Queen's Jubilee

[mjdgreg]

'Very well put and my God it brightened up some very sad lives'

[bobjimwilly]

'Very well put and my God it brightened up some very sad lives'

give it a rest ffs. Misquoting someone to make you look clever just makes you look a dick, unless that's what you were going for? In which case, bravo sir! 

[jucyberry]

Well said Rob. Nothing as sad as a rabid republican, they see no joy in tradition, tradition it has to be said that obviously means a huge amount to most people in Britain as has been proved this weekend.

As Steve says stick your republicisim, we have a Monarch and will always have a Monarch, the alternative is too repulsive to contemplate.

[mjdgreg]

As Steve says stick your republicisim, we have a Monarch and will always have a Monarch, the alternative is too repulsive to contemplate.

I think you'll find in Ireland not having a monarch works very well indeed. People who believe in the monarchy need to cop themselves on. It's totally immoral that these people live the lives of unbridled luxury at taxpayers expense.

[Thinwhiteduke]

As Steve says stick your republicisim, we have a Monarch and will always have a Monarch, the alternative is too repulsive to contemplate.

I think you'll find in Ireland not having a monarch works very well indeed. People who believe in the monarchy need to cop themselves on. It's totally immoral that these people live the lives of unbridled luxury at taxpayers expense.

If your all for a Republic...then all I can say is long live the Monaarchy.

This weekend has fully illustrated the strength of feeling to the Royal Family, and the volume of people who support it, anything you say will make zero difference to that.

[scriptman]

As Steve says stick your republicisim, we have a Monarch and will always have a Monarch, the alternative is too repulsive to contemplate.

I think you'll find in Ireland not having a monarch works very well indeed. People who believe in the monarchy need to cop themselves on. It's totally immoral that these people live the lives of unbridled luxury at taxpayers expense.

Ireland's economy is struggling, hence the European Union bailout last year. Not only did Ireland receive the bailout, it has been a huge recipient of EU cash over the last 20 years. Ireland's probably a bad example.

I struggle to understand the furore over occasions like the Queen's Jubilee.... other than an extra day off work. The only place to benefit from the Royal Family is the south east of England. For all the concern over her loyal subjects, Queen Elizabeth would sooner tune in to the 4:30pm at Sandown that at the plight of her Commonwealth.

[mjdgreg]

http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/Monarchy%20doesn%27t%20work/index.php

[mjdgreg]

I struggle to understand the furore over occasions like the Queen's Jubilee....

That's because you have a brain and have decided to use it. You haven't fallen victim to all the propaganda that the palace and the media constantly spew out to keep the sycophants in place.

[Filo]

THE CASE FOR WHY THE MONARCHY DOESN'T WORK

The monarchy is damaging to those caught up in it, it is unaccountable and it acts as a drag on our democratic process. This is a broken institution that long ago abdicated all responsibility for power but continues to take what it can from the taxpayer.
The monarchy is a 'broke' institution. Constitutionally it has abdicated all responsibility. For most of the time the Queen is both powerless and pointless.
There is a cosy arrangement in place which allows the government of the day to exercise the Queen's power in return for political support for the monarchy. Officials use euphemisms to hide the true nature of this deal - they say the Queen acts "on the advice of the prime minister", meaning she does what she is told. We hear debate about the "royal prerogative", which can be more accurately described as "prime ministerial powers". They talk about the Queen owning land, palaces and priceless art "in trust for the nation", which simply means we pay for them and she keeps them.

Politically the monarch serves little purpose. There are some powers she can and has used, but on these occasions we are reminded why the monarchy is unacceptable in a modern democracy. The Queen can, for example, play a role in choosing our prime minister. It's a job an elected president could do if we had a hung parliament, but an unelected, unaccountable monarch has no right to play any part in our political process.

