T8KE0FF From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2009, 400 posts, RR: 1 Posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5677 times:
Personally, I dislike the queen. What is the point? Yea, sure she brings in heaps of tourists to our nation but still... I just don't get it. What does she actually do that no-one is capable of doing??
I also reckon that the countries in the commonwealth, e.g. Aussie, should ditch old Vickie too. Although thats a whole other story...
So, my question is, do we really need another queen/king/or whatever after our one at the mo' dies?
SOBHI51 From Saudi Arabia, joined Jun 2003, 3022 posts, RR: 17 Reply 2, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5653 times:
Without trying to interfere with UK interior affairs, I do not see GB without royal family, they are a symbol and a good one at that.
Also The Republic of Great Britain does not shime good. If something is not broken don't repair it.
My
I am against any terrorist acts committed under the name of Islam
ajd1992 From UK - England, joined Jul 2006, 2645 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5654 times:
Not a fan of her but I don't see the Royal Family ever disappearing. It's just never going to happen, no matter what controversial things they seem to get up to sometimes.
JBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, RR: 22 Reply 4, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5644 times:
Quoting T8KE0FF (Thread starter): So, my question is, do we really need another queen/king/or whatever after our one at the mo' dies?
You should really study the British order of succession to see who'll be the next King (hint hint)
Personally I think the Queen has lots of unique value as the chief statesman and ceremonial head of the country.
Following your logic, why should there be any tradition at all? Why do the Changing of the Guard, when the "Guard" just plays bagpipes? Why maintain the Tower of London when there are plenty of modern jails around?
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 26 Reply 5, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5558 times:
How does the Royal family in England support themselves? I mean, are they living on the taxpayer's pound?? If so, what a waste of money!
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
comorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4676 posts, RR: 17 Reply 7, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5512 times:
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 5): How does the Royal family in England support themselves? I mean, are they living on the taxpayer's pound?? If so, what a waste of money!
Um, they used to own England. So even if they don't get a handout, they own enough to be comfortable for a very long time. They get a royal pittance for what they bring in so that issue is a non-starter.
LAXintl From United States of America, joined exactly 13 years ago today! , 22062 posts, RR: 51 Reply 8, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5500 times:
Looking from outside, I see the Queen and Royal family as an extremely valuable branding and draw for the nation.
After all the you have mass amount of tourism and dollars centered around the royal family. I've certainly trounced around the UK and spent plenty of sums with my family visiting various castles and homes related to the Royals.
Also don't forget, the Queen is still part of the legal governmental systems for other nations also, for example head of state in Canada thru her representative the Governor General, so simply getting rid of her has effects beyond UK.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
MadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, RR: 40 Reply 9, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5486 times:
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 4): Personally I think the Queen has lots of unique value as the chief statesman and ceremonial head of the country.
Oh definitely. She is not the World's longest reigning Monarch. This title goes to His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej, King of Thailand .
In the hierarchical order, the Emperor of Japan (Tenno) comes ahead of her an then HM King Bhumibol.
She is still an immense symbol worldwide, it may have to do with her age and all the historical time periods she has gone through in her life, World War II and more. How many US Presidents did she see during her reign. I had the number I posted it somewhere. It certainly makes a good number.
I still much prefer her namesake RMS Queen Elzabeth 2, Queen of the Seas. I treasure this ship the same as I treasure Concorde - while I can't say I treasure the Queen.
There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
david_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7145 posts, RR: 14 Reply 10, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 5465 times:
Quoting T8KE0FF (Reply 6): but in my view anything is too much for 'her'.
For that they have to meet and greet anyone and everyone who is invited to the Palace (including those idiots that pervade society that think they know it all whilst teenagers) and attend "official" functions in all manner of sporting, industrial and cultural fields. Would you do that under the obtrusive glare of the media? I wouldn't.
