This is something I posted on another thread, thought it was relevant.
Regardless of what you think about the monarchy, there is one argument in favour of the monarchy which in spite of the fact that it is one of the most frequently stated, is a genuinely terrible argument; the tourism argument. People always go on about how much damned tourism the monarchy brings to us and seem to think that this justifies keeping our royal family. I have several problems with this:
1) How on earth are these figures calculated? I've read various figures such as the royal family bringing in 57p per person to the UK, but who calculates this and what is it based on? If it's based on the amount of tourists going to Windsor or London, then this is absurd because these tourists may visit us anyway. If it is based on the number of tourists who go to see royal attractions then this to is absurd for a reason I will get to later. The point is, most of these figures are absolute nonsense and so cannot be trusted.
2) Let's assume that the figures are sound and accurate; this argument still assumes that these tourists wouldn't come to the UK if the royal family weren't to exist. But is this really the case? Do we genuinely believe that people wouldn't come to visit us if we didn't have a royal family? Plenty of people visit the Palace of Versailles and France hasn't had a royal family since the 19th century! In any case, surely if the family were gotten rid of, could we not have our government sell off the estates to private entrepreneurs (investing money in the public sector) who could use them as tourist attractions anyway?
3) Importantly though, is it really the case that we think that we ought to based our system of government on how much money our institutions give us? Following this line of thinking, surely it would make sense to run the entire judicial system as a tourism industry where foreign tourists can observe police interviews, watch terrorist interrogations and pay money to sit on a 'genuine British jury'? After all, English common law is one of the most widely used systems of law in the world - why not make a profit out of it? Of course - this would be ridiculous, we shouldn't be trying to flog our judicial system to tourists, and neither should be arguing that we should keep our monarchy simply because it makes us a bit of money. Systems of government should be based on a set of principles that are based on the most efficient and legitimate way of governing - not on how much money we can make.
Personally I'm rather indifferent to the monarchy; I have no problem with it being in place if most people support it, but if it were to be replaced I would shed no tears. However, this argument is infuriatingly poor and I should like to see it dismissed altogether.