Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To feel extremely bloody proud to be British today?

510 replies

hehitmeanditfeltlikeakiss · 19/05/2018 14:29

I take our country for granted because I live in a town that is the polar opposite of what Windsor looks like. But wow - watching the Royal family today I got shivers down my spine and felt so overwhelmed with emotion.

In the past I've looked at ways of emigrating because I've been fed up of living here, but I've just realised that it's a free country and to feel better about life I can actually make the move and go and live somewhere nicer (ok, maybe not Windsor but still).

We're so lucky aren't we?

OP posts:
Clandestino · 22/05/2018 15:58

derxa, 15 years ago there was less danger of a terrorist attack. Your father would consider himself lucky if he weren't shot on spot as a precaution.
The place around the wedding must have been swarming with security, wonder how many excited grannies and uncles in the crowd were secret officers with a loaded gun.

kalapattar · 22/05/2018 15:58

Why do we need a Head of State when we have a Prime Minister

Who keeps the PM in check and ensures they follow the Constitution?

Step · 22/05/2018 16:06

Err - The cabinet, parliament and ultimately the electorate, add to that the house of lords, the law, international law and institutions and you're about there.......

BertrandRussell · 22/05/2018 16:07

"Who keeps the PM in check and ensures they follow the Constitution?"

The elected second chamber. The Opposition. The governing party. People who actually have power. What could the Queen do?

kalapattar · 22/05/2018 16:16

The cabinet, parliament and ultimately the electorate, add to that the house of lords, the law, international law and institutions and you're about there

Yes - but look at what happened recently. It took a citizen to go to the Supreme Court to tell Theresa May that Parliament needed a vote on Brexit.

A Head of State has a role in ensuring the Constitution is followed

www.president.ie/en/the-president/constitutional-role

The Constitution also provides the President with the power to refer certain Bills to the Supreme Court for a determination as to whether the bill or any provision thereof is repugnant to the Constitution

The Irish Presidential model seems a good system to follow. The Italians have a similar system

What could the Queen do

Famously nothing. She keeps out of politics

Lizzie48 · 22/05/2018 16:23

A President Farage would have no power to enact laws and could be removed if they crossed any line. Unfortunately we can't remove any Monarch if they cross a line

Actually we can, and it has happened. Obviously it happened when Charles I was beheaded, after the English Civil War. But Edward VIII was forced to abdicate over Wallis Simpson. Just as well, as he was a Nazi sympathiser.

It's also extremely hard to impeach a US President, it's only happened once. And the US Presidency probably costs as much as the Monarchy, and the French Presidency is similarly expensive. A comparison would be interesting.

The advantage of the Monarchy is that it's ceremonial and above politics. Although Charles might find it hard to keep his nose out of things.

A ceremonial Presidency is a viable option, actually.

kalapattar · 22/05/2018 16:26

A ceremonial Presidency is a viable option, actually

I think that's what some Head of States like Ireland and Germany are.

Expected to be above politics but to ensure the Constitution is followed. German Presidents have refused to sign some Bills that they believe are unconstitutional.

kalapattar · 22/05/2018 16:36

And if there was a need to get rid of the Head of State, it's a lot easier than getting rid of a Monarch

"Removal of a President from office
There are 2 situations when a President may be removed from office. If five Supreme Court judges or more decide that a President has become permanently incapacitated, the President's term of office will come to an end.

The President may also be impeached by either House of the Oireachtas for "stated misbehaviour". Stated misbehaviour might include a criminal offence or a misuse of the President's powers"

biscuitraider · 22/05/2018 16:41

And the US Presidency probably costs as much as the Monarchy, and the French Presidency is similarly expensive
The Irish presidency is a good role model, two and a half times cheaper than this monarchy too. Ridiculous to compare with a US presidency.

biscuitraider · 22/05/2018 16:44

And if there was a need to get rid of the Head of State, it's a lot easier than getting rid of a Monarch
But once it's done it's done, never have to again.

derxa · 22/05/2018 16:50

But what if the people vote for a Trump like person for President as Lizzie said above? The UK doesn't completely consist of bien pensant Gurdian readers like average MNetter.

derxa · 22/05/2018 16:55

And I'm still laughing at the thought of my DF being taken out by a sniper. An 80 year old wearing a suit and member's badge

Dapplegrey · 22/05/2018 17:09

But what if the people vote for a Trump like person for President as Lizzie said above? The UK doesn't completely consist of bien pensant Gurdian readers like average mumsnetter

Good point Derxa!
Were that to happen then I guess it would be like the EU referendum with all those who didn't vote for the Trump-like person saying the result wasn't binding, we want another vote, the result was sabotaged by Russian trolls etc etc.

