When will pointless King abdicate

[IhateHPSDeaneCnt]

in favour of another bastion of the Monarchy? Loathe them all but assume it will take another generation to allow them to bow out in some sort of graceful manner - and hang onto loads of Titles, Land, Jewels, money etc. How has someone given the title of 'Queen Consort' i.e ex Mistress is now referred to as Queen and bestowed privileges e.g being allowed to allocate Royal Warrants? Don't know how she's got the gall to wear jewellery that previously adorned previous incumbent let alone the late Queen. Luckily, she does bugger all but retire to the home settled in the Divorce, smoke fags, drink Gin and Dubonnet (smells just like Granny!) and ensures stock of fully functioning Mont Blanc Fountain Pens are to hand - ready to be despatched to King at the faintest sign of a tremulous lip.

It was a rather frivilous waste of money imho nonetheless. Especially given the fact that we’d already witnessed plenty of pomp just a few months before relating to the late Queen’s funeral and the ceremonies heralding Charles as King.

And personally I don’t think that such an extreme show of wealth was appropriate for a country where every public service has been cut to the bone, undergoing a cost of living crisis. It showed a monarch out of touch with reality imho. I mean, who are the Crowns and gold coaches for in this day and age?

How much better if Charles had opted for a modest church service for his coronation. like every other continental royal, dressed in an ordinary suit, and created a mentail health drop-in service for the homeless with the £72 million. And funded it long term from the Duchy of Lancaster. Now that would have been a true example of serving his people.

How much better if Charles had opted for a modest church service for his coronation. like every other continental royal, dressed in an ordinary suit, and created a mental health drop-in service for the homeless with the £72 million. And funded it long term from the Duchy of Lancaster. Now that would have been a true example of serving his people

So agree. Instead we get golden carriages, tiaras, golden globes, one glove and a special vest and oil behind a screen.

The country needs to grow up

So agree. Instead we get golden carriages, tiaras, golden globes, one glove and a special vest and oil behind a screen.

All of these things (bar the screen and vest) already existed - why not re-use the resources you already have?

Not sure I want to be servile to this display of ostentatiousness, but fine if you do

p.s. new golden carriage shipped in from Oz. I know I know someone built it for free, still had to be shipped

I like the idea of doing something like the mental health drop in service, but suspect that £72M would be a drop in the ocean to make any significant difference. In the grand scheme of things £72 is not actually that much or many of these issues would already be solved.

What the big showing off party does is try to con the rest of the world into thinking we are more significant than we are. Which if they believe us has long term positive impacts on the country. I don't think that the coronation was for the King or for the people living in the UK that day, but for the way the country is viewed externally, and what good it does is so hard to measure we will never know if it is value for money or not. So as they money is not that huge in the scheme of UK finance it may as well be done as not, while we have a Royal. A separate issue to if we should have one or not.

How much better if Charles had opted for a modest church service for his coronation.coronation. like every other continental royal, dressed in an ordinary suit, and created a mentail health drop-in service for the homeless with the £72 million. And funded it long term from the Duchy of Lancaster. Now that would have been a true example of serving his people.

Not serving the interest of UK plc at all though, since hardly anyone would have tuned into watch, nor be motivated to visit nor spend money int he UK. The uK’s history and heritage is a major part of the country’s international brand. No sensible steward of the country would ignore that.

It might not be for you, and that’s fine of course. But it is a big deal for many millions around the world.

Also, not all European monarchs go to church in a suit to be inaugurated as the new monarch. Denmark has a very pared back ceremony. Other European monarchies are more splashy.

The trouble with complaining that the Queen's funeral and the King's coronation were too close together is that one is inevitably followed closely by the other!

I thought it was established that the tourism industry did not depend on having a living monarch; as France’s tourism figures testify?

Also, I think I remember Spain and Belgium, where both of the Kings abdicated, having a modest church service. I saw them on the news. A solemn handshake did the trick and it was modest but dignified. And I wouldn’t have objected so much to a pared down ceremony.

If Charle’s coronation ceremony was meant to
represent our standing in the world, then I think it very much missed the spot because I was abroad at the time and many people’s reaction to it, albeit politely said was, “a little too much”.

Also, all of the soft power objectives had already been achieved by the funeral of the late Queen, especially when you think of all the world leaders who attended.

Imho the Coronation was a step too far and felt to me anyway as though the powers that be were out of touch and not reading the room,

A monarch is nothing without subjects surely? They have to be in touch with what is going on in the land? Or what is the point?

I felt that a massive show of gold coaches and jewel encrusted crowns was so inappropriate in a country where people are having to wait a fortnight to see the doctor, where it’s virtually impossible to see a dentist, and where elderly people are treated in hospital corridors!

This is just my personal opinion, yes, but it feels like the wrong things are being honoured, and as a collection of countries, we don’t have our priorities straight.

Also that these decisions are made on our behalf from above, without any consultation, as if we are children being told what is good for us!

I went to the coronation because DD was keen.
I met loads of people not from the UK who has travelled in to see it. In the group I ended up sitting with there were 5 different countries represented -US, New Zealand, Switzerland and two others I can't remember off hand
They were young people, some with young famiies-I was the oldest at nearly 50. They were excited and were going to do various other tourist things while they were here.

If anything they'd have liked to see more pomp.

Also, I think I remember Spain and Belgium, where both of the Kings abdicated, having a modest church service. I saw them on the news. A solemn handshake did the trick and it was modest but dignified. And I wouldn’t have objected so much to a pared down ceremony.

