What do you want as head of state for the UK

[wordler]

We are a mixed bag of pro and anti-monarchy on here so I've created a little poll to see at a glance were we stand:

https://poll-maker.com/Q72KOF2ZL

I've added a Something Else option as I ran out of what I thought were all the possibilities.

It's anonymous but feel free to expand in the comments.

The ignorance on here is astonishing!
People don't even need to read books if they struggle! It's all online.

From an old Guardian article. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/08/queen-power-british-law-queens-consent

The Monarch
As Head of State. Didn't you know that?!
This means that the Head of Government, any ambitious Prime Minister, cannot mobilise the forces.
However, the Monarch cannot without the consent of Parliament.

And as long as the monarch holds that authority, no-one else can. It means that when one monarch dies the next one instantly takes over and the authority passes seamlessy and without fuss; so instead of crowds storming the centre of government and rioting in the streets we get a peaceful transfer of the status quo. No interregnum, no chance for an ambitious soldier or politician or peer (or member of the RF apart from the monarch, come to that) to stage a coup.

Oh an old Guardian article. Not convincing

Thanks, I'll have a read

And tut tut - you copied and pasted a part of the article in your previous comment and passed it off as your own rather than attribute it to the author of the article. Poor form.

That's what people don't understand, @MrsDanversGlidesAgain
Apart from who the armed forces oath of loyalty is sworn to, who is the Head of State, how laws are made, the fact that Parliament is Sovereign, that the English traded with the Medieval Islamic Empire etc etc etc

It also means they can mobilise against a democratically elected PM, as they plotted to do to with Wilson.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4789060.stm

Not true. Those secret tapes have not been verified. Nothing happened.

Wilson remained PM until he died.
Or do you think that the Duke of Kent had him killed?

Wilson also retired in 1976 because of increasing dementia (which was kept quiet for years). That might have led him to imagine plots against him.

that the English traded with the Medieval Islamic Empire etc etc etc

Vikings certainly did - Cat Jarman in The River Kings traces trade all the way to India and Islamic silver has been found in Britain.

Wilson also believed Marcia Falkender had letters which compromised him which she got from MI5.
In his earlier premiership he developed a warm friendship with QEII. They used to enjoy the holiday at Balmoral.
It's actually a very interesting time. No need to invent fake royal plots.

It's fascinating, isn't it? Vikings bought Kohl from Afghanistan! I love the idea of them buying eye makeup from the Muslims!

OT but I love the way she structured that book - from end back to beginning rather than the other way round.

I read her latest The Bone Chests and she says that there was a dip in the production of Islamic silver and that might be why the Vikings turned to raiding England - they couldn't get bullion from the usual sources.

I haven't read that one, thanks for the recommendation!
Have you read the Frankopan one?.

I wasn't as gripped by the latest one, mainly because with Saxon history the head spins trying to keep all the Edgars and Edwards and Aethel-things distinguished from each other.

I haven't read the Frankopan - I have a long haul in September so might buy it for that.

So I make that 85% on here for monarchy in some form (up to this point).

But I'm intrigued by the 3% who want 'something else'. I'm genuinely interested to hear other approaches (not already mentioned).

How about Paddington for HoS? Cuddly, loveable, into tea.

I don't hate the Royals but I would like a nice dog as head of state. Maybe a Golden Retreiver as they look very regal but have a nice temperament.

He could give a hard stare at all our enemies.
Also Harry & Meghan (same thing) 😀

He could give a hard stare at all our enemies.

True! I was going to say that he has a good moral compass, does Paddington.

The Monarch can and does vet potential legislation in order to get exemptions for the Monarch. It's disingenuous to say ' Parliament makes laws and the King has to consent' because the exemptions are written into the legislation before it goes to Parliament. So the Act goes to Parliament, the King consents, but of course they don't care if they have to comply with the law, because they have already negotiated opt outs of the stuff they don't like.
I don't really like the idea of a monarchy, but i dont think well get rid of them in my lifetime, and it's small fry really when there are so many other things wrong with our system. But really, the least we can expect is that our Head of State doesn't try and secretly get exemptions from equality laws and environmental legislation. If they want exemptions from legislation, then it needs to be declared in Parliament that that's what they have asked for and why. I also think only Monarch, spouse, heir, and spouse should be working, and most of the palaces open full time to pay for their upkeep through tourism.They can have 2 houses each.

It's not disingenuous. It's a fact.
Parliament is Sovereign.

The Equality Act 2010 still has the exemptions in it. The Late Queen exempted herself from Svottish environmental legislation in I think 2021 or 22, while she was complaining about people ' saying but not foing' on the environment.

Parliament is Sovereign but Parliament is passing legislation with built in opt outs for the Monarchy.