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family recently, and I'm just wondering if there could ever be a referendum to decide whether the idea of a monarchy is outdated and unnecessary?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?

In defence to the Monarchy, after 1649, we got where we are today without too many heads being lopped off. But that's part of the problem. Successive centuries have built up a very delicate house of cards (deliberate analogy ...) where precedent and tradition have eclipsed written statute. When the country is in default mode, it wasn't such an issue. Much like the dodgy steering on your car isn't a problem until you need to change direction. However, as we have seen with recent events - and the exact effect of the Fixed Term Parliament Act is still unknown - we are not in "default mode", and things aren't going at all well.

I checked out after a couple of hundred posts, but I was following a very fine grained argument over the exact process of appointing a Prime Minister (because it's not actually written down as law). And it's quite remarkable how vague it actually is. Do the Privy Council get a say ? Or parliament ? What exactly is the Cabinet Secretaries role ? Can the Monarch reject advice given ? If not, what is their prerogative ? How about "confidence of the House" ? Is that as clear cut as it sounds ?

These aren't exam-abstract questions. They are very real ones that might need an answer in the next 4 weeks....

Not many could give a toss about Harry and Meghan @PatoPotato - at least those of us who don't read shitrag tabloids and crappy magazines every other day.

They're a non event and will soon fade in to the background as George, Charlotte and Louis take centre stage as him and William did as they got older. They'll be about as public facing as the Wessex lot. Which, lets be honest, no one really gives a stuff about.

We are in the middle of a constitutional crisis and our Head of State is completely useless because she, quite rightly, cant do anything to interfere with an elected body

Actually, there's a (potentially worrying) amount she could do, at least in theory - again, see the Royal Prerogative: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_prerogative_in_the_United_Kingdom

As said, it's easy to be lulled by the Queen's fairly guarded behaviour, especially as it's been that way for so long, but that's no guarantee of a future monarch taking the same approach

Not many could give a toss about Harry and Meghan

I agree and disagree at the same time. I think people don't care personally about them. I don't think people get inspiration from them or listen to them when it comes to charity causes. I do think there has been a perception shift though since the wedding. They have gone from funny/interesting background amusement to more in the public eye in a bad way. I think the amount of celebrity focus has made people feel like the monarchy is becoming a Kardashian-esque circus. I don't think it's an identity that has ever been attributed to the monarchy. I also think this is a big reason why you have so many articles attacking their credibility recently. I think the rift between Harry and Will is because regardless of how much people don't give a shit about Meghan, she has harmed the reputation of the monarchy as a whole. I would say in a far worse way than the Charles/Camilla affair since it has always been accepted in history that kings have mistresses, concubines, etc.

The Swedish royals don’t cost any less than the British royals do not all of the Scandinavians have lower cost monarchies.

Actually, there's a (potentially worrying) amount she could do, at least in theory - again, see the Royal Prerogative ...

Which ultimately was how the Civil War started. And ended with Parliament placing limits on the power of Kings.

Remember the Monarchs power is exercised "on the advice of ..." which makes transparency an issue. When you are following tradition - like appointing the leader of the majority party in the House of Commons Prime Minster - it's just a formality.

The problem comes (maybe sooner than we think) when you enter an unexpected or novel situation. Just supposing Theresa May steps down, but it transpires her successor - for whatever reason - cannot "command the confidence" of the HoC ? What then ? We now have a law - the FTPA which has removed the Monarchs right to just dissolve parliament and call a General Election.

On a completely separate topic, how soon after the Queen passes away do people think we'll have to wait before we see Charles III coins, notes and stamps ? I'm guessing they've already proofed some discretely, so could be quite quick. And he'll face left on coins, I know that.

I don't think it's an identity that has ever been attributed to the monarchy.

I think it’s pretty much always been like that. Royalty and celebs fulfil basically the same purpose.

she has harmed the reputation of the monarchy as a whole. I would say in a far worse way than the Charles/Camilla affair since it has always been accepted in history that kings have mistresses, concubines, etc.

Really?

In what way? What has she actually done?

I don't think it's an identity that has ever been attributed to the monarchy.

Have you seen 18th and 19th century cartoons lampooning the Monarchy ? They make Spitting Image look like religious icons.

I think it’s pretty much always been like that. Royalty and celebs fulfil basically the same purpose.

Perhaps. But they should not be in the same category in the minds of the public.

Really? confused In what way? What has she actually done?

She turned their wedding in to the Oscars. She had nearly no family there. That should have been fixed before the wedding and there should not have been such a celebrity focus.

She turned their wedding in to the Oscars

Firstly, the royals tend to invite celebs to weddings. Kate and Wills had the Beckhams, Elton John, Joss Stone (off the top of my head). Secondly, she’s an actress, so they’re her friends. Are you saying she shouldn’t invite friends?

She had nearly no family there.

So what? She might not have much family and clearly her fathers side are a bit toxic. None of us can help our family (including the royals).

And you think this makes her worse than Charles and his infidelity? Are for fucking real?

I suspect the UK will end before the monarchy.

Well would you, if it went the way you wanted

It did go the way at least 2 of the original Tory leadership candidates wanted, and they did threatened to bypass Parliament and go straight to the Queen. There wasnt a stampede of brexiteers protesting about it that I could see!

It did go the way at least 2 of the original Tory leadership candidates wanted, and they did threatened to bypass Parliament and go straight to the Queen.

So far the Queen has done an admirable job of appearing to keep out of it all (returning to that "transparency" theme, remember she has a weekly personal meeting with the Prime Minister which is unminuted ....). I suspect the Palace has been fending off any advances behind the scenes to prevent a situation where Her Madge could be construed to have taken sides.