It's not just the institution that is dysfunctional. Occupying the palaces we have a family of fairly ordinary, uninspiring individuals who represent the very worst of Britain - snobbish, elitist and utterly out of touch with the rest of the country. The Windsors just keep on taking from the taxpayer and give very little back. Despite doing little and achieving even less, they demand respect and deference from everyone. The most talented and accomplished commoner is expected to defer to princes Harry and William. Scientists, architects and a host of other professionals who have earned doctorates and professorships, are lectured and patronised by Charles who demands he be heard and taken seriously for no reason other than his rank.

Desperate to defend their privilege the Windsors employ a huge PR team who work around the clock to promote the royal brand. Unable to point to any meaningful purpose the Windsors claim simply to "work hard", despite the evidence. They repeatedly remind us of what they do for charity, although what they do is of questionable value and could be done without the royal titles and the hundreds of servants.

It's not all their fault though. Let us spare a sympathetic thought for the Windsor family. They are dysfunctional and eccentric because of the bizarre institution into which they have been born. Starting from birth royals find themselves constantly in the public eye: they are relentlessly photographed and reported on by the media; they soon learn that they are restricted by constitutional requirements and royal conventions as to who they may marry and what careers they may pursue; growing up, they are surrounded by sycophants and lackeys whose deferential mindset teaches them that they can get away with almost any self-indulgent and extravagant behaviour that pleases them. No wonder Charles believes he has the answers to the world's problems - he's always been told how brilliant he is, regardless of the evidence of his own academic record. The monarchy is as damaging to the Windsors as it is to our democracy.

It is an institution that abdicated political responsibility long ago and which harms those who are caught up in it. It is bad for our democracy and bad for our pockets. The monarchy costs over 100 times as much as the Irish presidency, it is more than ten times more expensive than its German counterpart. Yet this institution which spends so much of our money is exempt from Freedom of Information laws. It does not have to hand its accounts to the National Audit Office for proper scrutiny and it continually blurs the line between what is public and what is private property, allowing the Windsors to shift costs onto the taxpayer while retaining tight control over access and accountability.

There is one final reason why the monarchy doesn't work for Britain. With over 90% of the population believing our political system does not work, our politics is crying out for reform. Yet reform in this country moves at a snail's pace because the monarchy gets in the way. Firstly, the monarchy gives the government enormous and unlimited power. This makes the government extremely cautious about moving too far down the reformist road, in case that power comes under full scrutiny and is threatened by genuine democratic change. Secondly, the monarchy's supporters cry foul when too much change is proposed, demanding that while it is permissible to make some modifications to our political system, we must not jeopardise the Queen's position, independence or authority. The deference and sycophancy shown by many toward the royals places the most important and fundamental reforms outside the political debate.

The monarchy is broken. It serves no purpose and it gets in the way of a genuine, refreshing and full-throated debate on the way we do politics in this country. It is time it went.

Another copy and paste from someone unable to make their own arguments!

i`ll quote your source Mick

http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/Monarchy%20doesn%27t%20work/index.php

[rtid88]

mjdgreg, PLEASE OH PLEASE DO THIS!!

 

It would make my life a much happier one!! Sick of reading your constant dribble!!

[bobjimwilly]

I'm no Royalist, but I understand the benefits of having a monarchy. And although she doesn't pay the same tax as the rest of us, the economic benefits of keeping such a historic institution far outweigh the relatively small amount of money they cost us. I also understand the monarchy comes with a fair amount of political clout, which is a major pro in modern times.

So stick that in yer pipe Mick 

[mjdgreg]

I'm no Royalist, but I understand the benefits of having a monarchy. And although she doesn't pay the same tax as the rest of us, the economic benefits of keeping such a historic institution far outweigh the relatively small amount of money they cost us. I also understand the monarchy comes with a fair amount of political clout, which is a major pro in modern times.

I'm afraid you must be a royalist to come out with drivel like that. The benefits of having a monarchy are far outweighed by the disadvantages. It's like Rovers having the benefits of all those alleged superstars but at great cost to team spirit and we all know what that meant. The fact they don't pay tax is a national scandal. If me or you didn't pay tax we'd be in serious trouble. Not only don't they pay tax they get state benefits!!!

