AIBU to suggest the Royal Family is no longer required

[cocktailclub]

I feel they have become irrelevant.
Who cares that a 95 year old can't have Christmas at one of her country homes? It's headline news that she's staying at Windsor castle. What a joke.
The whole lot of them are pampered lazy entitled and should just be phased out.
We will still get money from tourrism because the history is fascinating. They can all live out their lives in luxury but enough is enough. They make political statements, break the law (allegedly) and require a whole heap of financial support.
Get rid .

@ShippingNews

And what would you replace it with ? The Monarch is the head of state, so then you'd have....who ? An elected president ? Look around the world at the elected leaders of republics and then tell me how awful it is to have a monarch.

Why do we need a head of state? It's a ceremonial role. I mean she's asked to give approval to democratic decisions...she can't or won't go against them in reality. Why bother with the role at all?

YABU

Monarchies are about 1/3 of all nations and are a highly successful,arrangement.

If it ain't broke....

(And only someone with little knowledge of history or understanding of constitutional arrangements wouid claim that a constitutional monarchy was ceremonial only)

The countries deemed 'happiest' in the world are constitutional monarchies. Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Netherlands.

@mallees thanks, exactly!

@CheeseMmmm I don't think we need them full stop so hadn't thought of an alternative plan, apologies for the boring thread that doesn't run by your tiles or meet your needs.

I started such a boring and I'll considered thread because watching the fuss about their Christmas plans made me sick in contrast to the real news which is happening.

Most of them have pretty poor behaviour to be honest but Prince Andrew has surpassed the poor standards and this has just been the last straw for me. He's tainted the whole thing beyond repair and made me sick. Why support this family? If they lived in SE London on benefits they would be condemned for far less.

So there's my reasons and I don't think we actually need a replacement.

I care. I love our queen.

@gofg thank you so much for your thoughtful post and sharing your opinion.. I actually do care about others opinions hence the post. Sorry though for misunderstanding the point of Mumsnet and forgetting that it's all about agreeing with your point of view. Although I suspect that might be quite narrow minded.

Yep. This needs to end when The Queen dies. Take most of the property back for tourism. I wasn't always like but two words: Prince Andrew. They've got away with sh&t for far too long.

Why do we need a head of state? It's a ceremonial role. I mean she's asked to give approval to democratic decisions...she can't or won't go against them in reality. Why bother with the role at all?

No, head of state is essentially ceremonial in this country. It isn’t in, say, America, as its the president.

I’m not sure any counties don’t have someone classed as head of state at all - I read that Switzerland doesn’t but they have a completely different system to us that I doubt we’d move to that.

So, no replacement and what, the current role of prime minister would become more of a presidential role? So it's nothing to do with poor behaviour that you object to, just the monarchy?

@dinit

Yep. This needs to end when The Queen dies. Take most of the property back for tourism. I wasn't always like but two words: Prince Andrew. They've got away with sh&t for far too long.

Completely agree. Prince Andrew and the Queen's support of him has just finished any respect I had for the family. They are living by old rules where royals do as they please. They need to be held to account like everyone else.

If the role of monarch is such an important job, why on Earth have a system whereby simply by being born first in a family you become destined to do the job? Doesn’t matter what qualities or ability you have to do it. It’s the very definition of nepotism. God knows who we could end up with. Imagine if Andrew had been born first!

In reality there is a machine behind them running it all. How much power do they actually have? If someone completely stupid and incompetent did come to the throne it’s not as if they could start demanding changes to the law or refusing to sign things off, is it? The Firm exists. They’re just the very privileged front person, being advised on what to do.

@Crowdfundingforcake

So, no replacement and what, the current role of prime minister would become more of a presidential role? So it's nothing to do with poor behaviour that you object to, just the monarchy?

No. I object to all poor behaviour but the prime minister was voted in by the majority. I personally didn't vote for him but I accept the majority. The Royal family we're not voted in it's not democratic and I don't see a place for them.

@cocktailclub

I like having our monarchy. I think the Queen is great, I'll be very sad when she dies, apart from the fact that I think she's great, I'm not chuffed about Charles being next, but hey ho.

If you think all they do is pose for photos, you need to educate yourself.

Getting rid of them would be like of getting rid of speed limits & seatbelts. It may please you privately but would cause a lot of mayhem.

@ShippingNews

And what would you replace it with ? The Monarch is the head of state, so then you'd have....who ? An elected president ? Look around the world at the elected leaders of republics and then tell me how awful it is to have a monarch.

What's the difference? The UK PM has more power in their country than a US president. Their constitution and legislative process has a lot more checks and balances to actually get anything done.

The Queen in reality exercises no power.

Not to mention her age. Again, if the role is so important why is a 95 year old allowed to do it? Why is there not a retirement age if it’s such a demanding job? At least moving over for your younger offspring would hopefully mean that they may be slightly more in touch with the rest of the population.

