Loyal to the Royals?

[Oola]

Just wondering, if the Brits and anyone in the Commonwealth here think that our Royal family is a valid concept still in practice in the 21st century?

Also, others that belong to nations without Royals, would you like a Royal family?


I can't really decide. I do feel proud of the heritage, although when you look at it, in some instances they were pretty barbaric and immoral. But our current Royal Family, apart from some of their country pursuits (another thread/discussion) are beneficial to this nation I think. The work that Prince Charles does with the Prince's Trust and his Duchy line is admirable. Although they cost a fair amount, I think they also bring in a fair amount of revenue to the country in the past decade.

[eleanor2]

i know the royal family are far from perfect.so are we all. i do respect the royal family.they cost a lot.they own a lot that brings in to the treasury too. my worry as with all the younger generation.will wils and harry ever settle down.they have had a tough time of it.so who knows where the royal family pride will end up.

[fife]

i'm afraid i don't agree although my mother would kill me if she heard me say this as she loves the royal family, but i personally think they cost us tax payers a lot of money and for what appearances and a speech once a year it just adds to rip of britain i would rather my hard earned money be used else where i just don't feel that they serve a purpose now don't get me wrong i think wills and harry are wonderful people and it is nice to see that they behave like every one else there age but i can't stand charles or camilla and think they cost us alot of money renovating his house in scotland before he married camilla supposedly cost tax payers a huge amount of money and for what to keep her happy we would all like to re renovate our statley homes.

(have to say i do like the duchy range though)

Fife

[Ivy]

We do not have Royals in Germany any more (at least officially) This certainly adds to the popularity the British Royal family has over here. As a democrat I certainly have to be in favour of a president but he also costs a lot of money with all his trips abroad. He stays for the maximum of 10 years (two terms of office) and than a new one has to be elected. His official quarters have to be redecorated and fitted to his requirements. The President , like the Queen, has hardly any influence on the day by day politics and is more a representative figure. (Well the current one does not look very representative:) )
The royal family are brought up to be paragons to their subjects but obviously find it harder and harder to fit into this role. They are humans and Children of their time. They can't stay in touch with the people of today and stand for Victorian virtues on the other hand.
What would be the alternative for Britain? Donate the castles and houses to the National Trust and elect a President? Na ya dont want that do ya?
Maybe the circle of those members of the Royal family who are paid a state appanage should be made smaller but it's your heritage (Castles and estates) you have to protect if there is a Queen or not.

[Katelb]

I tend to go along with what you say Ivy,they do cost the taxpayer a fair amount but then so do a great many other 'unwanted' demands on our treasury;I don't wish to get into a debate on the implications of that remark,but given a choice ,I would rather the monarchy than 'the masses' who perhaps should not be here living off our revenue.

[dinger]

I believe the queen has done a good job but feel the younger generation have let her down rather a lot.

[Redstart]

I think you should consider what the Royals do for the country. Switzerland got rid of their nobility back at the end of the 13th century with the result that there was no patronage of the arts - so no well-known Swiss composers, artists and the like from the times of the Georges. There's no Bach, no Strauss, no Mozart, no Handel - they all had royal patronage in their different countries which enabled them to be creative.

The queen and her family seem to do a lot of PR for Great Britain and have very little private life where they can do exactly what they want. I've learned a lot more about them since I came here as not being particularly pro-Royal I couldn't answer all the questions I was asked about them.

That said, I'm very happy living in a real democracy. We have a different president every year and a certain number of signatures ensures a referendum. So no, I'm not pro-Royal but it wouldn't be Britain without a monarchy and you'd lose a lot of your foreign visitors.

[sheddie]

i think the Queen and the Duke are now looking their age and do amazingly well, still travelling around and the walk abouts, but I wonder will Prince Charles be missed out completely when anything happens to the Queen and will it go straight to William, what do you think?

[dinger]

I think william will be good for the people he has a lot of his mothers ways and charm.

[Katelb]

I agree with you dinger,I never have been able to picture Charles as king.

[Crocus]

I think William will be a fine king one day. Somehow, I cannot see Prince Charles as king. If and when William becomes king, it will be interesting to see how he will act, so to speak, being a king in this modern times. Perhaps more a people's king, him being brought up by Diana who obviously stood for being a queen of hearts.

[Ivy]

Well there are role models all over Scandinavia. The King of Norway going to work by tube..
Princess Mary giving an old lady who lost her way a lift in her car. Closer to the people, that is how British monarchy will survive. By the time the Queen dies most other monarchies will have made a change in generation Price Charles would be too old in their company. I really pity this man he was born and educated to one sole purpose. To become King. A position he most probably will never hold.

[jazzactivist]

I think that the British Royal Family are a waste of tax payers' money, and are such an old-fashioned concept - even the way that they look, speak and behave are from another era, even the younger Royals. They cost a lot and expect a lot - there is no need for them to have more than one home, for example. Plus they are an extended family with all sorts of relatives also receiving Treasury money for doing nothing much. I don't think that they should get any accolades for carrying out charitable work either, as that is part of their work, but the cost of Prince Charles would fund several charities on a long term basis to offer the same as the Princes Trust, so who is he really benefitting? To me, it is time that they went, but if the UK wants to keep them then they should be expected to live much more scaled down, ordinary lives and paid a set salary with a job description - only be available to immediate Royals. You can tell that I am not too keen o them, can't you? It must come from having worked for charities for years.