Just one sec...
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Should the UK have a Monarchy?? Yes or No?

Announcements Posted on
  • View Poll Results: Should the UK have a Monarchy?

  1. Offline

    Why would someone want to get rid of the Monarchy? Genuine question.
  2. Offline

    (Original post by Aj12)
    Sorry how does the queen influence who gets to be PM. And they did not even answer one of their own points. A president would be a bigger waste of money than the monarchy is. Plus the whole democracy argument that the monarchy is somehow undemocratic is just stupid. The queen has no effect on politics. And some of the most democratic countries in the world are constitutional monarchies
    If, in simple terms, an election were to come to a complete tie, the monarch would choose who governs. Democratic, huh?

    And please state your sources for a president costing more than the monarchy. If Republic can state their sources then so can you.

    I'm heading off to a lecture now. Shall reply to any points when I return.
  3. Offline

    (Original post by Aleandcynicism)
    It's not. But this thread is the longest I've seen a monarchy debate going before a monarchist throws in the tourism argument.
    I think we can both agree that it's a side issue that both sides trip up on

    What would stop them from doing this charitable work if they weren't a royal family.
    For a start, the lack of gravitas that not being royals provides them. Many institutions clamour for the royal stamp as it is greatly honoured.

    And it's bad when pseudoscience gets a public boost because a prince endorses it, but that's another discussion.
    Sure, another discussion. I can't say I'm happy with it either, but I think obsessing over a minor pseudoscience is a blessing compared to whatever else he could be spouting off on!

    I'm not a republican because I think I'm terribly clever; I think the concept of hereditary power, which has been transferred from the monarch to the prime minister (but would not exist without a monarch) gives the UK government far too much power. It's not controversial to say a UK government with a parliamentary majority can pass through whatever they like without hassle, and this stems from the power of the monarch.
    While at first glance you're correct, the fact is that enormous power would remain with a republic. Moreover the fault, surely, is with how easy it is to get a majority to endorse the use of the royal prerogative, than the use of the prerogative itself?

    What I mean is, a strong Parliament which condemns inappropriate use of executive powers would be an excellent watchdog. Your argument is for a strong Parliament, not necessarily removal of the monarchy.
  4. Offline

    If you want to abolish the monarchy, wait until after next year please, I'm looking forward to my 5 day weekend.
  5. Offline

    No no no no no and no.

    Did I say no?
  6. Offline

    (Original post by Aleandcynicism)
    If, in simple terms, an election were to come to a complete tie, the monarch would choose who governs. Democratic, huh?
    If the people cannot make a decision themselves and produce a hung parliament, the purpose of the Head of State is to make a decision as impartially as possible (i.e. the one most likely to be supported by Parliament).

    This is the same worldwide with ceremonial presidencies too. Note that the majority of ceremonial presidencies are not elected but appointed, to avoid partisanship in the Head of State.

    I'd trust a neutral monarch to make a good decision in this matter than a politicised president.

    And please state your sources for a president costing more than the monarchy. If Republic can state their sources then so can you.
    Republic's financial statements on the monarchy are very broken and I have refuted them elsewhere. I'll try to dig them out.
  7. Offline

    That is the such a terrible website, quite laughable.
  8. Offline

    Considering the crowd around the Palace the that wedding, it's evident that the general public still want it, so therefore, the UK should still have one.

    Personally, do I agree with it? Probably not.
  9. Offline

    Probably got negged just for not showing my sources...

    'Cost' of the Royal Family explained

    Sources for that...
    Finance Report for the Crown Estate ('Revenue Surplus' goes to the Treasury each year)
    Civil List 2010

    I'm not pro-royal by any means, but the expenses argument is utter trite of the highest order. If we change it should be for political/moral reasons, not financial. I still don't buy the tourism arguments (we still would have history!).
  10. Offline

    Republic please... but maybe we could find a way to create a hybrid monarchy system.... an elected king or queen perhaps?
  11. Offline

    Keep the monarchy, but I'd prefer it if the amount of royals getting money would be reduced
  12. Offline

    Hmmm this is a tricky one for me because I like our current constitutional monarch system we have i.e the way our govt system works, but I don't like the fact it's hereditary so we don't have a choice in who is our head of state. I think we should keep the system but be allowed to vote if who we want as head of state, even if that means voting to keep in our current queen. Although in saying that currently most people are quite happy with our current head of state therefore unless all of a sudden the majority of people decided they wanted a new head of state then i doubt anything change is coming any time soon.
  13. Offline

    You should have outlined exactly what a monarchy is on your first post, for those that don't know.
  14. Offline

    Long live the Queen!
  15. Offline

    (Original post by Hipster)
    What if a sleaze like Prince Andrew were the first born?

    I bet we would have fewer monarchists.

    There is nothing in the monarchical system that would stop a sleazy direct heir from becoming our future monarch.
    I don't think that's terribly persuasive. What if a sleaze like Andrew were elected? An elected sleaze would be more dangerous, as he would believe to have more legitimacy to do questionable acts.

    An inherited sleaze, however, is restrained by what actions it is constitutionally legitimate for his office to undertake. He would be required to remain as a constitutional monarch.
  16. Offline

    I do not really care however i do not want a president so as long as the Royals continue to be profitable for the economy as a whole and do not inter fear then i am fine with the.

    Vote 'YES'!
  17. Offline

    As long as people in Britain want a Monarchy they are entitled to keep it but on principle I think that people should choose their own Head of State and that is why I voted no.
  18. Offline

    I want the ability to vote for my head of state. We send our air force and army to Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq etc so they can vote for their head of state, well why shouldn't we?
  19. Offline

  20. Offline

    (Original post by thetobbit)

    They're a waste of time and yes they generate money through tourism, do you see them selling all their jewels and gold to give to charity?

    They're inbred and should be gotten rid off along with all other members of the ruling class who live in luxury while others suffer. "But at least their nice to look at"
    If you get rid of the monarchy what is left of England?
    What is left of our culture?


Submit reply


Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: March 20, 2012
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Which way did you want the referendum to go?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22

Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.