Your last point is the most ludicrous of the lot. Why should a thicko like Prince Charles have such enormous political clout? The clown is away with the fairies and is a major impediment to democracy. Off with their heads.

[Draytonian III]

Bigerty Bigerty boring ****

[scriptman]

I'm no Royalist, but I understand the benefits of having a monarchy. And although she doesn't pay the same tax as the rest of us, the economic benefits of keeping such a historic institution far outweigh the relatively small amount of money they cost us. I also understand the monarchy comes with a fair amount of political clout, which is a major pro in modern times.

So stick that in yer pipe Mick 

Does the monarchy have political clout?  Any influence the royals hold sway over UK politics has been systematically diluted since Cromwellian times. They may harbour opinions but in 21st Century UK they are advised not to voice them. The Queen's representatives are members of the House of Lords. These are able to discuss modern day political issues but they do not have the authority to enforce them, at best merely delay them. 

The UK will always be steeped in history and pomp and circumstance, whether we have a Royal Family or not. I'm sure the Queen does a grand job but why should the civil list or parliamentary annuities extend to chinless hooray Henrys?  When Windsor Castle suffered fire damage, £60 million of tax-payers money was used to repair it. It was well within the means of Royal Family and the hangers on to fund the repairs… but then again it would have come indirectly from us anyway.  Conisbrough Castle and Doncaster Minster are crying out for funding in order to meet much needed repairs.  Where is the Queen’s generosity in all of this?  The only time the Queen ever visited Doncaster was en route to the races.   

The Duke of Westminster is one of the UK's richest men with a fortune of over £6 billion, what has he ever done to deserve even a fraction of this?  Why should even a tiny proportion of my taxes go to the pompous Prince Edward or Prince Andrew?  The monarchy in this country, at the very least, needs to be scaled down to reflect modern society.  As individuals we may only contribute very little via our taxes but the total nationwide amounts to hundreds of millions. It's totally unacceptable in my opinion, especially when you see the state of the education and health services.
 

[mjdgreg]

Does the monarchy have political clout?  Any influence the royals hold sway over UK politics has been systematically diluted since Cromwellian times. They may harbour opinions but in 21st Century UK they are advised not to voice them. The Queen's representatives are members of the House of Lords. These are able to discuss modern day political issues but they do not have the authority to enforce them, at best merely delay them. 

The UK will always be steeped in history and pomp and circumstance, whether we have a Royal Family or not. I'm sure the Queen does a grand job but why should the civil list or parliamentary annuities extend to chinless hooray Henrys?  When Windsor Castle suffered fire damage, £60 million of tax-payers money was used to repair it. It was well within the means of Royal Family and the hangers on to fund the repairs… but then again it would have come indirectly from us anyway.  Conisbrough Castle and Doncaster Minster are crying out for funding in order to meet much needed repairs.  Where is the Queen’s generosity in all of this?  The only time the Queen ever visited Doncaster was en route to the races.   

The Duke of Westminster is one of the UK's richest men with a fortune of over £6 billion, what has he ever done to deserve even a fraction of this?  Why should even a tiny proportion of my taxes go to the pompous Prince Edward or Prince Andrew?  The monarchy in this country, at the very least, needs to be scaled down to reflect modern society.  As individuals we may only contribute very little via our taxes but the total nationwide amounts to hundreds of millions. It's totally unacceptable in my opinion, especially when you see the state of the education and health services.
 

Hear hear!

[mjdgreg]

http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/The%20Case%20for%20a%20Republic/index.php

[jucyberry]

Who are you quoting now? or are you thinking of running for office somewhere?

I half expect a piece of rhetoric about fighting on the beaches next.

I don't want to be rude but face facts, England isn't ready to give up the monarchy, it may never be. A resentment for inherited wealth seems somewhat simplistic and very communistic to me..

Myself, I envy no one, I covert no man or women's wealth and I don't begrudge those with money either. I see no point in always looking over the fence and whining that someone elses grass is greener than mine..

