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.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Monarchy Abolished?

540 replies

malibuloving · 19/08/2019 17:52

Other threads have inspired me Grin

Do you think we’ll ever live to see the Royals gone or perhaps our children will?

I can see public support for it to be abolished once the Queens gone. I feel like they’ve had too many chances at this point. The cover up of Andrews vile friendship with the sexual predator Epstein and the awful things Andrew probably did plus the pictures with teenagers has been an outrage. I also really like Harry and Meghan but their hypocrisy is quite embarrassing how they’re banging on about climate change and then jetting off across the globe on private jets. And more and more for all royals.

AIBU to think their time is up soon

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
BelleSausage · 19/08/2019 20:59

The so-called privately own estates are an absolute joke.

Not sure what you mean by this.

scaryteacher · 19/08/2019 21:00

there is a witness called Virginia Roberts (the girl in the infamous photo) who says she was trafficked by Epstein and forced to have sex with Andrew. She was underage at the time.

Nope, she wasn't underage in the UK, which is where this allegedly took place. She was 17 and age of consent here is 16. I am unsure if I find the story credible or not..I can't see that Tramp would have risked their licence by having there as she claimed, and surely the Protection Officers would have been about as well.

Lots of people believed everything 'Nick' said in the recent historic abuse claims, and yet he was a total fraud. Difficult, isn't it to know who or what to believe?

managedmis · 19/08/2019 21:00

What about the people who current work for the crown estates? What happens to those jobs once the places aren’t needed for state reasons. Do you honestly believe that the National Trust (or who ever) would keep them all on

^

Confused

Yeah, cos the Royal family are seen volunteering on a regular basis at all NT properties.

SeriouslyEnoughAlreadyRantOver · 19/08/2019 21:01

Would you prefer President BoJo?

what difference would it actually make if he was called President or Chancellor instead of PM?

Many countries manage without any kind of Monarch as head of state, it's not hard at all to replicate.

BelleSausage · 19/08/2019 21:01

@StoneofDestiny

How would getting rid of the monarchy raise money for any of those things?

StoneofDestiny · 19/08/2019 21:02

We will never be able to vote out King Charles, King William or King George regardless Of any lack of morality, intelligence or common sense

Correct, and we will still have to pay for the privileges beyond measure of their siblings, cousins, partners etc.

managedmis · 19/08/2019 21:03

She does a lot of back door diplomacy for us. After 9/11 it was the Queen’s contacts in the UAE that helped restore oil exports to the U.K. after the Saudis shut up shop.

^

Yeah. Lots of back door going on in the RF, apparently.

managedmis · 19/08/2019 21:04

In fact I don't even know why I'm commenting on this, there will NEVER abolish the monarchy, it'd be too complicated.

BelleSausage · 19/08/2019 21:07

@managedmis

My point was that the official royal houses are staffed by hundreds of people. All paid.

NT run houses have (at best) five or six paid workers (usually part time) and the rest are volunteers.

After the war, as the big houses fell one by one to death duties, the biggest victims of the loss of family estates were tenant farmers and local village workers. Estates were often sold and then broken up with tenant farmers turned out and house staff let go. These estates used to support while villages and in return were supposed to look after those villages.

Now we live on a democracy where no one owes anyone anything and we are all so busy giving each other side eye about everything that we’ve allowed ourselves to be dragged through fucking Brexit.

This country isn’t intelligent enough to make this kind of far reaching decision. As we have already shown.

Dippypippy1980 · 19/08/2019 21:07

Belle sausage, I’m not a legal expert but I do have a basic understanding. I know it would be a complex process that couldn’t be done overnight. But I know it is possible.

I do enjoy a bit of a debate - this is just a fun online chat. I am sure you are vastly intelligent, and you are are keen that everyone can see that your opinion should be h led in a higher regard than theirs (and you might be right for all any of us know - you could even be the attorney general 😂).. but Really no need for it on a mumsnet gossipy chat.

And should there ever be a referendum your vote will not hold any greater weight than us mere mortals.

