The quizz of Great England

[The Invisible Man]

But as I said above, can it really be shown that the monarchy itself is making money? Tourism will not cease when we grow up and become a republic. People would still visit Buck House as a curiosity, exactly as it is already.

 

I don't particularly like visitors coming to gawp at my quant little old country with its cute little queeny and olde worlde costumes and customs when they're not real, they're only there to drag tourists in. They're a great big re-enactment society really. I find it patronising, insulting and embarrassing.

 

Being anachronistic is a perfectly good reason for shutting down a political system.

[Colin, Germany]

Whether the monarchy is really making money is a question for the auditors. I rather suspect they would be if there were not so many of them.

 

I understand you feeling insulted and embarrassed by tourists visiting Britain because of its backward image, but most ways of making money have a negative aspect.

 

I agree that being anachronistic is a perfectly good reason for shutting down a political system, but the royal family are not the British political system.

[The Invisible Man]

Yes they are. They - it - is enshrined in the constitution. The armed forces owe allegiance to the crown, not the government or the people. The monarch can (theoretically) dissolve parliament; the monarch asks the victorious party leader to form a government, they are HER ministers, and it is HER government. (hence the phrase HMG) Acts of parliament (after struggling through the old farts and bishops in the Lords) have to be signed by the monarch.

 

OK so it's all farcical, and she wouldn't in practice exercise any of these powers and is expected to keep out of politics. So let's go the whole hog and disband them, get rid of our murky past and embrace a future of equality.

[Halifax Lass]

 

Haven't you two any work to do or any homes to go to? <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[Colin, Germany]

It would certainly help if many of the remnants of previous centuries when the monarchy wielded some power were abolished, but I am not impressed by presidents. The Australian people even voted to keep our queen as their monarch for the time being rather than have a president chosen by the political hacks.

 

A directly elected president would be better politically, but this has to be weighed against the rather strange advantages of keeping a smaller royal family than at present until the time is ripe for the inevitable change.

[The Invisible Man]

Lass - no.

 

Colin - yes, presidents do tend to be pillocks. But why have an individual with great or sole powers anyway? Look what happened to Caesar! Why can't we just have an elected parliament? The PMP's could elect a cabinet. If ships need to be launched or bridges opened, we can get Linda Barker to do it.

 

The ideal solution then is for the queen to emigrate and go to Australia, where they want her!

[Colin, Germany]

Halifax Lass - During the week I only have a hotel room to go back to in the evening. To do my work I need "coffee breaks".

 

The Invisible Man - Perhaps we should have a triumvirate, but that didn't work out very well either. The Australians don't want our queen. They merely thought it would be better to put up with her for a bit longer rather than accept the awful proposal presented to them by the political establishment.

[mikef]

I would rather keep the Monarchy with all its faults than replace it with a republic fronted by the likes of

Bush/Carter/Bush(elder)/Reagan/Carter/Ford/Nixon/Johnson etc or god forbid a President Blair.

Housing a new GLC or asylum seekers (you must be joking) in Buckingham Palace would cost a hell of a lot more public money than the present incumbents with no chance of any income from tourism etc plus the crime rate in the area would soar.

 

<img src="/images/graemlins/chat.gif" alt="" />

 

Mike F

[Mr Happy]

We have an elected parliament with a prime minister. We do not need a president wielding political power. Our monarchy goes back centuries and is the envy of many foreigners. Also, whether you like it or not Invis, it also gives the country a real lift when major events that involve the monarchy occur. For example, last year's Golden Jubilee. On a more local note, Her Majesty's visit to the Borough of Enfield gave many locals a real lift. My father-in-law said that meeting the Queen was something he will never forget. I was proud to meet her and to see the cheering residents of Enfield who lined the high street in the town centre in the afternoon (this was shown on TV) proved just how special our monarchy is. Yes, get rid of the hangers on but never get rid of the monarchy entirely.

[Halifax Lass]

I've met the Queen too Mr Happy and Prince Charles. Didn't think much of either of them. As for the Golden Jubilee, most people I spoke to couldn't have cared less in fact many felt the money could have been better spent elsewhere. It passed without celebration in many places. (Thank goodness).

 

Other countries still retain a monarchy without paying for it's upkeep. Royals in some countries actually go out and do proper jobs and earn their own money.

 

I hate to have to agree with Invis but Britain has an outdated monarchy. I wonder how many people realise that many of the things they think belong to the Queen actually belong to the nation - jewels, land, property. The monarch only holds them on behalf on the people.

 

Well I'd like my share! <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Mr Happy]

Well last year's Jubilee celebrations were well observed in Enfield. We all had a great time, including the mighty ETFC with a stand and a beat the goallie competition in the town centre with lots of other stalls!

 

It's about time we stopped knocking the monarchy (yes, the hangers on should be knocked) if we lost it this country would be far worse off. Other countries envy what we have got.

[Big J R]

So this leads me on to the Conspiracy Theories, yet again !!

 

Was her driver pissed, or was she and Dodi wiped out in an underpass in Paris ?? Flashing lights ?? Camera's turned ?? Where were all the witnesses ??

 

It's all too convenient.................

 

Five years for an inquest ?? Well, that's the French for you !!

 

OK - We'll all believe what we want to believe, and JFK was shot by ONE man on a warehouse roof, firing three shots in five seconds flat with an antiquated bolt-action rifle...................

 

 

 

YEAH; RIGHT OH...................................... !!!!!

[Halifax Lass]

I'm sorry Mr Happy but you're missing the point. "We all had a great time". Who is this "all". It was probably a minority rather than a majority of the people who live in Enfield. Also which other countries envy what we have?

 

I don't mind having a monarchy but I do object to them sponging off the nation and, as Charles hopes to do, disregarding the Constitution. The Swedes have a monarchy but they support themselves and are also more in touch with reality than the British Royal Family.

 

 

BJR you have raised some extremely valid points there, which according to some newspapers, many people in Britain agree with.

[Stu B]

I'm sorry if i offend anybody here but is it just me or has the Diana thing gone on for way to long?!Yes she was a very nice woman,but it's easy to do good things like that when your rich....i think it's time to let it rest.

[Jeff]

She was the 'Queen of Hearts' snob <img src="/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

[Little Miss Urchin]

Wish it would be laid to rest. Bloody woman drove me mad when she was alive - now she's dead!

 

Message to the press:

I really don't give a damn where famous people are 24/7. I don't want it shoved down my throat all the time. If I want to know about these things and have a good bitch about them I'd buy a mag.

 

And as for that selfish, obsessed, sorryful butler Burrell, or whatever his name is, what an absolute piece of poo. He had a letter that could have proven critical in the investigation but decided to reveal it now, 6 years after the incident. And, lo and behold, it coincides with the release of his book. Ever think the man was/is obsessed with her? Seems to be the only thing that distinguishes him from a stalker is that he had constant access to the object of his desire.

[Mr Happy]

For the sake of her children, it's time to let things rest. It's just that a certain Egyptian grocer and a lying conniving ex-butler with the morals and conscience of the Myra Hindley keep bringing it up again.

[Little Miss Urchin]

And another thing.

 

How can you charge the press for taking photos!? It's what the leeches do. Screw helping people in trouble, let's see if I can make a quick buck out of this.

 

What about the pictures of Marc-Vivien Foe? What about those taken in wars? The only reason it's happening (finally) is because of who died and the father of one of the victims is very rich and powerful and can therefore continue along this path.

[Mr Happy]

LMU, I love you!!!!!!!!!!

[Little Miss Urchin]

No, it's too late for that. The wedding is still off!