

Once the current Queen is gone I truly hope we become a republic. The Queen stays out of things that our elected parliament are there to do. I truly fear when Charles comes to the throne as he won't be able to resist making his opinions known and try to influence parliament to his way of thinking. His son is also getting a bit to eager to make his opinions known as well. I hate the likes of Prince Andrew and his children using taxpayers money to fund their lavish holidays on "trade missions". I believe there is a massive squabble currently going on with Andrew wanting formal roles for his children so they can go abroad on the taxpayer. Yup once the Queen is gone from this world Viva La Republic!! The US system might not be perfect by any means but at least every child in America has the chance to one day become the head of state of their country. Whereas in our country only those that are fortunate enough to be born into one very rich family will have that chance. Ow plus round the clock protection on the taxpayer.

 

[Howardh]

We'd have a whole load of buildings that tourists come to see. What can we do with them? Buckingham Palace is easy, make it the world's biggest Youth Hostel. Windsor? Bail hostel for offenders. Sandringham? Comprehensive School. Balmoral? Official residence of the newly throned Queen of Scotland....

 

[Dave1987]

We'd have a whole load of buildings that tourists come to see. What can we do with them? Buckingham Palace is easy, make it the world's biggest Youth Hostel. Windsor? Bail hostel for offenders. Sandringham? Comprehensive School. Balmoral? Official residence of the newly throned Queen of Scotland....

I'm amazed the Royal family had the cheek to ask the taxpayer to fund the repairs to the likes of Buck house. Not as if they can't afford it themselves. What would people rather the treasury spent money on the NHS or Buck House?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

President Blair, President Cameron.
Dear God!

President Corbyn?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Balmoral? Official residence of the newly throned Queen of Scotland....

Queen Nicola 1 ?

 

[Howardh]

President Corbyn?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Queen Nicola 1 ?

I wouldn't possibly...

Could have a proper referendum amongst the Scots to choose their own Queen. Amy McDonald, Eve Muirhead would be two candidates. As for Nicola - gets my vote even if it only stops Alex Salmond being Queen....

 

[me123]

I would actively campaign for the abolition of the monarchy. I don't dislike them, they generally seem like a pleasant bunch (aside from the homeopath and the racist) and I don't think for a minute that emulating Russia or France would be the way forward. But I see no reason why we should continue to fund this one family. I think that the money could be much better used elsewhere. The Royals are essentially figureheads, and I would personally prefer an elected head of state with some powers and a ceremonial role. However, I'd be open to a discussion about

With regards to tourism, we could open up the royal houses as museums. Much easier when the nonagenarians have moved out, and I bet the Americans will pay top dollar to see inside the Queen's former bedroom.

Of course, very few people would abolish the monarchy at this moment in time. Opinion polls about the monarchy constantly suggest that >80% of the population support the monarchy. I would argue that the figures actually translate into support for HMQEII rather than the monarchy as a whole. I wonder if her heirs and successors will prove to be as popular...

 

[swt class 450]

Yes we should definitely abolish the Monarchy and just make the Prime Minister the head of state (even though i dont like the current PM either). The Queen and the rest of the Royal Family are nowadays just a tourist attraction. The Queen doesnt ever make any important decisions or really have anything to do with running this country. I find it appalling that taxpayers like myself are paying for the Queen and the whole Royal Family. So yes i would fully support abolishing the Royal Family. Even if the Royal Family were abolished than im sure Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle etc would remain as major tourist attractions.

 

[backontrack]

President Corbyn?

He hasn't been PM yet.

 

[HSTEd]

A president would effectively do the role of the monarchy and the role of the PM, while some of the president's staff would be existing government staff redeployed in to new roles.

So you are proposing the abandonment of parliamentary democracy in favour of an American style presidential system?

That is an even bigger constitutional can of worms than simply converting to a Parliamentary Republic.

 

[tony_mac]

I find it appalling that taxpayers like myself are paying for the Queen and the whole Royal Family. So yes i would fully support abolishing the Royal Family. Even if the Royal Family were abolished than im sure Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle etc would remain as major tourist attractions.

Presidents can also be rather expensive
http://remco.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/SJASS_Vol.13_No.2-123-144.pdf

In conclusion we list the costs of the civil list and allocations in all ten countries in the table below (in millions of euros)
■ France 106.2 = highly transparent
■ Norway 40.5 = relatively transparent
■ The Netherlands 39.9 = relatively transparent
■ The United Kingdom 38 = less transparent
■ Germany 25.6 = relatively transparent
■ Sweden 14.5 = not transparent
■ Belgium 13.9 = not transparent
■ Denmark 13.3 = not transparent
■ Luxembourg 9.3 = not transparent
■ Spain 7.9 = not transparent

I propose that someone is chosen from the population at random. After 6 months, we can vote to keep them, or not. If we don't keep them, then another is chosen at random.
I think we will be more likely to soon get someone that does a reasonable job then by 'choosing' the person ourselves.

 

[yorksrob]

Abolish the German monarchy ?

The House of Hohenzollern has been retired since 1918.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm amazed the Royal family had the cheek to ask the taxpayer to fund the repairs to the likes of Buck house. Not as if they can't afford it themselves. What would people rather the treasury spent money on the NHS or Buck House?

Why should the Royal Family pay for the upkeep of a property they don't own - if you are going to demand the Queen personally pays for the upkeep of these facilities then you must also offer her the option of divesting those properties.

By all accounts she doesn't actually like Buckingham Palace very much.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes we should definitely abolish the Monarchy and just make the Prime Minister the head of state (even though i dont like the current PM either).

Thus giving a partisan political figure untrammeled near dictatorial power?
If you are going to require a partisan head of state then I am afraid you must abolish parliamentary democracy in favour of a proper presidential system like the one they have in America.

Which would be years of disruption and expense for no real gain

 

[me123]

I propose that someone is chosen from the population at random. After 6 months, we can vote to keep them, or not. If we don't keep them, then another is chosen at random.

That could well mean six months of one of these as our head of state.

Would you really want to take that risk?