What twerps who think that they pay too much for her are indifferent to is the tax revenue paid by the Royal Family and alll revenue garnered from the Crown Estates. According to Wiki, in the 2003-04 fiscal year, the amount surrendered was £176.9 million, where the Head of State Expenditure was £36 million For comparison, the 2008-09 financial year saw iincome of £226.5 million with expenditure at £41.5 million. So we in 5 years, we have received an approx increase of £50 million whilst shelling out £5m more. That level of expenditure is 69p per person...effectively every 5.3 days you are paying her the princeley sum of 1p. Yes, it's FAR too much money that they are receivng. Shall we go to being a Republic then and deprive the Treasury that amount of money at a time when we need every penny that we can raise?
That is the point of a monarchy - you don't get to choose!
Quoting SOBHI51 (Reply 2): The Republic of Great Britain
Given that Great Britain is just the big island and the outlying islands, not including Northern Ireland, we'll have to rethink the name... The United Republic?
Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 4): why should there be any tradition at all? Why do the Changing of the Guard, when the "Guard" just plays bagpipes? Why maintain the Tower of London when there are plenty of modern jails around?
France manages to have just as much pomp and ceremony with the Presidential Guard, Changing of the Guard at the Elysée Palace...
Quoting comorin (Reply 7): So even if they don't get a handout
david_itl From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 7145 posts, RR: 14 Reply 12, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5405 times:
Quoting signol (Reply 11): The tax office would still get the tax even if under a republic they didn't pay out to the civil list.
I have a feeling that this would be one of things up for discussion!
OA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 24928 posts, RR: 60 Reply 13, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5386 times:
Quoting SOBHI51 (Reply 2): Without trying to interfere with UK interior affairs, I do not see GB without royal family, they are a symbol and a good one at that.
Also The Republic of Great Britain does not shime good. If something is not broken don't repair it.
Totally agree , also alot of the work they do goes un reported, all the charity events and good causes they support. The most recent elections saw the current process works and led to a smooth transition, protocal was followed and its always worked.
They also bring in millions of ££'s in tourism. They have adapted to changes and the new younger Royals like William and Harry will be a great asset in future.
OLYMPIC AIR - ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΗ "Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΨΗΛΑ" "GREECE FLYING HIGH"
PlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11139 posts, RR: 63 Reply 14, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5374 times:
Quoting T8KE0FF (Reply 6): Agreed!! I don't pay text myself (being 14 haha) but I think its only about 5p a year, but in my view anything is too much for 'her'.
PAYG or PAYE?
Quoting OA260 (Reply 13): Totally agree , also alot of the work they do goes un reported, all the charity events and good causes they support.
Charles, for all his faults, is a very vocal critique of the built environment. I both support and disapprove of this; sometimes he gets it right on the head, whilst in other cases he does tend to be overly sentimental about progress. The Royal's charity work is also invaluable and surprisingly low key most of the time. Again to highlight Charles in his work for The Prince's Trust, he has changed the lives of many people... and given them the shock of their lives by turning up unexpected to see how they are getting on.
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 26 Reply 15, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5226 times:
Quoting comorin (Reply 7): Um, they used to own England.
Key phrase here being used to own. They don't "own" England anymore. So, what's the point??
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
NWOrientDC10 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1389 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5191 times:
Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 14): Again to highlight Charles in his work for The Prince's Trust
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7460 posts, RR: 5 Reply 17, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5141 times:
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 5): How does the Royal family in England support themselves?
They have a nice income from Royal Properties.
Quoting signol (Reply 11):
The tax office would still get the tax even if under a republic they didn't pay out to the civil list.
Would it? IIRC there was an agreement some years back that brought the Royal Income into a tax paying position. I have no doubts that the Solicitors for the Royal Family would have protected them in that agreement for "unseen future events".
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 15): They don't "own" England anymore. So, what's the point??
They still own a fair bit of land.
