Should William be our next king ?

[Lardlizard]

Yanbu for yes
Yabu for no

I'd rather see the monarchy abolished. The very best I can probably hope for (and I know it's a slim chance too) is an independent Wales with an elected head of state.

But anyway thats not how it works. You don't get to elect your monarch. It's hypocritical to believe in an unelected head of state and want the right to choose which one of them it is.

No he's too lazy.

He should be ashamed about the amount of 'work' he does compared to Prince Charles an Princess Anne.

@chomalungma

William's been very quiet during this pandemic. Mind you, so has Charles. And the Queen.

What's the point of them?
An anachronism.

They've been doing constant video calls to various causes etc. How did you miss this?

@PlanDeRaccordement

Keep the monarchy. They’re a living museum exhibit and very cheap.

67m isn’t ‘cheap’, that money could be used far more usefully elsewhere (NHS??). And I have one word if you even think about coming back with ‘but what about the money they bring in from tourism?’

France.

Do people know how the Royals are funded? The Royals are being paid with their own money effectively. It's slightly more complicated but to put it simply, the Treasury receives the money and returns a % to the Crown. The effective tax rate on this is far higher than anyone else in the Country.

The Queen and Charles are also funded by their relative Duchy income. The Queen does pay tax (although she could choose not to as well, she's the Queen).

What would happen on the abolition some of you crave? The flagship residences would most likely go to National Trust. (Buck Palace to developers? That's going to fly politically isn't it?).

The estate holdings would most likely be sold off. Yes that would bring in money in year one but after that, I can guarantee the Treasury won't be seeing but a fraction of the money it saw before due to the companies buying these being subject to the normal tax laws. In no way would this be a win for the taxpayer.

I think the Queen is awesome and I'd rather an apolitical figurehead than any elected glory hound. I'd also put good money that politicians of either hue would keep somewhere pretty damned grand for the figurehead to live in.

The Royals are being paid with their own money effectively. It's slightly more complicated but to put it simply, the Treasury receives the money and returns a % to the Crown. The effective tax rate on this is far higher than anyone else in the Country.

No they aren’t. Crown estate money is owned by the legal entity of ‘The Crown’. It is not private priority of the Windsor family. If they ceased to embody ‘The Crown’ they would have no claim to those funds (which are historically earmarked for the running of the state)

@WitchWandWithBaublesOn

I like William and Kate. Don't be mean all you lot who want to send them packing .

How do you know them?

William has a young family. It is probably better for them, and him, to be away from the throne until they are at least grown up.

Meanwhile, Charles remains the world's oldest and longest-serving management trainee.

No the last thing I’d want

Charles I can deal with just

But they are an anachronism for me

Meanwhile, Charles remains the world's oldest and longest-serving management trainee.

Management trainee? What is he training to manage? They don't manage anything, they go where they're required to go and do what they're required to do.

Probably the easiest job in the world with absolutely nothing for him to manage.

Pogdofly you do realise that the Queen meets with the PM every week and discusses policies with them?

She does a lot more than just cut ribbons.

Bikingbear Yes I do, but given that the Queen has no real power to do anything, I suspect that a once a week meeting with the PM is probably more a tradition than something that affects the country's policies to any great extent.

I'd think she probably questions things more deeply than shes given credit for.

Yes, she could be grilling the PM relentlessly on every single issue or it could just be an hour or so with a glass of sherry, but as neither of us are ever likely to attend one of those meetings we'll never know.

@Wandafishcake
I reckon King Charles III will be our last king.

He may not be Charles III. He's told friends he may choose to be George VII as George is his fourth forename. Apparently he doesn't much fancy following Charles I, who was the only monarch to be executed for treason, and Charles II who was an infamous Casanova whose reign is most notable for the Great Fire of London and the Plague.

They should keep the monarchy, but find a really charismatic royal dog to appoint as monarch instead of Charles or William. All royals really need to do is be good at shaking loads of hands, greeting lots of people, and posing for photos, and dogs are better at all of that than people. The Queen is 94! She shouldn't have to shake a hundred people's hands all in a row.

Dogs have large litters and can have multiple litters more easily than people, so there'd be constant pregnancies and new babies for the press and the public to coo over, without the insane cost and uncertain future of non-heir royal human babies, and without getting into the thorny issue of royals whining about the environmental cost of over-population while having large families themselves.

Dogs are also good at causing minor scandal so the tabloids would be happy ("King Snuffles caught sniffing other dog's bottom!") but would never cause any really serious scandals like financial fraud or being mates with pedophiles.

Dogs stay out of politics.

Most people like dogs and dogs are far less controversial than royals.

Yes. Snuffles for King 2021.

No, it's Charles next.

Oh and PMSL at the idea that a couple of brief Zoom meetings every week is a lot of work. Apart from the Queen and Princess Anne (and Meghan though she's not royal anymore) they're all totally lazy and workshy. I guess I give Charles a bit of credit for genuinely caring about certain issues like organic gardening. William doesn't seem to have any passions or interests now he's no longer a pilot, and Kate is the human equivalent of wallpaper paste. It's honestly shocking how badly she's neglected the few Patronages she has. But what do you expect of someone who spent all of her teens and twenties doing nothing but throwing herself in the path of and then hanging around waiting for a rich man to marry her?

@Skipsurvey

If the Queen died tomorrow Charles would really struggle with a coronation in the middle of a pandemic though!

It would make good headline fodder for the s*n though - they could call it a Coronanation. There was a great autocarrot fail here the other day, a poster had made 'chlorination chicken' and that's pretty apt too.

I'm with the PP who voted Charlie, purely for the extra bank holiday it would bring. Good thinking!

Whilst I'm not a monarchist, Charles should be next. Line of succession should be upheld.

Watched film King Charles 3 yesterday. Very odd and written in Shakesperean style with Kate and William as Macbeth/Hamlet type. I think Prince Harry must have seen it and taken its advice.

What do you think this is, the X Factor?
We don't get to choose who rules next, that's the point. They are beyond our control because they are appointed by God and we are just the 'umble poor who are to Know Our Place.

It is bonkers that, in a society where we work really hard to carve our own niche in life and make something of ourselves, this crowd sits in their palaces with every privilege life can afford them, and we are obligated to love them. If there were an alternative that would work, I would be all for it. But I think it would be just too hard to extricate its tentacles from our institutions and systems of government.

And I really don't think they work that hard, most of them. Especially William. Not compared to most of us.

Anyway, if we're now choosing royals, can Elton John be Queen Mum? He'd carry off those hats in style.

Monarchists are always telling me that the queen is the last line of defence (of the citizens of the UK) against a malevolent (or incompetent...) government. And that if push came to shove she could dissolve parliament or "strongly advise" them to pull their socks up.

(they did dissolve an Australian parliament, didn't they? not that long ago)

But when she really could have proved that, stepped up and won no end of brownie points over the prorogation last year.... nothing. Zip. Nada. Nothing.

She is good for nothing. A bit of waving.

And all the pp trotting out "well it would be President Farage/Blair/Johnson...." really. Get a bit of imagination. Ireland's presidency works perfectly well. Germany's president is often an ex politician, but they are generally harmless and fine. (and not chosen by a popular vote but by parliament)

We could have someone like Betty Boothroyd. Or what's to stop Princess Anne standing for the position?

forgot to say

I think if the monarchy wants to survive, Charles should pass it onto William. I was born in the early 90's, we have had an old monarch my entire life. Passing the Crown from one very elderly person to another pensioner is just unappealing.

push off with the ageism.