Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Ultimately, we could end the monarchy if we wanted to. There isn't the appetite for it however, so why bother? It would be a constitutional nightmare to sort out and the current system isn't broken, regardless of the carping of a very small number of republicans. It's by no means a given that an elected civilian presidency would be cheaper to maintain either, if that's your concern.
And what would we replace it with? An executive president like the system that gave the world Donald Trump? Or a ceremonial one that gave Ireland that bloke that looks like the Dungeon Master?
Personally I am very happy with a system that allows us to have a head of state that isn't a divisive political figure, who has impact and respect around the world which, by its hereditary nature, can be extended through her children and grandchildren.
|
Why would we need to replace it with anything? Not having a monarch doesn't automatically mean we must have a president. I'm not that unhappy with the current queen but it's unfortunate that her Maj sits atop a thoroughly odious class system that permenates the upper echelons of pretty much every aspect of the country
---------- Post added at 16:03 ---------- Previous post was at 16:01 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick
Therein lies the massive hypocrisy, 3 nations leaders with atrocious human rights records with women seen in those countries as 'lesser' species. Where were those Womens resistance protesting for women's rights in China, in Qatar and Kuwait ? Where was the petition to stop their State visits ?
The Speaker, Bercow has wholly acted inappropriate, he has used a platform to gain an audience and he has undermined the Government when he is meant to act neutral at all times, he is a hypocrite and undemocratic by dissing the democratically elected leader of our most important ally.
|
There were loads of protests about the Chinese visit