Overall I believe that the Royal Family is a net benefit for the UK. Behind the ceremony is a lot of legal issues that are avoided, and they level of tourism can't be underestimated. While "other countries" may have more tourists, I would put the UK at the top of the "European Wish List" for Yanks looking to fly over the Atlantic. I've spent more time (and money) there than any other place - well, except for Australia.
As for the Queen, I'm impressed with her. She did her WW II bit as a truck driver and has performed exceptionally well ever since.
The most impressive part though is how adaptable she has been over the years as the world has changed so much. Political changes, technology changes (especially in communications) and all of the family issues. The Queen has adjusted exceptionally well, Charles is well prepared to take over and William & Harry have both grown into impressive young men. Harry, to me, is like Andrew who was simply "H" when he served as a chopper pilot in the Falklands War. Harry sort of "slipped" into Afghanistan and served until his service there was disclosed by the media.
Overall I'm impressed with the Royal Family in my lifetime and believe they add something to the UK that can't be copied or replaced.
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12337 posts, RR: 12 Reply 18, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 5111 times:
I think the sense of continunity of Royality is something many people want in their countries so long as they are more of a figurehead, not a true part of govenment power structures. While HRH Queen Elizabeth II is the Head of State for the UK and some Commonwealth Countries, she really only has a ceremonial invovement in the UK government, no real involvement in actual policy decisions with rare exceptions. That is something most UK citizens can live with and prefer.
zkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4739 posts, RR: 10 Reply 19, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 5082 times:
Quoting david_itl (Reply 10): What twerps who think that they pay too much for her are indifferent to is the tax revenue paid by the Royal Family and alll revenue garnered from the Crown Estates. According to Wiki, in the 2003-04 fiscal year, the amount surrendered was £176.9 million, where the Head of State Expenditure was £36 million For comparison, the 2008-09 financial year saw iincome of £226.5 million with expenditure at £41.5 million. So we in 5 years, we have received an approx increase of £50 million whilst shelling out £5m more. That level of expenditure is 69p per person...effectively every 5.3 days you are paying her the princeley sum of 1p. Yes, it's FAR too much money that they are receivng. Shall we go to being a Republic then and deprive the Treasury that amount of money at a time when we need every penny that we can raise?
There was another study also that showed how little it costs to have them as head of state compared to other countries with Presidents etc.
One other factor that was mentioned in another post is that they attract millions of pounds of foreign currency from tourism.
Quite simply the British Royal Family is the worlds most famous monarchy and tourists like to see things related to them.
Me personally I don't care for or against the monarchy, but as mentioned purely economically they are far better than any other alternative for Britain.
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 14150 posts, RR: 26 Reply 20, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5067 times:
Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17): They still own a fair bit of land.
Do they pay their fair share of property taxes??
The thing is, the Royal Family may have once ruled England for many, many centuries. But this is 2010. Who is ruling England now?
.
.
The people.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
PeterPuck From Canada, joined Jun 2004, 318 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5028 times:
I'm sure her nearly 60 years of involvement in politics, diplomacy, charity work, business, etc are a welcome resource for the Prime Minister in his/her weekly meetings! I don't know what percentage of Canadians agrre with me, but I would prefer to keep the status quo with the Queen as our head of state.
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8418 posts, RR: 13 Reply 22, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4996 times:
Quoting T8KE0FF (Thread starter): Personally, I dislike the queen. What is the point? Yea, sure she brings in heaps of tourists to our nation but still... I just don't get it. What does she actually do that no-one is capable of doing??
skidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 60 Reply 23, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4961 times:
While everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, I don't think a 14yr old has any idea what he is talking about.
However, if the UK education system paid more attention to the History of this country and how it has evolved and grown through the years, he wouldn't have to ask stupid questions.
Having seen the mess "elected" presidents, dictators and the like make of the countries they rule, then give me the system we have any day.
Still, it's good that he asks questions as this is the only way to learn. It's simply sad he cannot find the answers at school.
