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

The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

To wish all the royal family would become private citizens?

145 replies

Snog · 12/01/2020 10:50

I wish they would all stand down
I'm sick of the virtue signalling, wealth hoarding and hypocrisy while there is so much poverty deprivation and homelessness in the UK with the NHS, mental healthcare and social care in semi collapse.

I don't want a royal family for the UK. I used to but I have really changed my mind.

Nobody visits the UK to see the royal family fgs. And if people will only donate to charities if a royal is a patron they they need a slap.

OP posts:
malylis · 13/01/2020 19:00

When Ireland became independent the Crown Estates reverted to the state. That precedent?

TeacupDrama · 13/01/2020 22:48

I'm pretty sure when the Russians got rid of the tsar they just took over the Royal palaces and they are now art galleries and museums, however when the Germans forced Wilheim to abdicate just before the end of WWI he went into exile in the Netherlands of monarchies abolished very few appear to have kept palaces though kept quite a few possessions some privately are still referred to as King of Italy Romania etc
Spain is really the only country that has restored a monarchy after previously abolishing it in the 20th century but that was down to Franco wanting a traditionalist heir and he played the sons of previous monarchs against each other and his daughter Carmen married Royalty so Juan Carlos took over when Franco died but then changed things

PlanDeRaccordement · 14/01/2020 09:25

I'm pretty sure when the Russians got rid of the tsar they just took over the Royal palaces and they are now art galleries and museums

You can’t really compare shooting the royal family in a basement and then burning their bodies to how the British Monarchy would be abolished.

PlanDeRaccordement · 14/01/2020 09:43

When Ireland became independent the Crown Estates reverted to the state. That precedent?

That didn’t actually happen when Ireland became independent in the 1920s. When they became independent, they kept the monarchy as a commonwealth nation. It wasn’t until 1948 when they became a republic that they took the Crown Estates. And none of the Crown Estates in Ireland funded the privy purse so that makes sense.

PlanDeRaccordement · 14/01/2020 09:56

Which other monarchy-abolishing nations are you thinking of?

Well India for one as their abolition was done peacefully. No one was shot, or guillotined, or had to flee into exile.
When they became independent and abolished their rulers in the 1947-9, there was an agreement that the rulers would become private citizens but in return for giving up ruling rights would receive annual payment also called privy purse payments. It wasn’t until 1970 that the Indian government then took the next step to abolish the privy purse payments because the country was in massive debt. Even then, the rulers kept their palaces and the surrounding lands.

So it was a two step process with a generation of time between steps. Realistically, in my opinion, a monarch is not going to agree to just stop being head of state peacefully without some privy purse payment/pension/land being agreed to in return.

FramingDevice · 14/01/2020 10:08

@Plan, you’re not seriously comparing the UK monarchy to the former colonies upon which it imposed its rule and its monarch? Seriously? Hmm

malylis · 14/01/2020 11:15

The Ireland example was appropriate for when it came out of the commonwealth

The Crown does not belong to the monarch (which is why it was given by parliament to William 3rd and George 1st). The examples of commonwealth countries isn't as good (but the land did all eventually revert to the state).

The Crown estates would be controlled by the state on the UK becoming a republic.

derxa · 14/01/2020 11:22

Youn don't need a president just because you don't have a royal family. You could let hundreds of other people do their chores. Spread the glory and honour around a little. When you open a bridge it could be the oldest villagers in the nearby town who did the honours. When you open a university it could be a famous professor. They don't actually do anything that other people could not do.
Who would come and see these people open things?

malylis · 14/01/2020 11:47

Who goes to see people do these things in the USA?

noodlenosefraggle · 14/01/2020 12:18

Do they even need people to open council offices etc? Why? These things exist because the Rotals exist. Frankly, who turns up to see the Duke of Kent or whoever other minor Royal opens a supermarket? They do it to justify their existence. I agree they cant be expected to live on a council estate in Hull, but they have huge private residences. They could get funding from the state which gradually fades out as their children are expected to make their own ways.

UYScuti · 14/01/2020 12:22

Yes we need to get rid of those weird pampered dinosaurs

Baileys4two · 14/01/2020 12:32

YADNBU, I've thought for a long time that we should get rid of the lot of them.
Everything they have (eg, palaces, homes, shares, etc, ) should be owned by the state, because ultimately that's where it came from originally.
Let the Queen and Philip live out what's left of their lives where they are, but give the rest of them a one off severance pay of £500K max, and take back anything that's been gained using public money, including property, no matter how far back.

Baileys4two · 14/01/2020 12:35

PlanDeRaccordement, would definitely be the cheaper option though Wink

MichaelMumsnet · 14/01/2020 15:33

Hi all, we've pretty much reached our Meghan and Harry thread quota for today. This one has run for a while, but we're going to move it over to the Royal Family section in a mo.

BolloxtoGender · 16/01/2020 08:49

Yabu

TheClitterati · 16/01/2020 08:53

YANBU But you are being naive to think that any money not spent on the royal family would be going to help those in poverty. Sadly this country does not work like that.

MissSmith1 · 16/01/2020 13:25

HMQ is head of the church.
I expect that will be dismissed as irrelevant by most posters as they aren't churchgoers and only their views matter. But it will be extremely important to many.

Mner2000 · 16/01/2020 21:25

YANBU. I am to be becoming more republican by the day. They are far too expensive in terms of land, houses, resources, money, travel etc for what we get back from them. They are completely out of step with what is happening to the rest of the country and the bleakness of austerity.

The behaviour of PA and his arrogance during that interview that he could just brush all of the allegations to one side is unbelievable. How many more skeletons are in their closets? I am sure his are not the only secrets they are hiding.

I am probably in the minority but I don't see why we should wait for the Queen to retire... pension her off, give her one of her nice houses and say thank you very much but we need to find another way...

peridito · 17/01/2020 10:20

Great thread .Love the discussion on finances .

Yes yes yes ,lets have only a monarch and their children.No idea what function they would fulfill ,we don't need all these royal visits or patronage of charities .

yes yes yes lets move /reabsorb/seize the Crown Estate .

malylis · 18/01/2020 10:37

No seizing needed. State and crown are interchangeable terms in reality, the crown estates are public.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page