@CurlyhairedAssassin

If the role of monarch is such an important job, why on Earth have a system whereby simply by being born first in a family you become destined to do the job? Doesn’t matter what qualities or ability you have to do it. It’s the very definition of nepotism. God knows who we could end up with. Imagine if Andrew had been born first!

In reality there is a machine behind them running it all. How much power do they actually have? If someone completely stupid and incompetent did come to the throne it’s not as if they could start demanding changes to the law or refusing to sign things off, is it? The Firm exists. They’re just the very privileged front person, being advised on what to do.

Scrap the monarchy (which is laughable in 21st century as a concept). Scrap the unelected house of lords.

Move the House if Commons to Birmingham and bring in PR voting.

That would be a start to get away from the aristocratic hell hole of England

Who cares that a 95 year old can't have Christmas at one of her country homes?

So nasty. I can't stand this kind of disrespect. Towards any 95 year old.

I like having the monarchy. I think the queen does a good job. She may be old fashioned but she is in her nineties. Find me a ninety something year old that isn't old fashioned.

A lot of tourists from abroad wouldn't be so bothered about us if we did get rid of them. Part of the novelty for them is that we do still have a working monarchy. Yes we have a fascinating history but so does every other country on the planet. We are not unique in that. A fascinating history will not keep the same amount of tourists that our monarchy does.

I fully agree that the monarchy should be scrapped. How can we have a true meritocracy when the head of state has that position merely because they came out of the right womb? It's anachronistic.

However, I would go further and say end it now rather than after the death of Elizabeth Windsor. There's a narrative now, reflected in many comments on here, that she's done an exemplary job and deserves respect etc. That's not a narrative that matches actual events though, given that her catastrophically poor judgement and misguided actions have almost led to the end of the monarchy at least twice (Windsor Castle fire and Diana's death). The Windsor Castle fire greed and entitlement is echoed in things like her claim for fuel bill payments submitted to a hardship fund. There's the recently revealed tax debacle from the 1970s. Given the press is known to cover up stories about the Windsors, what else is yet to be revealed? Not forgetting the many stories of her rudeness towards members of the public as well.

I agree with some points made by User135644, especially getting parliament out of London. I would keep the Lords but change it to appointees only with no more hereditary peers as it provides an excellent system of independent checks and balances to MPs captured by the party line. To be able to draw on the wide-ranging expertise, experience and abilities of highly disparate outstanding figures from Doreen Lawrence to Floella Benjamin should be a source of pride imo.

But back to the OP, we should end the monarchy. As Terry Pratchett said, the problem with people is their tendency to bend at the knee. Let's stand up together as the equals we should be.

@Prescottdanni123

I like having the monarchy. I think the queen does a good job. She may be old fashioned but she is in her nineties. Find me a ninety something year old that isn't old fashioned.

A lot of tourists from abroad wouldn't be so bothered about us if we did get rid of them. Part of the novelty for them is that we do still have a working monarchy. Yes we have a fascinating history but so does every other country on the planet. We are not unique in that. A fascinating history will not keep the same amount of tourists that our monarchy does.

The French get more tourists than anyone and scrapped their monarchy centuries ago.

If you opened up the Palaces to tourism rather than a peek from outside then that'd drive tourism.

Scrapping the monarchy isn't something i'm bothered about anyway. I think the monarchy is irrelevant anyway. Parliament does exactly what it wants. Look at how Rees Mogg deceived the queen to prorogue parliament.

I would keep the Lords but change it to appointees only with no more hereditary peers as it provides an excellent system of independent checks and balances to MPs captured by the party line

I'd be happy with it as an elected second chamber, but all it is a peers for favours arrangement. The ridiculous honours scheme is the same.

I agree. It's 2021. I bow to no-one.

If the Queen of any of her hangers-on turned up at my workplace I wouldn't curtsy, no 'ma'am' etc.

The upper class are not my betters.

They are not appointed by God.

She's welcome to a chat and a cup of tea.

'Your HIGHness'. ABSOLUTELY NOT.

How is this still a thing in the 21st Century.

@SonicBroom

I care.

@SonicBroom why do you care? I've never understood why people care about the royal family especially since joining MN. No one I know in real life is even remotely bothered by them

@bantuknots73

The OPs question was “ Who cares that a 95 year old can't have Christmas at one of her country homes?” and I responded that I do.

I’m going to respectfully decline to explain why I care as quite honestly I’m tired and I don’t want to try to make anyone understand as it just ends up in an argument.

@User135644

The tourists who are drawn to us due to the Monarchy (and there is lots of them) will be less inclined to visit if we get rid of the royal family. A fascinating history alone will not keep bringing all them over. Every country has a fascinating country.