Monarchies are better value for money than Republics

[pap]

Very little real power?

 

Please. Bills aren't law until they get Royal Assent.

 

Apart from HRH, no-one in this country legally owns any land. If you strike oil under your house, it belongs to the Crown. We have the right of tenure, nothing more.

 

The Queen cannot be nicked. It is legally impossible for her to commit a crime. How many other people have that power?

 

I suppose the monarch has no real power if you choose to believe that. I know that people say that these days, the Crown is really Parliament. They forget that Parliament is transient. It's the institutions that persist that retain true power and influence.

[ecuk268]

Today's moanchy has very little real power - parliament holds that. If we had an elected head of state, they would most definately want a say.

 

They have more than you might think...

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills

[Whitey Grandad]

The Crown is not the Queen, it is what we call the State in this country.

[CB Saint]

They have more than you might think...

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills

 

Fair enough they have a power of veto, although rarely use it. If the same power were held by an elected polictician I wonder how many times it would be used. You can imagine it now Labour president and tory government or vice versa, nothing would ever get done.

 

All the same, I still trust the Queen far, far more than any of the narcissistic characters in parliament.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Very little real power?

 

Please. Bills aren't law until they get Royal Assent.

 

Apart from HRH, no-one in this country legally owns any land. If you strike oil under your house, it belongs to the Crown. We have the right of tenure, nothing more.

 

The Queen cannot be nicked. It is legally impossible for her to commit a crime. How many other people have that power?

 

I suppose the monarch has no real power if you choose to believe that. I know that people say that these days, the Crown is really Parliament. They forget that Parliament is transient. It's the institutions that persist that retain true power and influence.

 

The Queen has power in name only. If she ever used it then she would be put in her place very quickly.

[Fuengirola Saint]

Well if she's just a figurehead then we can get rid of her then surely? After all she doesn't really do much and the idea that she should get the lucrative figurehead position purely and simply because she inherited it is, well, stupid. Ironically Puerto Rica is actually a republic - it's head of state is the US president but unfortunately it's citizens don't get a vote in US presidential elections - the US can be a little disingenous about the democracy it promotes though.

 

Anyway, bottom line is that if you think our head of state should be decided by birthright alone then you're a monarchist, if not then you're a republican.

 

Isn't it called Puerto Rico ?

[solentstars]

i prefer to elect our head of state and have a chance to throw them out rather than this fairy tale nonsence of a king and queen in this day and age and that the one family pass it to a son or daughter of a elitist family.

yes its great for tourists like the usa but they would not have one themselves. the facts its not going to happen anytime soon shows we are still not a mature demoracy to end this childish farce ..