This terrible awful monarchy that you resent so much resides in a country that is free to have people voice their dissatisfactions..Perhaps it is time more was thought of the riches we as a nation posess rather than look to what others with more than us posess with resentful eyes.

[donnyroversfc]

http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/The%20Case%20for%20a%20Republic/index.php

 

[bobjimwilly]

Why should a thicko like Prince Charles have such enormous political clout? The clown is away with the fairies and is a major impediment to democracy. Off with their heads.

If you'd said that about the Prince Philip, I wouldn't disagree, but you obviously don't know what your talking about in reference to Charles. Plus I, like most, tend to ignore imbeciles who refer to people as "thickos", so count yourself ignore sir.

[bobjimwilly]

I'm no Royalist, but I understand the benefits of having a monarchy. And although she doesn't pay the same tax as the rest of us, the economic benefits of keeping such a historic institution far outweigh the relatively small amount of money they cost us. I also understand the monarchy comes with a fair amount of political clout, which is a major pro in modern times.

So stick that in yer pipe Mick 

Does the monarchy have political clout?  Any influence the royals hold sway over UK politics has been systematically diluted since Cromwellian times. They may harbour opinions but in 21st Century UK they are advised not to voice them. The Queen's representatives are members of the House of Lords. These are able to discuss modern day political issues but they do not have the authority to enforce them, at best merely delay them. 

The UK will always be steeped in history and pomp and circumstance, whether we have a Royal Family or not. I'm sure the Queen does a grand job but why should the civil list or parliamentary annuities extend to chinless hooray Henrys?  When Windsor Castle suffered fire damage, £60 million of tax-payers money was used to repair it. It was well within the means of Royal Family and the hangers on to fund the repairs… but then again it would have come indirectly from us anyway.  Conisbrough Castle and Doncaster Minster are crying out for funding in order to meet much needed repairs.  Where is the Queen’s generosity in all of this?  The only time the Queen ever visited Doncaster was en route to the races.   

The Duke of Westminster is one of the UK's richest men with a fortune of over £6 billion, what has he ever done to deserve even a fraction of this?  Why should even a tiny proportion of my taxes go to the pompous Prince Edward or Prince Andrew?  The monarchy in this country, at the very least, needs to be scaled down to reflect modern society.  As individuals we may only contribute very little via our taxes but the total nationwide amounts to hundreds of millions. It's totally unacceptable in my opinion, especially when you see the state of the education and health services.
 

Some good points about Conisbrough Castle and Doncaster Minster there. I agree, the monarchy could do with scaling down, but there is simply no advantage to abolishing it. We have the full power of a democratic Government running the country, and I don't think the queen has ever used her power to overule any decision by the government or the armed forces.

In terms of political clout, I refer to the number of overseas trips the monarchy makes, keeping us in-touch and friendly with certain countries that tend to disagree with out political leaders. Granted, t'old Philip normally cocks things up with non-white countries, but apart from that...

[jucyberry]

I would think the Queen has in her 60 years of rule forgotten more about politics than you or I will ever know..Just because they are in truth forbidden to express their personal opinions doesn't mean they don't know exactly what is going on.  I think you highly underestimate them if you think they don't.

[hoolahoop]

http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/Monarchy%20doesn%27t%20work/index.php

Ffs you don't buy into that crap surely!!!

[Filo]

I'm no Royalist, but I understand the benefits of having a monarchy. And although she doesn't pay the same tax as the rest of us, the economic benefits of keeping such a historic institution far outweigh the relatively small amount of money they cost us. I also understand the monarchy comes with a fair amount of political clout, which is a major pro in modern times.

So stick that in yer pipe Mick 

Does the monarchy have political clout?  Any influence the royals hold sway over UK politics has been systematically diluted since Cromwellian times. They may harbour opinions but in 21st Century UK they are advised not to voice them. The Queen's representatives are members of the House of Lords. These are able to discuss modern day political issues but they do not have the authority to enforce them, at best merely delay them. 