Dapplegrey · 22/05/2018 17:10

But once it's done it's done, never have to again.

Biscuit - really? What about the Restoration and Charles II?

derxa · 22/05/2018 17:26

The Irish President has a term of 7 years. That's quite a long time to suffer a dud.

siwel123 · 22/05/2018 17:39

We could have a 4 year term. Regardless I would rather have someone elected. How many has an undemocratic queen been ruling for again?

Lizzie48 · 22/05/2018 18:11

The French President used to have a 7 year term. It meant that if they won a second term they would be in power for 14 years. Mitterrand was in power for that long. He got too used to power, appointing and sacking Prime Ministers. They have changed it to 5 year terms same as the Parliament, which I think is much better.

biscuitraider · 22/05/2018 18:26

But what if the next monarch is no good? we can't vote them out. See the injustice?

Lizzie48 · 22/05/2018 18:49

Thankfully, the Monarch can't do much damage, as they're just a figurehead. Presidents can do a lot of damage, look at Nixon and Watergate, and goodness knows how much damage Trump will do before his time is up.

As I said, a ceremonial President could be the answer. Or a trimmed down Monarchy, which does work well in other countries.

Dapplegrey · 22/05/2018 18:53

But what if the next monarch is no good? we can't vote them out.

Yes we can. If Labour win the next election and they feel they have enough support to abolish the monarchy then they could organise a referendum and if the pro monarchy side won then they would have to go.
That's what happened in Greece - iirc.
Government would have to decide what happens to the properties and possessions which are owned by the state. The Royal Family have plenty of stuff which is theirs, (as opposed to the state's) and how much of that they would be allowed to keep remains to be seen.
I guess it would take a few months to organise the referendum by which time most of the rich people in U.K. would have got out, taking what they could with them.

biscuitraider · 22/05/2018 19:51

Thankfully, the Monarch can't do much damage, as they're just a figurehead. Presidents can do a lot of damage
No point in having them then, why pay out fortunes for a figurehead.
Prime ministers can do a lot of damage too, having a monarchy doesn't make it less so.

BertrandRussell · 22/05/2018 20:53

You can't have it both ways. The Monarch is either a check on the worst excesses of parliament or a powerless figurehead. One or 'tother.

Why can't we have just a Prime Minister?

marchin1984 · 22/05/2018 22:18

And the US Presidency probably costs as much as the Monarchy, and the French Presidency is similarly expensive

you can't compare the british monarch to either. One is a glorified hat model and entertainer, while the US president is the most powerful person on the planet, and the french president has huge powers (he is not a figurehead).

Trump is thoroughly unpleasant, but Obama was similarly unpopular with huge swathes of American society. Why? The president makes consequential and important decisions that will necessarily piss off a lot of people. If your main job is to waive at people, it's really easy to be popular.

It's a silly comparison.

marchin1984 · 22/05/2018 22:21

I think that's what some Head of States like Ireland and Germany are.

The Queen is head of state in Australia and Canada, but the de facto head is the GG, which effectively is effectively ceremonial. There is a constitutional role, but that's only important around once every 80 years.

kalapattar · 22/05/2018 23:03

But what if the people vote for a Trump like person for President as Lizzie said above? The UK doesn't completely consist of bien pensant Gurdian readers like average MNetter

But someone like Farage or Trump wouldn't want to be President under a 'figurehead' Presidency like Germany and Ireland have because they can't make laws or run the country. Their power would be strictly limited and would be based around a Constitution with a limited time in office.

So what reason would a politician like Farage have to want to be President under such a system? Apart from to say he was President of the UK (with no actual power) and he would have to sign laws that he didn't agree with (unless there was a constutional reason why he couldn't sign them) - and then the courts would get involved. And if he was found to be 'trying it on', he could be removed easily from office - under the Constitution.

The Monarch could refuse to sign an Act of Parliament - and then what would happen?