StoneofDestiny · 19/08/2019 21:09

*BelleSausage'
Taxes that pay to keep the monarchy going would be diverted to essential services, countless 'police and security operations' following them everywhere would be stood down and used to police our streets. Palaces would have to be self funded by tourist money - and renovations would not come out of the public purse. Private trains, planes, yachts and estates - sold to be self funded tourist attractions.

StitchingMoss · 19/08/2019 21:09

@BelleSausage what on earth makes u think it would be more expensive to have an elected head of state? Evidence?

The Republic of Ireland have an elected head of state as so many other countries - it’s much cheaper than funding the astronomical cost of the monarchy (and please don’t repeat the bullshit figure of 62p or whatever the palace come out with - that doesn’t take into most of the costs!).

BelleSausage · 19/08/2019 21:10

@Dippypippy1980

The problem with democracy is that you profess to know nothing about the topic but your vote would hold the same weight as anyone else’s, regardless of understanding.

All the issues of modern democracy summed up. You are demanding a vote about something that deeply affects the country, based on emotion and a current rumour. Yet you know nothing about the subject and don’t plan on finding out.

Brilliantly clear. Thanks.

Bezalelle · 19/08/2019 21:11

Hopefully. They're all sponges and nonces and weirdos.

MabelMoo23 · 19/08/2019 21:11

@scaryteacherthe photo was taken in London, so no she wasn't underage here, but in Palm Beach Florida, the age of consent is 18 so yes she would've been underage "on that occasion"

She maintains it was 3 different occasions

StoneofDestiny · 19/08/2019 21:12

After the war, as the big houses fell one by one to death duties, the biggest victims of the loss of family estates were tenant farmers and local village workers. Estates were often sold and then broken up with tenant farmers turned out and house staff let go. These estates used to support while villages and in return were supposed to look after those villages

These estate workers went on to find jobs elsewhere, productive jobs that did not involve propping up the lifestyles of the hunting, shooting landed gentry.

Dippypippy1980 · 19/08/2019 21:13

Aw bell sausage - you are brilliant😂😂😂

Thank you

sue51 · 19/08/2019 21:13

I think the Irish model would be a good one for the UK to adopt.

MeOnScreen · 19/08/2019 21:14

Meh as long as they're bringing in more money then what they are spending who cares?

BelleSausage · 19/08/2019 21:14

Look, I’m going to bed. I cannot be arsed to keep answering all of your questions about constitutional monarchies and the public purse. You can all read.

Read this information about the funding of the Royal Family to find out why that big pay day you are envisioning won’t happen.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finances_of_the_British_royal_family

PicsInRed · 19/08/2019 21:14

Austria, Germany, France, Italy, China, Russia etc etc have thriving historic tourism and lovely parklands. No royals.

And all this talk about the Queen protecting us constitutionally. The amount of crises under her reign - including presently - and she's done nothing.

"Oh, she's not supposed to interfere in seemingly every this particular situation."

Well, what's even the bloody point, then?

BelleSausage · 19/08/2019 21:15

And I have the wiki link because it is the easiest to understand.

GlitchStitch · 19/08/2019 21:15

Nope, she wasn't underage in the UK, which is where this allegedly took place. She was 17 and age of consent here is 16.

If she was paid for sex it's a crime if she's under 18. If she was trafficked it's a crime regardless of her age.

Anyway Andrew was hanging out with him after he'd been to prison for sex offences. It's grim.

managedmis · 19/08/2019 21:16

After the war, as the big houses fell one by one to death duties, the biggest victims of the loss of family estates were tenant farmers and local village workers. Estates were often sold and then broken up with tenant farmers turned out and house staff let go. These estates used to support while villages and in return were supposed to look after those villages

^^
YES! Bring back serfdom!

Just follow Trump's model and let's bring back coal! Working down the pit is such fun!

LaurieMarlow · 19/08/2019 21:23

If we get rid of the monarchy would we give them back control of the crown estates. As I understand it the monarch gave control of the crown estates to the government in exchange for an allowance (the civil list) so really they should have it back unless we simply accept that the government can simply take other people property when it wants (which it may seem to do anyway

You understand wrong. It’s not Windsor family property, it belongs to a legal entity called ‘The Crown’ which would cease to exist or be changed radically if we got rid of them.