To wonder if Britain will always have a monarchy...

[DrinkSangriaInThePark]

... Or if not, how/when will British people get the opportunity to disband it?

I'm not from England, I'm Irish living in Ireland by the way, and I don't have very strong feelings for or against the British Royal family. But I seem to be hearing a lot of criticism of, and annoyance at, the Royal family recently, and I'm just wondering if there could ever be a referendum to decide whether the idea of a monarchy is outdated and unnecessary?

Again, I'm totally unbiased one way or another, but just wondering if the monarchy has to stay forever, just because it has always been there. With a democratic government, will be there ever be a time when it's deemed an unnecessary cost?

If we were to abolish the monarchy the process and the office would be under minute scrutiny.

Having met Prince Andrew, I do think it very wrong that a man like that would be king if he have been the first born.

Like parliamentary expenditure’s under intense scrutiny? Despite the expenses furore, MPs are still fiddling them. A Welsh Tory MP’s just been removed as a result. I’ll take the Royal family, thanks.

Why would the president have to be a politician?

Have you looked at the US lately?

Blimey sue51 I'm getting even more worried about you.

The presidents role would not be to make policy. I cited Ireland not America.
We now, quite rightly, remove politicians who fiddle their expenses. Do you really believe the Royals are above making personal gain from their position?

The Royal family doesn’t need to make personal gain from its position, it gets the State Grant and is independently wealthy. The Queen or Boris? No brainer.

Sue you're just making yourself look a bit daft now.

I suggest you take a bit of time to look into the finances of Prince Andrew.

As we've not had a republic since 1660

That wasn't a republic it was a Commonwealth.

What do they teach at schools these days ?

You know well what I meant.

I was at school in the 50s and 60s so its been a while.

sue I wasn't referring to your Prince Andrew comments. You don't think Presidents make policy in some countries? You need to know much more on the subject.

OP I envy you your non-executive presidency. Seems to work well.

Again, I am using Ireland as a role model. Have a look at their constitution.

Some other sites allow posters to set up polls (like Facebook). It would be interesting to poll amongst people who do not support the Monarch, "Why" ?

Personally, it's nothing to do with the money. In a country which can find £10 billion in loose change for a political agreement and squirrel £26 billion in a cookie jar for Brexit, a couple of billion for the Royal family is penny ante stuff.

My dislike is the inherited privilege bit. I guess I just never liked having to tell DS that he couldn't ever be King, no matter how hard he worked as school. But, as some more perspicacious posters may have realised, I'm half born of a Republic to start with.

Many posting on here do not seem to understand the difference between an executive and non executive presidency. France and the US have the former countries such as Germany and Israel do not.

I've said this on another thread, but France does well without a royal family. I think you could open the palaces to the public and make so much money from that. I think once the Queen dies there should be a referendum. I'm not British but I find the whole thing outdated and weird. You're paying to courtesy to a family who think they're better than you? Just odd.

Many posting on here do not seem to understand the difference between an executive and non executive presidency.

80% of UK citizens probably don't understand the UKs constitution (such as it is) in any detail to start with. Let alone other countries and principles such as Separation of Powers.

@Eustasiavye you can get married if you have children in Ireland. You can get an abortion in Ireland. The Troubles were caused by the British. France got rid of their Royal family, and I know I'd sooner visit France than England. You're xenophobic and it's embarrassing.

France got rid of their Royal family, and I know I'd sooner visit France than England

Yes, but presumably that's for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with their lack of monarchy? Or do you refuse to visit countries that have a Royal Family?

I think once the Queen dies there should be a referendum

Brenda from Bristol won't like that.

I don't live in Britain so I don't really understand what the queen does. What difference does it make if the monarch is abolished? What does she do that the government can't do? You have a prime minister, isn't that enough?

@ShatnersWig No, just simply stating that Britain has much more to offer tourists than just a royal family. And I don't think tourism can justify keeping a very rich family in pocket when tax payers money could be put to much better use. Or is austerity over?

It’s not taxpayers’ money.

I don't live in Britain so I don't really understand what the queen does.

The Queen is our head of state (and head of state of a few other countries as well). She has specific and personal powers to dissolve parliament, appoint (and remove) ministers (including the Prime Minister). Her signature is required to enact laws. And a whole host of things beside. Because she is unelected, there's a sheen of fiction that she does things "on advice" of her government.

Beyond that, it's all a bit vague. Not having a single written constitution, it's hard to enumerate the exact powers and role of the Monarch. As discussion of recent events have shown.

For better or for worse, you can at least learn and quote the entire US constitution (and I could at one point). Which is a manual for how to build and run a country ... as P.J. O'Rourke once noted:

The U.S. Constitution is less than a quarter the length of the owner's manual for a 1998 Toyota Camry, and yet it has managed to keep 300 million of the world's most unruly, passionate and energetic people safe, prosperous and free.

I’m amazed that the royals never make a bigger deal of how much of the sovereign grant is spent on state visits

So am I, which makes me wonder yet again if everything's quite as it appears. Never underestimate the monarchy's capacity for using smoke and mirrors when it suits

They might not have any real say these days ...

I believe there's an issue here in believing that because something's been done a certain way during the Queen's long reign, that's the way it has to be done. Even basic research of the Royal Prerogative shows the potential for things to be very different, which in future may or may not cause problems

Just as a quick explanation of the Irish system:
We have a government and a Prime Minister, called the Taoiseach. They run the country, in the same was as the British Primer Minister does.
We also have a President, who is more of a figurehead and doesn't have anything to do with the actual day to day running if the country (actually quite like the Queen).

So it's not at all like the American system.