Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To ask you if there were to be a vote tomorrow on whether or not we should become a Republic country, how would you vote?

336 replies

LLDilema · 14/12/2015 14:18

Very long thread title... but just interested to know, if tomorrow it was announced that we all have to vote on whether to keep or abolish the royal family, how would you vote? Yes to keep. No to lose.

OP posts:
EastMidsMummy · 14/12/2015 18:39

This whole website is broadly devoted to doing the best for our children so they can be fulfilled, successful and reach their potential. And then we say the highest role in the land is pre-ordained to be head of state on account of whose fanny they came out of?? It's medieval and ridiculous. Get rid.

Theknacktoflying · 14/12/2015 18:43

Am I missing something? My child could never be the POTUS simply because I wound up giving birth in a UK hospital ....

The argument that a republic would be based more on merit and reward are mistaken.

chipsandpeas · 14/12/2015 18:45

would vote to get rid

Puzzledandpissedoff · 14/12/2015 18:53

Another vote to get rid - though certainly not until the queen passes

It isn't even about he money for me, since a president would probably cost as much if not more. I just that I hope we're all grown up enough now to be able to choose a head of state for ourselves, rather than bending the knee to some accident of birth

bearleftmonkeyright · 14/12/2015 18:56

No,losr

AnyoneFucoffee · 14/12/2015 19:02

Yes (stay a monarchy). For a lot of different reasons.

CordeliaFrost · 14/12/2015 19:04

No - get rid.

purplehazed · 14/12/2015 19:08

What do they say they cost us, 65p or something? why does everyone make out that's nothing? that's a huge amount of money, off everyone in the country. Just imagine all the worthwhile things that could be done with that.

purplehazed · 14/12/2015 19:11

A president doesn't have to cost more at all. Ireland's presidency is two and a half times cheaper than the UK monarchy, with the added bonus of being able to vote out.

Pipestheghost · 14/12/2015 19:12

No - get rid

CordeliaFrost · 14/12/2015 19:25

Purplehazed - that 65p that the royal lovers quote, time and time again, applies to the Sovereign Grant only. I'm not sure if the 65p figure is correct these days, as the SG for 15/16 was £40 million. The SG goes towards the cost of property maintenance, staff salaries, travel etc.

Costs not covered by the SG are:

  • Security (whether it's the protection officers assigned to members of the family, or security at events they attend)
  • Royal ceremonies
  • Local visits (which are covered by the local government/s of the area being visited)

When all these costs are factored in, the figure is believed to be about £300 million, or possibly as high as £350 million.

A President would NOT cost us all that, nowhere near it, Ireland prove it can be done on much, much less!

SirChenjin · 14/12/2015 19:27

It would depend on what alternatives were being offered.

I loathe the royal family and everything it stands for, but if it were replaced by President Blair or Salmond I'd vote to keep them for a bit longer.

ComposHatComesBack · 14/12/2015 19:30

No, get rid. And I defy anyone who says yes to come up with a rational, well reasoned argument as to why the principal of an hereditary head of state is fair or just.

Grilledaubergines · 14/12/2015 19:43

Keep.

toffeeboffin · 14/12/2015 19:44

no, get rid.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 14/12/2015 19:46

No, lose.

IonaNE · 14/12/2015 19:46

Yes to keep.

toffeeboffin · 14/12/2015 19:48

'the problem with a monarchy is that we get pot luck about who comes next.'

EXACTLY!! Pot luck.

How the UK is still a monarchy is beyond me.

Do people not want to rebel?

William, Kate and all the 100's of minor royals do nothing while we toil our bloody guts out and are just happy to be on these shitty zero-contract jobs and a pint on a Friday night if we are lucky. Drudgery and hoping to retire. It's bullshit. The opposite of egalitarian.

Lord and serf is alive and well.

purplehazed · 14/12/2015 19:49

If the royal family were allowed to air their political views I'm sure they'd be less monarchists than there are now. Just suppose they were democratically elected, what qualities would they have that would make people want to vote them in. Probably none. Just proves what a farce it all is.

Kaytee1987 · 14/12/2015 19:52

SirChenjin oh god president salmond can you imagine Confused I used to joke that I'm sure he wants to be King of Scotland but that's a whole other conversation.

wasonthelist · 14/12/2015 19:53

William, Kate and all the 100's of minor royals do nothing while we toil our bloody guts out and are just happy to be on these shitty zero-contract jobs and a pint on a Friday night if we are lucky. Drudgery and hoping to retire. It's bullshit. The opposite of egalitarian

And abolishing the monarchy is going to improve zero hours contracts how exactly?

This is one of those "careful what you wish for" things. If you really want rid of zero hours, vote and campaign on that, don't waste time moaning about a couple of dozen irrelevant toffs who aren't doing any harm.

Asheth · 14/12/2015 19:53

No get rid, but of course they would have as much right to stand for election as any other citizen. So if the country want President Charles that's fine! But I doubt they do. I think the current support for the monarchy is more to do with affection for the queen, than any real belief that a monarchy is a fair system.

silvermantela · 14/12/2015 19:53

def yes to a republic, although I do respect the Queen and would be happy to let her finish her time out. Fitting end to the longest reign too to also be the last.

wasonthelist re: PM and selective education this is a fairly recent thing though, which presumably we could reverse - all five Prime Ministers to hold office between 1964 and 1997 went to non-fee-paying schools, as did Gordon Brown iirc, as would Corbyn.

lighteningirl · 14/12/2015 19:54

Keep

FunkyPeacock · 14/12/2015 19:56

Yes - to keep

Mainly because I think the alternative could be far worse and looking at European countries which still have a monarchy they generally seem to be some of the more civilised and fair countries

I would however like to see funding to some of the peripheral royals cut dramatically (Andrew, Edward, Beatrice, Eugene et)

Swipe left for the next trending thread