The palace and parade photos I posted above are from Belgium actually. So, no.

They are inevitably close together. That’s obviously unavoidable!

My point is that the Queen’s funeral was appropriate following a seventy-year reign but, having had that show of majesty etc, it wasn’t appropriate to pile on more!

Especially for a monarch who is a caretaker king and whose reign will inevitably be short and whose consort is somewhat controversial.

Initially I thought that QE2 hadn’t done Charles any favours by not abdicating earlier and allowing him to make drastic changes and slim the whole institution, and its remit, right down.

But as he he hasn’t shown any sign of doing that at all in his first two years of reign, then I am disillusioned by the whole institution.

Charles has been ill though so maybe he has plans in the pipeline? I certainly hope so!

Rich as our history and culture is, I don’t think the UK can depend on creeky institutions and looking backwards forever.

But it is a big deal for many millions around the world

I hardly think so. They have a nosy at footage if it's easy to find. It's just looking at specimens in a cage from curiosity. No more no less

@Kneejerkreaction778 great post. So agree

Who got a Golden Globe?

The ceremony itself was definitely a hand shake in church though. No crowns were involved as I recall.

I can't be arsed to look it up. Some big golden dollop. Might be called a sceptre a globe who knows, not interested!

So is it the ceremony or the trappings around it that are the issue? I had rather taken from this discussion that both were being dismissed as over the top and unnecessary?

Oh I don’t know. If you are going to have a monarchy may as well have the pomp that goes with it imo. I quite like looking at the outfits.

derail: is it the Netherlands that has a king day? Which is a national holiday I think. Sounds fun!

Yes - these decisions and budgets are decided on our behalf by the elected representatives that we have chosen to make those decisions on our behalf.

Our constitutional monarch has no power to do anything in terms of a coronation or spend anything without the consent of the government who we elect.

So we get a double event every now and again, rather than an inauguration (costing about $100m each time) every 4 years.

There were only 4 in the 20th century - so for every reign over about 8 years, it’s probably saving us money

Of course that depends on which international comparison you choose. UK is a P5 country and despite how we are feeling is in the top 10 of most lists of the richest countries

Well at heart I’m a Republican so to be fully transparent I don’t see any of it as particularly desirable.

I very much love the UK and its history though and I want the country to thrive and focus on what is important.

The Monarchy just seems like a massive distraction and a sop to the masses atm. Who cares if another ward in our local hospital has shut down if we can admire pictures of Princess Charlotte’s new coat?

I think our focus should be on decent living standards and homes for its citizens. Human dignity when it comes to maternity services and looking after our very young and our very old and those with SEN and disabilities. Decent wages. A fair holiday allocation. Well run public services. Green spaces for those that don’t have gardens. Excellent subsidised public transport. A bit like the public services that some citizens of some EU countries enjoy,

I know we are an island but sometimes I think we need to look outwards at the rest of the world and learn lessons, instead of focusing on our traditions and what we have always done.

I genuinely find it worrying that we accord such dignity, respect and riches to the royal family, while the needs of the general public, especially those who are under-privileged are so ignored.

It feels morally wrong. And that the establishment is not serving the people, but hindering improvements.

You probably have much greater knowledge about these things than I do, but I find it hard to believe that, if Charles had insisted that he wanted to be crowned in a radically different way, that public servants wouldn’t rush around to accommodate his vision. With obvious restrictions relating to security and visiting dignitaries.

As has been previously mentioned on these boards; Charles became Prince of Wales during a made-up ceremony in Caernarfon Cathedral. Yet for William, nothing was done!

Surely that shows that there is a certain degree of flexibility when it comes to royal ceremonies!

We saw it during Covid too! Everyone adapted perfectly well to a pared down approach.

I think our focus should be on decent living standards and homes for its citizens. Human dignity when it comes to maternity services and looking after our very young and our very old and those with SEN and disabilities. Decent wages. A fair holiday allocation. Well run public services. Green spaces for those that don’t have gardens. Excellent subsidised public transport

Those things are all the job of the Government, not a non-political head of state

Obviously yes. But you missed my follow up points about the monarchy being a distraction from the realities of life in the UK atm, And how such a show of immense wealth at the Coronation was therefore out of step.

And about the establishment holding us back as a country rather than serving its people. About how always looking backwards to tradition sometimes prevents us from moving forward?

I am saying that when we Brits constantly look to the monarchy and all of that privilege at the heart of the establishment and are encouraged to view that as a good thing; it’s skews our perspective when it comes to the values that really matter.

So if everything in the UK was rosy, would a monarchy be ok by that logic?
Also, I think most people are capable of being able to distinguish between traditions that they may enjoy and want to keep and the fact that the country may be being badly run. I don’t think a change to the head of state we currently have would change that situation at all. It really is bollocks to suggest that the population are in thrall to the monarchy

In addition, when so much pubic discourse and news stories are focused on the monarchy; it leads to other more important things being ignored or brushed under the carpet.

Don’t worry about our GDP and our national debt of £2.8 trillion, look what a strong message the Coronation ceremony with its gold coaches sends out to the world!

Personally, I see it as a sort of delusion, pure fantasy; smoke and mirrors! It’s about privileged people protecting their own interests and protecting the status quo. I don’t blame the individuals involved. Once you are at the top of the tree, it’s only natural to defend that position. But it’s not doing the rest of us any good imho.