The UK will always be steeped in history and pomp and circumstance, whether we have a Royal Family or not. I'm sure the Queen does a grand job but why should the civil list or parliamentary annuities extend to chinless hooray Henrys?  When Windsor Castle suffered fire damage, £60 million of tax-payers money was used to repair it. It was well within the means of Royal Family and the hangers on to fund the repairs… but then again it would have come indirectly from us anyway.  Conisbrough Castle and Doncaster Minster are crying out for funding in order to meet much needed repairs.  Where is the Queen’s generosity in all of this?  The only time the Queen ever visited Doncaster was en route to the races.   

The Duke of Westminster is one of the UK's richest men with a fortune of over £6 billion, what has he ever done to deserve even a fraction of this?  Why should even a tiny proportion of my taxes go to the pompous Prince Edward or Prince Andrew?  The monarchy in this country, at the very least, needs to be scaled down to reflect modern society.  As individuals we may only contribute very little via our taxes but the total nationwide amounts to hundreds of millions. It's totally unacceptable in my opinion, especially when you see the state of the education and health services.
 

The queen visited Doncaster during Silver Jubilee year, she reviewed the RAF at RAF Finingley

[mjdgreg]

The queen visited Doncaster during Silver Jubilee year, she reviewed the RAF at RAF Finingley

That's right. I remember all the bogs being changed and fitted with gold plated fittings.

[donnyroversfc]

The queen visited Doncaster during Silver Jubilee year, she reviewed the RAF at RAF Finingley

That's right. I remember all the bogs being changed and fitted with gold plated fittings.

 

[mjdgreg]

Who are you quoting now? or are you thinking of running for office somewhere?

I half expect a piece of rhetoric about fighting on the beaches next.

I don't want to be rude but face facts, England isn't ready to give up the monarchy, it may never be. A resentment for inherited wealth seems somewhat simplistic and very communistic to me..

Myself, I envy no one, I covert no man or women's wealth and I don't begrudge those with money either. I see no point in always looking over the fence and whining that someone elses grass is greener than mine..

This terrible awful monarchy that you resent so much resides in a country that is free to have people voice their dissatisfactions..Perhaps it is time more was thought of the riches we as a nation posess rather than look to what others with more than us posess with resentful eyes.

At the risk of being rude, I don't think you have read my posts properly. Either that you are pretending you haven't. You base your whole reasoning on me being resentful of inherited wealth. This is a minuscule part of my argument. I reckon you bang on and on about this point because you are unable to refute any of my many other reasoned musings.

I understand your problem because it is impossible to defend the indefensible. So I'd give up now if I were you because you have lost the debate and there is nothing you can do about it.

[mjdgreg]

Ffs you don't buy into that crap surely!!!

It's not crap it's the truth. I defy anyone to refute any of the points made with reasoned argument.

[rtid88]

Don't need to just think u r a dick!! Plain and simple!!!!

[mjdgreg]

Why should a thicko like Prince Charles have such enormous political clout? The clown is away with the fairies and is a major impediment to democracy. Off with their heads.

Seems some of you don't realise that Charles is a thicko. Despite going to the best schools in the country he only got 2 A levels grades B and C. Because he was a royal he went to Cambridge, a university that he didn't get the grades for and ended up with a 2:2 degree. Very poor indeed. There were plenty of working class people that had more A levels with grade 'A''s that didn't get a look in. Here's the proof from Wikipedia:

'Tradition was broken again when Charles proceeded straight from secondary school into university, as opposed to joining the Armed Forces. On the recommendation of Robin Woods, Dean of Windsor (a massive sycophant), and despite only gaining grades of B and C in his A Levels, the Prince was admitted to Trinity College, Cambridge University, where he read anthropology, archaeology, and history, tutored by Canadian-born Professor John Coles. He graduated with a 2:2 Bachelor of Arts on 23 June 1970.'

[mjdgreg]

Don't need to just think u r a dick!! Plain and simple!!!!

What an intelligent post. You can't refute any of my arguments so you resort to childish abuse. I rest my case.