Given the state this country is in, with the standard of politicians we have seen over the past 20 years or so, then to have a stable head of state such as the Queen is, I think, essential.
26 MadameConcorde: The Queen does not have her own aircraft that I know of. No Queen's Flight. You will have a difficult time believing how much Nicolas Sarkozy and wife
27 OA260: Quite true but in his defense at that age I went through the get rid of the Monarchy phase! Its part of student/school life sometimes. Then when you
28 GDB: It's not about the money (a totally insignificant amount of government spending), it's about continuity, keeping the head of state out of politics thu
29 bookishaviator: Whilst I personally would love to see Australia become a republic, it's worth noting that the Queen and the royal family are, for all intents and pur
30 ltbewr: Perhaps one critical area where the powers of the Royality should be changed is as to their position of 'defender of the faith', that is the Church of
31 avek00: ...That's only until he wins the next round of elections and goes for the Presidential A380 to upstage Obama. As an Episcopalian, and Anglophile, I s
32 KiwiRob: You forgot Belgium, or was it intentional? Precisely why having the Queen as head of state makes sense, as soon as you get a President the role of he
33 Pyrex: While it is up to the British people to make that decision, I do not believe in the concept of a parliamentary monarchy. Simply put, the notion of dem
35 SOBHI51: Seems some people concepts of democracy need a revisit. Free elections, Parliament with power to change ruler (PM), speaker corner, free press among
36 LTU932: Old Vickie? For a 13 year old, you really know nothing about your country. Victoria has been dead for over a century, Elizabeth the Second is your Qu
37 Pyrex: No they don't. Democracy means equal rights for everyone, it does not mean "if your great great great grandfather was the meanest SOB around and mana
38 Lufthansa411: One of the things in the British political system that I have the most respect for. As seemingly crazy as it is to swear allegiance to the Queen, it
39 GST: Agreed. And indeed they are an integral, and good, part of our legal system. Removing them would needlessly politicise the role of head of state, and
40 MadameConcorde: Actually, there is a Queen Victoria still living and she is not that old. She is a Cunard Queen, of royal class, sailing the Seven Seas.
41 777236ER: Clearly nothing will change whilst the Queen is alive, but how many 21st century Brits would accept Charles as king? Our money shouldn't go to keep a
42 AirframeAS: Those people are not a part of the Royal Family. The politicians are THE people. My uneducated guess is probably not much. Not after the crap he has
43 RJ111: HRH is a fine ambassador for the UK (and others) more so than any PM has been or will be. I believe Charles can be too. 84 years old now she still per
44 777236ER: Do you seriously believe that? He's worse than his dad! He - wants to ban McDonald's - has written to countless government departments trying to infl
45 david_itl: And of course, none of those things would happen with a President. Time to get real!
46 RJ111: he won't have a patch on Liz but if he falls into line i think he can be ok and will change some people's opinions of him. Perhaps i'm just an optimis
47 photopilot: Views from Canada...... You Brits are welcome to keep Charles and your future Queen Camilla, Lizzy and the rest of the royal Clan. Despite the fact th
48 KiwiRob: I don't see a problem with banning McDonalds, or at least whacking a bloody big tax on fast food. What an absolute load of misinformed crap, HRH does
49 777236ER: A president would have some sort of accountability. That's the point, with power comes accountability in a democracy.
