AIBU to think the current Queen has been a mediocre to poor Monarch?

[ComposHat]

Anyone else think all the praise lavished on her is undue? We are all told that she has done a 'good job' but has she really? The servile media, including the supposedly balanced BBC won't broker any attempts to criticise her in any way. We are simply told that she has been 'beyond reproach.'

I'd argue that she's been a dull and unimaginative Monarch, clinging to hidebound tradition and fighting to preserve arcane privileges like a Royal Yacht (actually a mini cruise liner) and resisting paying tax on her income. At crucial moments in her reign she's dallied and shown weak leadership.

On her watch the monarchy has at best stagnated and at worst slipped into an inexorable decline and has begun to feel like an anachronism.

I'll venture that history will not judge her as kindly as all these fawning contemporary commentators do. Her reign will be seen as the point at which the rot set in.

The money sunk in assets currently owned by the Crown would be equally tied up. The revenues from those assets are given to the State. They are many times bigger than the payments back via the Civil List.

I suppose the question is, whether a President would be able to manage on an income equivalent to the Civil List, whilst carrying out the same range of duties and looking after all the assets. I think there would be very little difference (and indeed comparators suggest greater expense).

I should be interested to know on what basis it could possibly be cheaper.

I'm the happy citizen of a republic (Ireland) and even I think the Queen's been a good head of state. She's remained neutral, kept her opinions to herself and tried to represent everyone, which is exactly what a ceremonial head of state in a parliamentary democracy does (its what we Irish expect our presidents to do for example). They are meant be bland, unifying figureheads.

And lets not forget the strong example she set as Princess during the war.

I think that she has done a wonderful job. I doubt we would like OP in the role!

Have to agree with the OP. I don't think she's gone beyond her duty. Dull personality, seems to lack warmth, didn't visit Aberfan for 9 days after the disaster, didn't lower the flag on Buckingham Palace when Diana died. The speech she gave after that was delivered without any true feeling. I don't see anyone special. Happy to keep her but can't warm to her at all and don't like the fawning done by the press which has reached fever pitch in the past few years. Felt the same about the Queen Mother - that phrase that was dragged out about her being the nation's mother, what a load of old tripe.

History will look on her as one of the best- like Elizabeth I and Victoria.

Of course Her Madge would be much better off if her two younger sons and their spouses/sprogs could just drop out of the public eye, get proper jobs and live normal lives rather than being semi-employed tabloid fodder.

compos, I don't agree with the sentiment of your OP, but I do agree the monarchy could be more open. You mentioned her meetings with the PM. I don't think I've ever seen any footage of those meetings. I'm not quite sure what she could do to be more open, have a Katie Price style reality show?

I admire her dignity, she seems a very steadying influence - no matter what happens in the world there will always (sort of) be the Queen wearing a hat and waving.

I did watch The Kings Speech last night so I'm feeling a bit sorry for them at the moment to be honest, so probably not at my most critical

I don't even know what she is meant to do I see her as face of money and that's it

See she's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't - with Diana she took her grandchildren away to grieve and was criticized, she didn't lower the flag - well as you aren't particularly royalist then why are you bothered? Its just a flag in that situation. And Diana wasn't actually part of the Royal family when she died.

OK so she didn't visit Aberfan until 9 days after the disaster - perhaps she was letting the village recover itself, there was mayhem there and the press were not particularly sensitive to what had happened, and a Royal visit even in sympathy was not something that was so easily achieved with all the security detail that is required to move HRH and it was far more stringent then than it is now. And reports of that time did say she was close to tears on meeting the survivors.

If she cried in public or let down her guard you would be equally as disgusted so she really can't win.

sovery who knows

I doubt we would like OP in the role!

You are probably right, I'd look a fud in ermine.

Headfairy Here you go:

the queen 'volunteered' to pay tax after the country had had a gutful of her family in the 1990s, i.e. Charles and Diana's and Sarah Ferguson and Andrew's divorces and tiresome behaviour. There was a fire at Windsor castle. it had no insurance so a conservative minister , peter somebody declared that the taxpayers would foot the bill. the taxpayers let it be known that they would not pay the bill for the royal family's negligence. After some tooing and froing she declared that she would start paying tax to appease the people.

the thing to remember about the royal family is that they are a european tribe that wants to continue ruling over the various countries for another 1000 years. every euro royal is her cousin. if the russians called her tomorrow and said that they needed someone to sit on the throne, she would send andrew or edward to do the job. they have little loyalty to this country. if they got a better offer tomorrow, they would take it.

Flick you would prefer your hard earned cash went to them in some other way then? If they were unemployed?

Because it wouldn't just affect them, it would affect all the small businesses that supply them and all their employees and their families. Sniffing at employing 800 in one place is a little disrespectful.

creighton we aren't talking about her children though we are talking about her. And you really think she would just up and leave a country she has put 60 years into? That really would have been a waste of her life, so its a pretty unlikely scenario.

What did you expect, she is not exactly called upon to do much and it is important that the government of the day is calling the shots, therefore she has to remain relatively silent

Thanks UNmember, I kind of pictured it being just like that, pretty dull chit chat. I don't suppose she even lets the PM know her real opinions. I know a few people who've met her (informally, not at public engagements) and they say she's quite funny when she's in a good mood. But she always remember her place, ie she's the Queen. Top of the pile.

It took the whirlwind that was Diana for her to learn how to be human (and actually take off the gloves occasionally to let non Royals actually touch her) but then to be honest she's the product of a very stuff Edwardian background. I'm not surprised she's detatched and cold. They all were then.

i think their loyalty is to themselves as a family in the first instance.most of what goes on with the royal family has nothing to do with us. they just want us to worship them and keep our mouths shut.

yes, she would up and leave this country. the mall was widened in the 1950s so that a plane could land in front of bp and transport the family away in the event of a nuclear threat from the soviet union.

I find it depressing that people are so quick to criticise others who have a differing opinion to their own!