But that just underscores the pointlessness of a constitutional Monarch who can't exercise powers only available to them for fear of the appearance of political interference. Who remembers Prince Charle and the "spider letters", where it turned out he was trying to influence government policy ......

DGRossetti interestingly a £5 coin already exists, minted to mark Charles's 70th birthday: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-45862598

As you suggest, it's not hard to imagine that the same portrait may already be in use in preparing future currency and stamps ...

I'd be amazed (and a little disappointed) if the Mint and Mail hadn't quietly commissioned a portrait and got Chucks approval ... after all one thing we should be able to do properly is Royalty.

And you think this makes her worse than Charles and his infidelity? Are for fucking real?

Lol calm down.

Obviously no one cares if you have a million celebrities at your wedding and no family at your wedding as a normal person. Infidelity would be worse of course, I'm not talking about normal people.

As a royal, perception is everything. If the public starts to equate Meghan with a reality TV star, then they will start to question the whole framework. I'm not saying infidelity is good for royals, but for kings it's kind of expected. Have you heard of Henry VIII?

I'm not discussing their morality. I'm discussing their viability and how long they will last. The public needs to feel like royals are better than them, for lack of a nicer way to say it. Do you feel like Kim Kardashian is better than you? Probably not. People need to feel like the monarchy is better than your run of the mill celebrity.

I don't give a shiny shit about the Royals morals when they aren't preaching them too us. To be honest it's more politicians that try to preach morality. And should stop.

The public needs to feel like royals are better than them, for lack of a nicer way to say it. Do you feel like Kim Kardashian is better than you? Probably not

Well that’s my fundamental issue. I don’t think the royals are better than me for popping out of a royal vagina.

In the main they’re not particularly good looking, talented or smart. I can’t fathom why anyone wants to put them on a pedestal? Perhaps you can elaborate.

At least I see Megan’s attributes. While not everyone cup of tea she’s clearly beautiful and self made. She’s miles out of Harry’s league if you ask me.

PatoPotato: I think having a wedding look like the Oscars has affected the way the public sees the monarchy as a whole.

I don't agree, it was a beautiful wedding and the outstanding impression was of a deep, true love between the couple. I have never forgotten it, it was such a happy occasion.

In the main they’re not particularly good looking, talented or smart. I can’t fathom why anyone wants to put them on a pedestal? Perhaps you can elaborate.

They are put on a pedestal due to privilege of their birth. Public perception is hugely important to this and why Elizabeth had to marry Philip rather than random Frank down the road. It's also why it was a big deal that Will was allowed to marry a commoner. They have been tinkering with the idea of blue bloods/aristocracy and marrying outside of it, but that hasn't always been the case. If they make big mistakes with their partners and swing the pendulum of public perception too far in to the disrespect direction, then the monarchy will not last.

This is not a slight against Meghan. I think she's very pretty and probably a great partner to Harry, but with the celebrity focus and perhaps slightly being too political, it will come back to bite them.

LaurieMarlow

So what if she’s “beautiful”? Is that an important attribute when you decide whether a woman is worthy of admiration?

And “self-made”? She had a job, like most women in the West. The only reason you’ve ever heard of her, or are even discussing her, is because of the man she married.

Meghan is a very, very bad fit for the royal family. It’s extremely obvious that she wants worldwide fame on her terms. She wants to be seen a “global humanitarian” and some kind of IG influencer, posting sepia tinted pics of herself & wearing the most expensive clothes in the world.

All perfectly fine for celebrities doing it all on their own dime but not for a working member of the royal family.

Harry & Meghan’s ONLY job is to support the Queen. They act as her emissary, accepting curtseys and bows on her behalf when out and about. It’s not supposed to be about them & they are not supposed to be trying to continually make themselves the story.

Kate & William are getting it absolutely right. Harry & Meghan are getting it absolutely wrong.

They want to create Brand Sussex - when it ought to be Brand Monarchy and nothing else.

Their stupid perfume ad pics of their engagement, wedding & now baby say everything you need to know about the pair of them....vain, shallow and narcissistic.

They won’t last. Either they’ll move to the US together with Harry throwing in the royal towel, or they’ll divorce and she’ll go alone.

if they make big mistakes with their partners and swing the pendulum of public perception too far in to the disrespect direction, then the monarchy will not last.

Well Diana was a bone fide aristo and that was a disastrous marriage.

Why should the public feel that a family of not particularly bright people who shake hands and smile for a job are better than them? They're not. And Henry VIII? The man who definitely had two wives murdered on a whim and who's claim to the Throne is based on his father probably kidnapping and murdering two children?

The only reason you’ve ever heard of her, or are even discussing her, is because of the man she married.

Well no. I was a fan of Suits from the start. I appreciate thats not true of everyone though.

Meghan is a very, very bad fit for the royal family. It’s extremely obvious that she wants worldwide fame on her terms

You’re just spouting speculative shit now.

Harry & Meghan’s ONLY job is to support the Queen. They act as her emissary, accepting curtseys and bows on her behalf when out and about. It’s not supposed to be about them & they are not supposed to be trying to continually make themselves the story

I find this very accurate. A notable point about the Queen is just how little we know of her opinions on anything (except perhaps for the Commonwealth and some comments about Christian values in the Christmas broadcasts). No doubt she has her views and some high profile friends, but on the whole we don't hear about them - she just keeps her own counsel and gets on with the job

If only the rest - and especially her ghastly heir - were the same