To not understand how the UK can afford to pay £250 million for the coronation?

[Kedfs]

When there are people reliant on food banks to survive and we are told that there is no money to pay for nurses and teachers pay rises?

Whatever your thoughts are on having a monarchy, having a coronation is unnecessary and was abandoned by other monarchies years ago. If he really wants one, can’t he pay for it himself, given that he has billions of pounds?

The answer here is that these things don’t happen overnight. We’re still very much in the QE2 era. The Queen only departed a few months ago and there’s been no opportunity to reconsider but I believe that process is starting now. Even the most fervent Republican was not going to be actively speaking out against QE2 during her reign. Now is the natural time
to reconsider and decide what we as a people want to do going forward.
It’s becoming increasingly clear that that solid majority for a monarchy is eroding day by day, especially among the younger generations.

The problem for the Monarchy is that at a certain point, they may … it depends on how everyone feels … come to be seen as an obstacle to reform rather than a solution. The point is that the reforms needed in the UK run much further and deeper than just getting rid of the monarch. The country needs a wholesale reconfiguration. This is the argument about monarchy; it inevitably links us to the past rather than allowing us freedom to evolve in the future. This is not about the individuals involved, it’s about institutions.

And I contest your view that the populous would find it easy to make their feelings known on this matter if they were in opposition to the monarchy. I suspect very few people think about it in any great detail at all tbh! That position is then assumed to be one of consent and support for a monarchy when in reality it is probably nearer to indifference.

In other words, you will only get a clear view of what the public really want if they asked the question directly in a referendum.

Instead of Charles inviting us to swear allegiance to the Crown, I firmly believe that he should have invited us to declare our support of the Crown, or not, as the case may be!

"I suspect very few people think about it in any great detail at all tbh!"

Stating this really doesn't help your argument at all, but it adds to my point. If very few people think about the Monarchy at all, it means it's not a central problem in their lives. And this means it's unlikely to reach a point where the population will want a referendum on the Monarchy itself.

After all, the population understands that power lies not with the Monarchy, but with Parliament and the Government. It is Parliament and the Government who really affect people's lives. The Monarchy represents the British State at home and abroad. Considering the Monarchy is a large part of British soft power and we're second only to the USA on that...we'd be mad to get rid of the Monarchy!

Now, you say that "The country needs a wholesale reconfiguration". You'll have to explain what you mean by this. If it's becoming a federal state, then there really isn't any real discernible demand for this. We've already had devolution which Blair admitted his Labour Government hadn't properly thought it through - i.e., they'd unintentionally weakened the Union itself. Most people want to keep the union together, so there'll be no reconfiguration such as federalism or further devolution. Those aren't fixes for people's daily lives.

So what kind of "wholesale reconfiguration" are you thinking about?

Good response! I love all these "the majority of people don't want the monarchy" posts. Just because your friends, family, and colleagues don't want a monarchy doesn't make it the majority!

That goes for anything! For example, a border poll in Northern Ireland cannot take place unless its likely a majority want it. So, why would any government grant one until then?

That same principle applies to IndyRef2 in Scotland AND to any possibility of a referendum on the Monarchy.

Oh, and the Crown is itself an extension of the British State. The Crown Prerogative is a power exercised by the Prime Minister and the Crown Estate is not the personal property of the Monarch either. So, under our constitution, the King has absolutely zero right to "invited us to declare our support of the Crown, or not, as the case may be!" via referendum on the Monarchy.

Only Parliament can do that since Parliament itself is Supreme.

Parliament supreme my arse, when a dodgy prime minister can disband parliament to avoid MPs voting on a matter of national interest as well as using their power to promote nepotism, corruption, etc as we have seen over the last decade, the only supreme thing in this country is the PM, his personal interests and his friends.

Think you'll find the Supreme Court upheld the Doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty and struck down Boris Johnson's prorogation of Parliament as unlawful....🤦‍♂️

Poor argument.

Not such a poor argument, he remained in power even after something so outrageous (and much more shit)

He is pretty much like Trump, a loose cannon, misogynist, corrupt self serving psychopath loved by the majority of the population.

Another poor argument.

Constitutional Law is a very different thing to Criminal Law. The Supreme Court upheld Constitutional Law by reasserting the Supremacy of Parliament.

Johnson was clearly ousted via non-Constitutional Law concerns.

Either way, the system prevailed and he did not.

But the point still remains that it is Parliament that can authorise a referendum on any issue. The King certainly can't! 🤦‍♂️

OP may not have voted for them so may not have “wanted” this. Hence the justified moaning. In my opinion we don’t moan enough. We just accept things.

If you are anti monarchy then yep you aren't going to understand the cost, the revenue that comes out of it, and the image of the UK it projects. Nor are you going to understand even at £250m its £ 5 or so per head so not having it isn't going to do half the things you think it will.

Travel a bit and see what the populations of other countries think. Some of my family live in Greece and France and have had Sunday papers full of the Royal family for weeks.

As a European who lived in the UK for years I think this argument is misleading. The coronation pomp is obviously exceptional and tourists know they can't just book themselves a coronation.

The people who buy magazines with royals on the cover do so for escapism and don't necessarily have the money or the desire to go ogle palaces.

