Which way would you vote in a referendum on the monarchy?

[O11]

Now that the Queen is gone, if there were ever to be a referendum, would you vote to keep or abolish?

I would vote to abolish.

@crumpet , look at Ireland's President. How is that system not an improvement?

Abolish

@Lindy2 , that's cool. So we can talk about it, then. And if we have a referendum on it - a properly constructed referendum not the Brexit bollocks - you vote your way and i will vote mine. And, as with Brexit, we have to accept the outcome.

Abolish

abolish..

if it had been 10 years ago, but if it was a referendum right now probably keep, as it’s such an unstable time, I don’t think it would be sensible to add to it

I used to hope it would end after the Queen, now I guess I’d say after Charles

Abolish. Many successful countries aren't monarchies, Germany, France,the US..

Abolish but with min thresholds on turn out and majority.

e.g. 75% turnout, 65% min in favour of abolition.

Not doing similar was Cameron's mistake with Brexit.

Keep. In the grand scheme of things they are not so expensive, and all the pomp and ceremony is just so rich with history and colourful, it's worth it. Of course we could become just grey and boring like all the other republics

KEEP! After Brexit, the Royals are the only thing stopping our politicians from having absolute power. The monarchy are head of the armed forces and the courts. Let's not hand total control over everything to our corrupt government.

It's laughable people think abolishing the monarchy with make society more equal. We would have to have a wholesale slaughter of people with inherited wealth and power, as in the French Revolution. Cos France is an incredibly equal country 🤔

Pointless thread without a poll, are you keeping count OP?

The royals stop nothing
They rubber stamp whatever they are handed - with a chance to exclude themselves from whatever law is being imposed on the rest of us first of course

A President like they have in Ireland performs the same role as the Queen. Is largely ceremonial. Signs off laws put to him by Dáil Éireann. And, crucially, is elected. And cheaper.

"We would have to have a wholesale slaughter of people with inherited wealth and power, as in the French Revolution"
Utter nonsense

Well France is doing better than the UK when it comes to income inequality. I wouldn't mind living in France tbh.
inews.co.uk/news/how-uk-economy-compares-european-countries-new-report-1738909
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0143622815000351

Keep.

The US system is a mess with separation of power, French isn't much better.

Anyone fancy president Blair, Johnson, Cameron or Brown?

@randomsabreuse , so try the Irish system of a President. There's more than one way to have a republic

Keep. A president will just be there for short term gains for themselves, whereas the Royals have to take the long view for the country. Imagine if we ended up with Putin.

I refer you back to President Higgins in Ireland. There's more than one way to have a presidential system

Realistically we'd need to replace the Lord's with a second chamber which wasn't made up of appointees before or at the same time as replacing the head of state.

With an elected head of state there's always some conflict if they're not linked to the party in power in the legislature.

I will admit that I haven't studied the Irish Constitution to see how it deals with separation of powers and division of powers. Is the Irish President just a figurehead or do they have constitutional role?

The Irish President has a constitutional role in so far as she/he signs legislation into law. Her/his ability to influence that process is close to zero (much like our Sovereign). And there's the ceremonial aspect which is much lower key.

On balance, keep.

Keep

Keep

Keep

It's the best of a bad bunch of options isn't it