50 RobertNL070: A 21st century Louis XIV ? L'état, c'est moi. Very doubtful.
51 777236ER: You don't see a problem with banning a private organisation because it produces something you don't like? That's a totalitarian view. What are you on
52 MadameConcorde: While we the French tax payers are forced to finance the lavish life of Sarko and his newest wife Carla, their children and step children. The true 2
53 PlymSpotter: So the man is not entitled to express his opinion? Only the reigning monarch is required to be impartial. Not to lose money or contracts. If a design
54 GST: And she knows, as does every British monarch in the last 150 years, that if she crosses that line on anything more than telling a PM not to be the fi
55 PlymSpotter: Glass is rapidly becoming the new concrete unfortunately - used where something quick and easy is needed, without much thought to the integrity of th
56 Mortyman: In a monarchy it is the Primeminister, cabinet and ellected paliment that holds the political power. It is the Primeminister etc that will be held ac
57 777236ER: So you're happy for the nation to be ruled by some tacit agreement? In fact, let's get rid of all our laws and govern by "common sense"! No, the argu
58 PlymSpotter: If you note, he already has a job - several in fact. I'm afraid it's not clear why utilising your position to make statements on what you believe in
59 GST: In a manner I suppose I am. The UK has an uncodified constitution and it works rather well, the relationship between monarchy and government is part
60 mariner: It isn't "tacit agreement" at all. The monarchy exists by Act of Parliament and functions with the consent of Parliament. If the Parliament changes i
61 KiwiRob: But would never do that, did you not watch the news and the trouble the election result caused. I like McDonalds, I even worked for them but I have n
62 skidmarks: Don't try and make capital out of something as simple as this. The fact is that History, along with other subjects which used to be a staple part of
63 GDB: No, that does not and will not happen, quite apart from anything else, that ingrained national skepticism that was also a factor in preventing extrem
64 777236ER: Even worse: we pay him to live in palaces, he has supreme power over us, and he has vested commercial interest! These points are the same, and the an
65 PlymSpotter: Exactly how does he have this 'supreme power'? Dan
66 KiwiRob: I have no problem with democracy, my thoughts on the matter are if it isn't broken why try to fix it. The UK and NZ have an almost identical forms of
67 dl021: OK...to pitch an opinion from the outside, with the only dog in this fight being that the UK is first among equals in our pantheon of allies and frien
68 GDB: Even worse, one who described himself as a 'Stalinist', (he wasn't talking about his musical innovation and development either). There is a small Rep
69 kdhurst380: You know, it scares me that the government considered lowering the voting age to 16. I would be worried that you could vote two years down the line w
70 rfields5421: If you don't have a king or queen - how can it be a 'kingdom' ? What would you call the nation without a monarch? Heck keeping the royal family and a
71 TheCol: By that logic, we might as well become the 51st state. Hell, it'll be a lot cheaper than spending countless billions changing the way this country fu
72 Carlisle: It's like going up to a person and asking them if they would like a million dollars... well, in your case, pounds... Cheers, Jeremy
73 shamrock604: Well, let me set out my stall. I'm Irish - from the Republic, and my political views would definitely be towards the Republic system of government. Mo
74 GDB: But haven't they in large part already done so? I've mentioned the lack of dedicated VIP aircraft for them, the Royal Yacht was decommissioned 13 yea
75 A332: The Queen is loved by many... but I think once she's gone the Royal Family should be disbanded, sort of like the Partridge Family... leave a lasting i
76 777236er: Exactly how does a tourist get to see the Queen? Unless, of course, you mean the palaces, crown jewels and other regalia, none of which requires a mo
77 GDB: And those costs you mention would make the merest dent in the good causes listed? A replacement President would be free? Like the ones elsewhere in th
78 skidmarks: Ah, the ability to quote statistics to prove a point. A typical "I'm right so get stuffed" attitude there. When I look at the waste that goes on elsew
79 PlymSpotter: I was actually classed as this at times in my life. Was I in severe poverty - no, I was quite happy and so were my family, my working parent just did
80 777236er: You seriously believe we couldn't get a president for (at least) an order of magnitude less than we pay the queen? Not allowing them to use his or he
81 KiwiRob: Doesn't the Crown only three royal palaces used by the Queen, Windsor Castle, Buckingham Palace and Holyroodhouse, her other homes Balmoral and Sandr
82 PlymSpotter: When using such a person to try and demonstrate that they are too poor to go on holiday, have enough shoes, or any other commodities etc... then it s
83 GDB: Experience elsewhere seems to very often indicate that. If we were starting from scratch, sure we'd not have a monarchy, but the long evolution of de
84 seemyseems: No I don't think they should be ditched, I thing its good that we and some other countries still have a royal family reigning, (IMO). And yes, I am a
85 speedbird9: technically n the Crown does owns about 70% in the UK and reserves the right purchase any piece of land without the owners approval Yes but for every
86 ScarletHarlot: Here's one Canadian that agrees with you! Especially after 15 years of living in the States and having an elected President.