The UK used to be seen as cool and quirky by younger tourists - think Camden Lock market, not Buckingham Palace- and I guess it offers reliably deferential services for the very wealthy. The monarchy is neither here nor there for all this.

Brexit has shattered the country's reputation abroad and I don't see how the coronation will help that.

Totally agree with most (!) As immigrant of nearly 2 decades, but!
It eill be the merch which will being most in imho. Every big event I am aaked to buy people merch. Will and Kate wedding, Jubilee etc. Merch is the saviour.

And yet the UK ranks second only to the USA in terms of soft power!

The Royals are a big part of UK soft power as shown with evidence on previous pages. It does assist with building UK reputation abroad as well as diplomatic relationships globally.

And that feeds down to the perceptions of tourists themselves.

Allied to the UKs second ranking in soft power, we are also ranked second in the Audit of Geopolitical Capability.

All these things inform opinions and perceptions of the UK abroad.

Politicians might still like and respect the country (at least on the outside), but amongst ordinary people it's not the case.
I have recently visited my native country. People were laughing about veg in UK, wtf is happening there, Brexit, the fact that I can't just send package anymore without recipient having headache and pay was moaned about, the stag parties, the stag parties and the stag parties, rubbish, shit in rivers, exchange rates, I had to explain what foodbanks are and so on.
People abroad know somewhat what's happening here because it does feature in their newspapers sometimes

Ordinary people don't think about UK the way they did 10, 15 years ago.

Which is your native country?

EU one is all I will say

Each country has its issues and I can’t think of one that really is in the position to laugh

Maybe one does feel they can though

It’s more the point that if very few people think about it at all then they would surely benefit from doing so? Or is it better to have an ignorant, uninformed, disengaged population?

I don’t think it’s helpful given the theme of this thread to go in to the full details of what I would consider to be “wholesale reconfiguration” of the UK, because it largely concerns changes made to improve democratic accountability, and how the populace are best served by our current institutions, and I simply don’t have time this morning, but abolishing the House of Lords and replacing it with an elected second chamber would be a good start.

And yes of course I know that only parliament can instigate a referendum. Please don’t twist my words.

I was saying that if the monarch swears an oath of allegiance to his people, and his people in turn are invited to swear an oath of allegiance to him, it would be plain good manners to check rather than assume, that that is in fact what the people of this country want, especially after seventy years in which so much about British society has changed.

It’s a bit like someone serving you cake at a tea party when you wanted a sandwich. Most polite hosts, who truly want to please, check first. They don’t go ahead and serve the cake and rely on the recipient to protest that they don’t like it!

I don’t really care how it’s done tbh! But if the purpose of the monarchy is to genuinely serve its people, then surely its people should have a say in the matter. Or is it the case of a paternalistic “now don’t bother your silly heads dear subjects, we know what’s good for you”. Sorry, but the days when we trusted our institutions are long gone. Those in power have seen to that.

And if your answer to that is “nah nah that’s not the way a hereditary monarchy works” I do know that, but we still need to find a way or else at some point we cease to be a fully functioning democracy.

Eh? Who is getting the money from TV rights?

Of course each country has their issues.
But frankly, having newspaper articles how people in uk are told to eat turnips because no salad veg, while the other country has all available is obviously going to make people joke about it, isn't it.
The fact that only about 15% of our waters here have good ecological status is also abysmal.
There are plenty bad things but UK was not thought about before like that. Latest question is wtf happened because article about kids in poverty rising appeared.
Absolutely none of the above things screams great and cool country like UK was seen about 15 years ago.

They’ll have been saving up, a bit like parents saving up for their child’s university fees from the day they’re born. I mean, it’s not like we haven’t been expecting the event for a good few years, is it?

shame they didn’t do that with pensions, it’s not like they didn’t have 60 years

But where is it that’s so much better?

And has no food banks

This is baseless rhetoric utterly reliant on your own anecdotes which led you right into the Anecdotal Fallacy.

What happens on the international absolutely does impact upon the perceptions of tourists.

The UKs high standing in soft power, global military power and even brand recognition (sixth) speaks volumes on that point. 🤦‍♂️

Had to explain about food banks? Like those are unheard of in the European mainland! 🤦‍♂️ Rubbish.

If people rely on newspapers to tell them what life is like in any country, they'll only hear sensationalist things. They're obviously not true representations of life anywhere and I think most Europeans are intelligent enough to understand that.

The alternative is to assume they're thick as mince, bigoted or other if we go by your logic....🤷‍♂️

As expected, a load of meaningless waffle.

This bit:

".....that is in fact what the people of this country want..."

Where is your evidence that people want a Monarch to consult with the people regarding allegiance?

The majority of the population is still in favour of the Monarchy. As such, no need for any Monarch to do this. And because the majority are still in favour as already laid out in previous posts above, there's no need for the people to have a say via a referendum or whatever.

Cease to be a fully functioning democracy? Have you heard yourself?! Hysterical comment. 🤦‍♂️

You're trying to reason here in a very circular manner which is a logical fallacy. It doesn't work. Your posts are just full of rhetoric and no real substantial evidence in support of it.