King Charles & Queen Camilla? Really?

[Joystir59]

Can anyone honestly imagine these two carrying the royal family forward once the Queen dies?

We put up and shut up while Boris parties and the queen hands out meaningless awards to worthless morons

Well then presumably people will not vote for Boris at the next election. But if more people do then that is their choice. We are free to do that.

Face it, there's a political crisis in the UK. If you'd like to address that with more bling and ostrich feathers, carry on and see where it gets you

When did I say I wanted more bling and ostrich feathers? And there is nothing new about “political crises” in this or any other county, whatever their system of government.

@smilesy

We put up and shut up while Boris parties and the queen hands out meaningless awards to worthless morons

Well then presumably people will not vote for Boris at the next election. But if more people do then that is their choice. We are free to do that.

Look up fptp and pr. We are not free. The electoral system is broken.

@smilesy

Face it, there's a political crisis in the UK. If you'd like to address that with more bling and ostrich feathers, carry on and see where it gets you

When did I say I wanted more bling and ostrich feathers? And there is nothing new about “political crises” in this or any other county, whatever their system of government.

Bling and ostrich feathers is what the monarchists support the RF for, and coerced subsidising of "royal" families is what you get by continuing to support the idea of monarchy. Not everyone enjoys being coerced as much as monarchists do. As with Brexit, if you ignore large numbers of people and hope they shut up and go away, they tend not to. It'll take a while for change to happen but it will.

Once people start questioning it and reading more, the pack of cards collapses. I used to be broadly supportive of the Royal Family until I realised what they were really up to.

Lots of Commonwealth countries are talking about ditching the Royal Family as soon as the Queen dies. Australia has said it as well and New Zealand.

First I've heard about it, and I live there. Just because "someone" is quoted as saying it doesn't make it true - it takes a bit more than that!

Australia has been talking about republicanism for ages, and it was queen The a shock when what was expected to be a confirmatory referendum was won by 'retain'

That was over 20 years ago, so it's a fair time for a 'once in a generation issue' to be reconsidered. But it's being put off, because it's widely believed that 'retain' will win again, and that a vote in the immediate aftermath of transfer isn't a fair time either.

As countries can and do change their arrangements for their head of state, the invariable answer from the monarch is endorsement of the decision and the beginning if the planning for formal transfer. I don't see that changing

There has been a lot of unhappiness of late with the Royal Family.

Even here in the UK, there was the Oxford Students who wanted to took down the Queen's picture.

There has always been issues regarding The Duchy of Cornwall too, especially about how they charge you for short lets, the property reverting back to them when you die, even if you have a wife and dc. And several other problems.

Not to mention the RF and how they hide their finances.

@EdithWeston I am sure it would be retained with the Queen as Head of State. The question is whether that will change with Charles.

@NiceShrubbery

Would you prefer to elect a head of state who could potentially seize power and not allow fair and free elections to remove them?

What on earth are you talking about? Lots of W European democracies have an elected president who acts as referee and can step in if the PM is being a twat. Why are people not wanting to consider alternatives or look at ROI, Italy, Germany etc.

We also do effectively live in a single-party state. A 44-percent govt is not a majority and our current system offers no hope of a fairer result. We put up and shut up while Boris parties and the queen hands out meaningless awards to worthless morons.

We have no constitution so "constitutional monarchy" is meaningless.

Face it, there's a political crisis in the UK. If you'd like to address that with more bling and ostrich feathers, carry on and see where it gets you.

What has Boris said about what it will take to get him out of Downing St? I don't think he mentioned anything democratic. I think it was about an army of tanks being needed. Glad he isn't the elected head of state as I think he's doing enough harm as PM.

The UK does have a constitution, it is made up of laws, statues and rules etc, it just isn't written as one document.

" the queen hands out meaningless awards to worthless morons"
---------------------
That is most unkind!

Most of those given awards have done something, usually many things, often for a long time, and for the good of others

The awards are not meaningless to them; and the recipients are not worthless morons

ancientgran The UK wants to be taken seriously as a major world player and cannot be bothered to cut/paste or write its own constitution defining what it stands for??

