Posted: Sat 26 Jun 2004 13:10 GMT
Post subject: Are the Royal Family worth £36.8m?
|
|
- leoville
- Guest
-
-
-
The Royal Family cost us £36.8m last year. Are they worth it?
Of course the Royals are worth £38 million. They bring far more than that into our coffers through tourism and other associated spin offs every year. They are our heritage, and without a Monarchy this country would soon become a nasty republic. Do we want that, a socialist dictatorship? No thanks. I'll take the monarchy any day. God bless her majesty, and the House of Windsor.
What do you folks think?
|
Subscribe to British Expat today to get the most out of our great community.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat 26 Jun 2004 13:30 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- SSue
- Voluntary Moderator
- Joined: 31 Oct 2003
- Posts: 5205
- Location: From Grimsby, Lincolnshire, to Sydney, then Port Macquarie NSW Australia
The younger generations of Australians are all for a republic, but of course they don't realise all the implications. My vote will always be for the monarchy.
SSue 8)
|
Sydney Sue - Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
Read all about it! http://www.britishexpat.com/563.0.html
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat 26 Jun 2004 13:59 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- spainboy
-
- Joined: 13 Apr 2004
- Posts: 761
- Location: lanzarote
With footballers costing over 30 million They (Royal Family) are quite cheap
But i feel they could learn some PR from the Danish / spanish Royals
|
Follow British Expat on Twitter!
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat 26 Jun 2004 14:25 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- Not-Lorna
-
- Joined: 06 Apr 2003
- Posts: 1087
- Location: Beautiful British Columbia, Canada
spainboy wrote: i feel they could learn some PR from the Danish / Spanish Royals
I agree.
8)
|
Read the British newspapers online!
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat 26 Jun 2004 16:59 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- Dave
- Site Admin
- Joined: 21 Jan 2003
- Posts: 9242
- Location: Currently UK
I've shifted this to the Opinions/Politics board as that's where it belongs.
[Mod mode off]
Without a monarchy our country would immediately become a republic, I would hope - the only other alternatives being military dictatorship (monarchy under another name, if you go back to the roots of monarchy) or anarchy.
I really don't have any truck with the idea that a republic equals a socialist dictatorship - you only have to look at the US (the world's first modern republic) to refute that argument, and there are several other non-monarchies which I'm sure Thatcher would be proud of (Chile?).
I'm not altogether convinced by the tourism argument either. Bavaria still seems to get plenty of heritage visitors even though it lost the Wittelsbachs in 1918 - Mad King Ludwig's palaces still get plenty of visitors, and people still turn up in droves to the Oktoberfest (tho' maybe it's the beer that causes that). People would still come to see the trappings of royalty even without the Royal Family there. After all, how many scheduled events are there where tourists can expect to see the Queen? Trooping the Colour and the State Opening of Parliament, and that's your lot.
The convincing argument for keeping a monarchy, I think, is Sue's - what are the implications of scrapping it? How much power do you give a President? Do you go for a largely ceremonial Presidency, as the Germans (and many other Europeans) have done? Or do you make the President the Head of Government, like the US and (to a lesser extent) France and Russia?
Personally, I'm a big fan of parliamentary democracy - a Prime Minister who's PM simply because he can command a majority in Parliament. I'd be much happier if party strengths reflected the popular vote more closely (yes, I support PR). But I don't really care too much as to whether we have a monarchy or a ceremonial president - it makes little or no difference to the way the country's governed, which is really the important question here.
|
British Newspapers Online - your handy guide to the UK's national, regional and local press!
ErgoGuides - Great travel and business eBooks from British Expat!
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat 26 Jun 2004 17:19 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- leoville
- Guest
-
-
-
Can someone pls delete this thread, and forget I ever brought it up !
|
Want to PM someone? You'll need to subscribe to British Expat.
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat 26 Jun 2004 20:00 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- Not-Lorna
-
- Joined: 06 Apr 2003
- Posts: 1087
- Location: Beautiful British Columbia, Canada
leoville wrote:Can someone pls delete this thread, and forget I ever brought it up !
That'll learn ya!
|
Follow British Expat on Twitter!
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun 27 Jun 2004 01:39 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- SSue
- Voluntary Moderator
- Joined: 31 Oct 2003
- Posts: 5205
- Location: From Grimsby, Lincolnshire, to Sydney, then Port Macquarie NSW Australia
Quote:Can someone pls delete this thread, and forget I ever brought it up !
 you opened the can of worms, now deal with 'em!
SSue 8)
|
Sydney Sue - Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
Read all about it! http://www.britishexpat.com/563.0.html
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun 27 Jun 2004 12:02 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- leoville
- Guest
-
-
-
Yes.....replies like this, sure brings a lot to the discussion.
|
Join British Expat on Facebook!
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun 27 Jun 2004 14:48 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- nooranismith
-
- Joined: 06 Feb 2004
- Posts: 452
- Location: Rome, Italy
No-one going to leap to the defence of the realm? Are there no staunch monarchists among us? I'm all for an spirited discussion, but I find it hard to disagree with anything Dave said. They must have some supporters out there who can come up with a reasoned statement in their favour, beyond 'gor blimey, but she's a fine ol' lass, our Liz'.
Maybe not.
|
Follow British Expat on Twitter!
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun 27 Jun 2004 16:07 GMT
Post subject:
|
|
- Rich
-
- Joined: 15 Apr 2003
- Posts: 1237
- Location: Sweden based, but travel alot so your guess is as good as mine, answers on a postcard to the HOF...
I'm not a staunch monarchist, but i agree they should be kept, if for no other reason that working out how an alternative would work/who etc.
The Royals (don't laugh) are extremely well respected and liked throughout the world, and certainly help the British image etc - just look at the crowds etc that come out to meet them on foreign trips, whether to other commonwealth countries or not.
Even in bscure parts of Europe who hate monarchists, events like the DI-Charlie wedding and Di's Death (and whilst nothing against her,i think Di is EXTREMLEY overrated/over loved) capture the imagination and leave a major toal on people. Even people i've met in Romania etc and start talking to, often come to the royals, and most can tell you where they were when they heard Di had died.
Not sure how much we should be supporting the royals, but i do think at that price, they are reletively cheap. Also not sure i would agree with an essential down grading of the royals (a la Scandinavia) where they are almost completely ceremonial, although well loved. I think the Royal family having certain privelages and especially right of veto etc for any law/government is important, even though they are unlikely to ever use it.
|
Subscribers of British Expat can include a link to their own website here.
|
|
|
|