87 777236er: Three palaces justifies a plural. Your other points are laughable. I'm not using such a person, you are. You seem prejudiced against the poor, do you
88 PlymSpotter: If you spent money on cigarettes, booze and PlayStation games when on minimal income, whose fault would it be that you couldn't afford a holiday, or
89 maxter: One small difference... The people get to choose the Prez...
90 skidmarks: And look what happens when the people choose. They get Politicians who waste Billions more than all the Royal Family put together, on pointless, priv
91 777236er: So are you saying that living on £6.20 a day for everything including accomodation, food, water, electricity and gas is poverty or not? I would sugg
92 PlymSpotter: I thought I'd answered this but, just to be clear, in the UK I would consider that to be below the poverty line. Well below it in fact. It may, but I
93 GDB: The implication there being that 32 Sqn RAF is the 'Queen's Private Squadron', no it isn't, Royal VIP flights make up a small minority of their taski
94 Blackprojects: The UK has remained Stable for a very Long time and is one of the Great powers on the world stage not from Prime ministers who have come and gone but
95 MadameConcorde: HM the Queen commands respect. She is also a living encyclopedia. She has perfect command of French she can deliver speeches in several languages with
96 skidmarks: Please explain why I apparently think we need a Dictatorship? A more inflammatory, pointless and rude statement from one who knows he has lost an arg
97 directorguy: I'm for keeping the monarchy. The monarchy in the UK is a poignant symbol that is instantly recognisable. At the same time, the Monarch is the symbol
98 777236er: Seems quite clear to me, you think elected officials waste billions and unelected leaders who lead us by virtue of birth are better. The fact you put
99 777236er: Good, so let's be clear that you accept that 10.2% of British children live 'well below the poverty line' (indeed, in severe poverty), and this is wo
100 ME AVN FAN: The point is that you have to make your mind UP ! to "ditch" the monarch means to turn to a republic. The "United Republic of Great Britain and North
101 PlymSpotter: And yet only 18% of people have a problem with it... or have you conveniently forgotten about another one of your 'facts' that has been debunked alre
102 RobertNL070: 4250 people = approximately 0.007% of the UK population (61,383,000 mid-2008, Office for National Statistics) So what? Apparently the UK has a defici
103 TristarAtLCA: Yes we can. And I would much rather pay for that than send more soldiers to Afghanistan to be returned in body bags or have their limbs blown off, wh
104 MD-90: She's a lot cheaper than an American President.
105 KiwiRob: Gotta wonder if Harry really is her grandson. Ireland is a minor country, the Irish President is a minor politician, the PM in Ireland has most of th
106 MadameConcorde: ... and cheaper than a Sarkozy who just bought a A330 and two brand new Falcon 7X plus all refit costs to have them fitted suited to his own taste an
107 GST: The governmental system in Ireland makes the presidential office rather superfluous, and indeed extremely political. This I view to be an extremely b
108 JMA777: I think a monarch with any real power would be a very good way of keeping commoners in check, however, a monarch that is marginalised in such a way a
109 shamrock604: Minor? How would you feel about New Zealand being reffered to as "minor"? The Irish president typically does not comment on any such issues. The Pres
110 KiwiRob: It probably depends on the type of president you have, one with actual power like the Russian, French or US president or someone like the German or I
111 ME AVN FAN: do not forget that the "Presidential fleet" in France is in reality part of the armed forces (Force Aérienne, Aéronavale) and the "Royal Fleet" in
112 777236er: So the money we waste on the Royals can be used to much more worthwhile things, please see above. How about using the money to pay for increased body
113 TristarAtLCA: Brilliant idea! As the majority of limb losses occur below the waist or unprotected arms But I agree with your sentiment. Lets fund it by stopping th
114 PlymSpotter: Exactly - there is not a single question posed in that poll which is even slightly relevant to the population's feeling towards it's monarchy. Furthe
115 777236er: Now she's inviting racist fascists around to the palace! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/politics/10318287.stm Is she a racist or just completely out of to
116 PlymSpotter: "He received the invitation in his capacity as a member of the European Parliament (MEP) - all UK MEPs are asked as a matter of course."
