King Charles III

[CountArach]

Do you really think that the politicians only serve the common voters and not those who pay the money for their campaigns?

That's why I would ban donations

In Germany we don't really vote for our President either, so that is a moot point.

Well maybe you should

Secondly, monarchy is not incompatible with democracy - it can even safeguard it.

I sense a Franco moment coming on...

[naut]

Britain is an unconstitutional monarchy. Most people think the House of Commons rules. But, in fact every bill passed by the House of Commons must be signed by the monarch before it becomes law.

Let me channel my inner Tribsy
Yes they have to sign it. But, the second part of your statement is bollox, they have no say in the matter, if the don't sign it they're out on their .

Well maybe you should

Why bother? If they have no power at all, why hold votes for them. Sounds like a waste of time, a bundle of red tape and a whole lot of bureaucracy. If you don't have a Monarchy why the hell have a equivalent figurehead position at all?

And I've never understood all the beef about the Monarchy coming from Australia. We, do after all get a holiday out of it, something they don't get in the UK after all.

[CountArach]

And I've never understood all the beef about the Monarchy coming from Australia. We, do after all get a holiday out of it, something they don't get in the UK after all.

The Australian way of life dictates that we would probably make up a new Public Holiday.

[Sir Moody]

To be honest I dont understand what is wrong with the idea of a vocal Monarch - im all for a King/Queen who states and discusses their opinion - so long as they dont take their opinion and uses what little power they have left to force it on Parliment.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

To be honest I dont understand what is wrong with the idea of a vocal Monarch - im all for a King/Queen who states and discusses their opinion - so long as they dont take their opinion and uses what little power they have left to force it on Parliment.

Sir M:

Good to see you back!


Now, go to the Gameroom, sign up for GH's Pirate ship, and tell him I sent you.

[Sir Moody]

Sir M:

Good to see you back!


Now, go to the Gameroom, sign up for GH's Pirate ship, and tell him I sent you.

who says i havent been here all along?

/hides behind his cape and moves back into the shadows laughing manically

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Why bother? If they have no power at all, why hold votes for them. Sounds like a waste of time, a bundle of red tape and a whole lot of bureaucracy. If you don't have a Monarchy why the hell have a equivalent figurehead position at all?

We already spend far too much money on our President, and as I have said before, I saw somewhere on Paradox Forums where someone proved that Germany spends more on the German President than [I believe] Britain spends on theirs, once the final totals are all factored in.

[CountArach]

We already spend far too much money on our President, and as I have said before, I saw somewhere on Paradox Forums where someone proved that Germany spends more on the German President than [I believe] Britain spends on theirs, once the final totals are all factored in.

That sounds like putting a price tag on freedom...

[ICantSpellDawg]

Royalty should be elected in the UK or dissolved. They could use a "King" as a traditional figurehead or Cultural Representative like President or Chancellor.

"Born into it" is simply not good enough anymore.

Landmarks would have the allure with or without Royals.

[Incongruous]

Royalty should be elected in the UK or dissolved. They could use a "King" as a traditional figurehead or Cultural Representative like President or Chancellor.

"Born into it" is simply not good enough anymore.

Landmarks would have the allure with or without Royals.

Bollox, show me how your own elected representatives give a damn about your freedom, Christ an American talking about safeguards of freedom.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Bollox, show me how your own elected representatives give a damn about your freedom, Christ an American talking about safeguards of freedom.

Okay

[rory_20_uk]

Bollox, show me how your own elected representatives give a damn about your freedom, Christ an American talking about safeguards of freedom.

Seconded. Democratic they're not, but there's few elected officials that have done as good a job, and on average the elected ones are far down in the gutter.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

That sounds like putting a price tag on freedom...

What freedom? The monarch doesn't interfere with or restrict our freedom, and they don't in Britain. The Labour Party is already good enough at that.

[CountArach]

What freedom? The monarch doesn't interfere with or restrict our freedom, and they don't in Britain. The Labour Party is already good enough at that.

How about my freedom from Tyrrany? My freedom to elect my own leaders?

C'mon CA you are smarter than that, and anyone who believes the Commons cares about freedom is an idiot.

The Commons don't care about Freedom - point me to where I said that and I shall correct it. Oh wait, I didn't!

Simply because elected officials don't care about us doesn't mean we should try to:
1. Scrap the system
2. Reform the system

The Monarchy would be a good butress against the ever absurd stance of Parliament.

Then why haven't they done that already? Because they have no power! Why do you even bother keeping the Queen around at all?

[InsaneApache]

Why do you even bother keeping the Queen around at all?

She looks a lot better on postage stamps than Pa McBroon.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

How about my freedom from Tyrrany?

Last I checked, no monarch in the West is a tyrant, or has been for quite a long time.

My freedom to elect my own leaders?

As I said, here we don't anyways. Besides, the monarch doesn't have much power.

[Incongruous]

The Commons don't care about Freedom - point me to where I said that and I shall correct it. Oh wait, I didn't!

You are saying that the Monarch must go because you seem to harbour some notion that the Monarchy impedes my personal freedoms, well it does not. The elected part of our government does not care about how many freedoms its destroys, yet you seem to wish to give them more power, by scrapping the Monarchy.

Reform? Reform to what? Reform for the sake of reform is bollocks, high minded Republicanism is also bollocks, because it leads to exactly the same thing, the concentration of power to a limited section of society.

Look at the U.S.A.

You should fear politicians mor than anything else in the world, including constitutional monarchs.

[Incongruous]

That sounds like putting a price tag on freedom...

Oh please! The Drama!

C'mon CA you are smarter than that, and anyone who believes the Commons cares about freedom is an idiot.

The Monarchy would be a good butress against the ever absurd stance of Parliament.

[JR-]

That's why I would ban donations

i would always support any ban on state funding of political parties, they exists with the support of the electorate or the come to believe they are a class above.