To think the monarchy will end with the death of Queen Elizabeth 2

[Gingertea2020]

As an Aussie am curious to know if British monarchy can really prevail beyond life of Queen.

Recently there has been the biography of Megxit and details, intricate, of the fall out between the two Princes and their wives.

Added to this there is the Prince Andrew saga.

With all that is happening in world, will it really continue ?

I can’t imagine a Prince Charles.

I genuinely wonder why the British bother with it all.

Charlotte looks quite a character. That time a few years ago she sat down on the tarmac and refused to budge was quite funny.

Sorry if already mentioned but I think some of you would rather enjoy watching the comedy The Windsors on All-4.

Charles slimming down the monarchy ... just means only certain people in the lineage will receive Crown funding

Excellent - so in financial terms it means that he gets to keep more of it for himself

I don't doubt that'll appeal, though things might get awkward if some event organisers out in the sticks want a royal presence and nobody's being paid to do it

Excellent. It'll be Charlotte then. Meet you here in 2045 to argue about Charlotte's party-girl attitude and profligancy!

Charles will become King I'm sure, but after him maybe it will end.

I don't see the problem. Whenever this comes up some people claim that that we have to replace the monarch with a head of state who lives like a monarch and that's just not true. We can do whatever we like and that includes having no head of state at all. They serve no purpose.

If we really wanted a figurehead to go to banquets (why?) we could elect someone and pay them the same as a postman.

Maybe give the position to retired entertainers/actors who would have no problem with public appearances.

I think the whole "oh but you have to have someone..." was probably started by the RF's PR team

Realistically does anyone give a shyt.

I really doubt it.

Excellent - so in financial terms it means that he gets to keep more of it for himself

no, of course not. The purse w/o reduce accordingly and thus cost the taxpayer less. Additional to that he will also turn certain properties over for the potential to raise more income (which will replace state funding)

Puzzledandpissedoff It doesn't matter what powers the queen once had or even still has in theory. Does anyone really think if she started declaring war on other countries or ordering people executed that it would actually happen?

Some of 'the British' don't bother with it all OP, me included.

But judging by the thousands of people that flock to catch a glimpse of them every time there's a royal wedding or some other royal event it would seem that a great many of 'the British' are very happy with them.

Even if the monarchy were to be wound up, and I can't imagine why it would, it would take a lot more than the death of the current queen to end it.

It's not something that could be decided overnight and would take years and acts of parliament to implement.

It's not a case of someone walking into which ever castle they happen to be in and saying 'right you lot, pack your bags you're leaving'.

Does anyone really think if she started declaring war on other countries or ordering people executed that it would actually happen?

Of course not, but it's not starting wars or chopping off heads which are the realistic concern with a less stable monarch. However try looking into the parliamentary possibilities and the situation becomes more concerning

The purse w/o reduce accordingly and thus cost the taxpayer less

I can't work out if you're being ironic there, Bernadette but I assume you're aware that the arrangements for the Sovereign Grant mean it can never decrease?

For @pussycatinboots

@wagtailred, you had me in stitches with that quip. Possibly too.much wine but I could not stop laughing.

Surprised at the number of comments suggesting skipping over Charles and straight to William. Regardless of the scandals in the 90s, Charles has all the makings of an excellent King. He has a strong work ethic, engages with people and organisations, has done amazing things with the Duchy, has a sound financial mind, and is genuinely passionate about certain things. The hypocrisy about taking so many private jets while preaching climate change is awful but William is equally bad.

William on the other hand is just awful. Completely work shy, lazy, petulant and entitled. Kate has more charisma and gets a pass because she has kids but she’s so lazy and workshy too - the way she neglects the tiny number of patronages she has is just awful, and of course the media don’t report it at all. Her very first patronage closing for want of a tiny bit of money and it coming out she’s only visited them once in ten years, even though it’s a charity that helps support the mental health of vulnerable children through art which is all 3 of Kate’s pet causes; the embarrassing recent interview where Kate Zoomed with the head of another of her patronages and said something like “feels like I was there yesterday” and the head mentioned she’d only ever visited once years earlier, and KP editing it out. Not to mention the Ed Sheeran incident. She has so few patronages, and at least two of them she has literally never visited since she first signed on as patron? William is even worse admitting he doesn’t even read briefing notes. He failed to become a fully qualified pilot because he didn’t put the flying hours in. Dropped the special uni course created for him. No. They both have a lot of maturing to do before they’re ready to rule.

I don't care what happens with the British monarchy, but I would like Australia to become a republic soon.

We gain nothing by being tied to Britain in the way we are.

I know the Cambridge stans will attack me but I heard the Rose Hanbury rumours reported as being an open secret that everyone knew by more then one friend who’s on the aristo scene, and my partner and several friends are journalists and seen first hand the extremely heavy handed legal pressure William has used to suppress the rumour. I heard it long before it leaked online btw. The affair allegedly happened while she was pregnant with Charlotte, not with Louis.

Until I saw her swanning around like a celeb and having ridiculously expensive baby showers. Inviting celebs to her wedding instead of family. Making ridiculous demands and upsetting the staff. Behaving disgracefully towards the rest of the RF. Moaning about the restrictions of being a senior royal. Lecturing people on flights etc whilst flying around in private jets.

LOL she didn’t actually do any of those things.

Aussie here too. I think there will be a big push here to become a republic.

@GreyGardens88
I think it should just be massively scaled down, they don't need Balmoral, Sandringham, Windsor, Buckingham Palace. They should have one residence and turn the rest into tourist attractions year round.

Balmoral and Sandringham are Lizzie's personal property, they don't belong to the nation and if the monarchy was abolished they would remain the personal property of the Windsors. Buck House and Windsor do belong to the nation, and they're held in trust for future generations by the Crown Estates.

Definitely time for Australia to become a republic. Many people here are reeling from by the publication of letters between the Queen and our governor general at the time when the GG sacked a democratically elected Prime Minister in the name of the Queen. 1975. Major constitutional crisis. The letters show that the Queen was able to deny foreknowledge but her team was coaching the GG.

Charles can't slim down the monarchy for long seeing as William is having children as if he needs spare kids to create alliances with neighbouring countries.

Maybe we should go back to that method of choosing royal brides. Surely Scandinavia could have spared a couple of princesses for William and Harry?

I think we are very very lucky William was born before Harry.

Is it luck, or was it training? The establishment puts its energy into the heir, not the spare. Look at Andrew. Look at Margaret. Is it really sheer dumb luck that they weren’t the first-born, or were they simply not prioritised and left to their own devices?

@pigsDOfly
But judging by the thousands of people that flock to catch a glimpse of them every time there's a royal wedding or some other royal event it would seem that a great many of 'the British' are very happy with them.

There are 65 million people in the UK, so the few thousand who turn up to look at them are a tiny proportion of the population.

I think.monarchy will continue. I think Charles will be ok King. He won't have too many years and then William will be ok. Just grateful we won't get emotional wreck Harry and must be centre of attention Meghan.

The way she treated her father was appailing. I could not really care if Meghan wanted to jet about whilst lecturing the rest of us, or how much she spent of tax payers money on Frog House, what made me see her for what she is, a nasty attention grabber who can't bare anyone else being in the limelight was announcing her pregnancy at a family wedding is just so incredibly spiteful. Did anyone see her elbow Harry out of frame recently in video clip so she ended up centre of camera focus with Harry almost pushed out of shot? She just can't cope with not being centre of attention.

"I think we are very very lucky William was born before Harry. Katherine very much lives up to the role of future Queen consort."

If Harry had been born first, then Kate would have stalked and nailed him instead