Joke nation full of serfs.

@BadgerB

" the queen hands out meaningless awards to worthless morons" --------------------- That is most unkind!

Most of those given awards have done something, usually many things, often for a long time, and for the good of others

The awards are not meaningless to them; and the recipients are not worthless morons

Unkind but true.

People who think the queen gives a flying f*ck about who she's handing gongs to, cannot be very bright. She gives them purely to maintain her own ill-gotten position. And why would anyone want an award from someone like that?

They should step aside.

If you want a royal family you have to accept it's a hereditary monarchy. Charles is next in line. That's it.

I actually think they'll be quite good at it but he'll only be King for a few years anyway, if not.

I actually think they'll be quite good at it but he'll only be King for a few years anyway, if not.

If he lives as long as his mother he'll be king for a lot longer than a few years.

Most awards go to senior people who really do not deserve them. The occasional one goes to someone who has devoted their life to helping others. The latter is good for PR.

@Webshite

ancientgran The UK wants to be taken seriously as a major world player and cannot be bothered to cut/paste or write its own constitution defining what it stands for??

Joke nation full of serfs.

It has a constitution, it just isn't one document. It grows overtime, new precedents are set, new laws are made. It is all there.

I'm not sure why cutting and pasting would be considered as something superior.

@Justkeeppedaling

I actually think they'll be quite good at it but he'll only be King for a few years anyway, if not.

If he lives as long as his mother he'll be king for a lot longer than a few years.

Yes - there is longevity on both sides - father to 99 and mother 95 and counting

His maternal grandmother was 101 when she died I think - and Philip has some pretty long lived relatives too.

Having clear transparent laws and a constitution would be superior. They can't or won't do that, as suits them well to live with the mess we have that most people don't understand.

@Webshite

Having clear transparent laws and a constitution would be superior. They can't or won't do that, as suits them well to live with the mess we have that most people don't understand.

You can already see how corrupt they are by not having a person who represents them. What big organisation does not have a proper representative / PR / Media rep. Absolutely no one. Not a single one.

Now and again we have Nicholas Witchell on the telly giving us a stern look saying "the palace will absolutely not comment on that". Then there is the 'never complain, never explain' mantra. How arrogant.

Imagine if the government kept telling us this !

Rhubarb rhubarb. I like the monarchy as a concept, it's not like they have any real amount of actual power. I do not feel like a subject and I could not care less that they might, depending on how much you bend reality, cost me a few quid a year. Better them than vast numbers of unelected, very expensive quangos etc.
As to precedent, some people might do well to remember that elderly and/or unexpected monarchs have historically done well on the whole. In more recent times:
William IV, much more popular than his ludicrous brother.
Edward VII, derided as a loose living buffoon but actually a much better diplomat than his mother and achieved more than anybody expected in his short reign.
George V, boring, staid, a good calming influence during WW1, much helped by his very dependable and rather personally powerful wife. God help the country if his peculiar older brother had lived.
George VI, huge concern about whether he was fit to be king after the abdication, he'd not been trained for it, had a stutter (so what!) etc. Turned out to be a very good king, deeply mourned by the majority when he died far too young.
Charles and Camilla will be fine. They know what they are doing and seem prepared to do the necessary work. I hope Charles gets longer than his geat, great grandfather.
As to the commonwealth, well that's up to them, as it should be. I note with interest that two non-empire countries have joined the commonwealth in recent years.

@Webshite

Having clear transparent laws and a constitution would be superior. They can't or won't do that, as suits them well to live with the mess we have that most people don't understand.

Oh yes, let's get Boris to scrap it all and he can write a bright new shiny constitution. God help us all.

P. Charles is 73, so definitey not going to be the monarch as long as the current Queen.
yes, it is true that he may live until his 90s like the Queen, but the title refers to Queen Camilla, and she may not live that long.
As regards awards (mentioned earlier), quite a few of them are decided by the Government.