117 ME AVN FAN: Some practical questions : > In what way does QEII govern the Church of England (Archbishop of Canterbury) ? > If the U.K. becomes a U.R.of, wh
118 bjcc: Firstly, we pay Charles nothing at all. He gets nothing from the Civil List, he lives from the Duchy of Cornwall's profit. When the Queen acts in her
119 PlymSpotter: Essentially she still only has a symbolic roll, but it's the only one I know of in which Governance is specifically implied. Her roll is to appoint t
120 ME AVN FAN: So that in reality not so much would change, as the Prime Minister would stay in 10 Downing Street, the new State President with his family would mov
121 777236er: Ah I see, so it's ridiculous outdated tradition that allows racists to hobnob with our unelected leaders. Or maybe she just is simply a racist: http:
122 GDB: Don't have them, most trips are on BA. We leave the dedicated, often extensive, VIP fleets to nations with Presidents. Who no doubt feel with their m
123 777236er: To the tune of £2.6 million in 2009, nice little backdoor subsidy.
124 KiwiRob: I wonder what the total cost of Browns trips were and the rest of cabinet?
125 777236er: You mean the trips of our democratically elected officials? Who cares. Personally, I'd be concerned about an apparently racist monarch using our mone
126 KiwiRob: So democratically elected officials are allowed to rip the system off like they were doing in the recent perks scandel, lots of people cared about th
127 777236er: They have been considered racist since the late 70s, and the term was a racist insult from the 50s, so if you had one in the 80s then yes, it was a r
128 maxter: Good stuff, finally a head of state that we can call our own, better that than some irrelevant out of touch pampered and spoilt entity from a small i
129 GDB: You see here is the difference, being privy to the process of VIP chartering, since BA is the most commonly used, you get to know how it works, it's
130 PlymSpotter: You have already answered your own rhetoric: Dan
131 na: For me the Royal family and the glamour, tradition and glory around is one of the 3 key points that mean Britain in a positive way. Britain without th
132 KiwiRob: The problem is (I have thought long and hard about it) the current system works really well in Australia, New Zealand and Canada, ok some young hothe
133 CXB77L: To me, abolition of the Monarchy is no more than a change for the sake of change. While the Queen has the power and the authority, in reality that po
134 PlymSpotter: They do. The charity work undertaken is also invaluable; tens of millions of pounds given to good causes each year. I do find it bemusing that people
135 skidmarks: And don't you have to wonder at the reliability of someone who screams "Racist" at every opportunity? Someone claiming to be impartial and honest, yet
136 RJ111: Not just the teachers taking a pay freeze this year. Ma'am did too.
137 ME AVN FAN: - while Britain in fact IS another boring middle-of-the-road democracy ! - the German Bundespräsident institution is not boring but quite nicely doi
138 Blackprojects: This will probably not happen in my life time as the young Princes of wales are both more popular than ever having chosen to serve on the front line e
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2009, 400 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Apr 2010, 181 posts, 
From Saudi Arabia, joined Jun 2003, 3022 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4459 posts, 
, 22062 posts, 
From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10243 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 24928 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11139 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4739 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jun 2004, 318 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
