Quote: Kosh "I enjoy pageantry. You don't need a Royal Family to indulge in it'"
Other "pageants" I've experienced were dull in extremis though, IMO. I've been to the Edinburgh Military Tattoo and the Notting Hill Carnival. Neither were in the same league as yesterday's event IMO.
Quote: Kosh "If you think that the Royal Family wield no [ireal[/i power then you're rather naive. Also bear in mind to whom the armed forces swear allegiance - it isn't to the elected government or even the country. Not that I think Charles is about to launch a coup, mind. Come to that, all our sitting politicians swear allegiance to the Crown rather than the country and the people who elected them.'"
Maybe I am naive, but the bit underlined is the key point for me. I won't be going mad celebrating Charles' accession to the throne as I'm not a fan of his at all, but I don't think he's likely to interfere in our democratically elected government. Is it archaic that an outgoing Prime Minister has to tender his resignation to the monarch? Yes. Not really a major concern of mine though.
Quote: Kosh "The cost isn't a big issue for me [iper se[/i as an elected head of state would have to be financed and would most likely come out at a similar level. There is a lot of money wasted on hangers on though. It may not add up to much per head of population but added together could be usefully spent elsewhere.'"
I agree that there are a lot of hangers on and that the Queen should fund the likes of Andrew, Anne, Edward etc. I also think that it's not an unreasonable amount that she gets from the Civil List - £7.9m a year. There are plenty of other draws on the public purse of pretty questionable worth IMO.
Quote: Kosh "I do have an issue with being a subject rather than a citizen, and with the whole feudal system that appends from the Royals. It's archaic and should have no place in a 21st century democracy.'"
Fair enough. Not a big issue for me.
Quote: Kosh "I'd like to see the Royals 'retired' and GB become a Republic with an elected head of state. An arrangement could be made where they paid for the upkeep of those properties that they have exclusive use of while other properties pass to the state and are paid for from state funds. You can still have the pageantry but we can finally grow up as a country and start looking forward instead of back.'"
I'm OK with the status quo. The Royals might be an "unnecessary" layer of the constitution, but I don't see they actually have a real and material impact on the political landscape of the country. I do enjoy a sense of national identity and belonging, and enjoyed the fact that yesterday Britain was the centre of the world for a lovely occasion, perfectly executed, which, whilst not "uniting" the country, did serve as a focus for some very British forms of eccentric celebration including duck-racing, 1950s party games and morris dancing. If you can suggest something similar or better in the post-Royal republic, fair enough, but it'll have to go some to top 1 million on the streets of London yesterday. Sitting indoors with the curtains drawn listening to Morrissey and trying to remember the last time the Queen actively influenced public policy doesn't count. That last bit was TIC, for the avoidance of doubt. I think.
