Royals cost Britain £37m a year

[punky]

Originally Posted by purenuman

Blackpool pleasure beach attracts more foreign tourists that the Royal hotspots!

Like Graham, I couldn't find about Blackpool or the Royals in there either, but i'll give you the benefit of the doubt, so lets say that Blackpool does attract more than all the royal attractions put together.

How many of those Blackpool visitors are from outside the UK? How many people in other countries, when planning their trip, say, nah, sod Buckingham Palace, let's go to Blackpool? Probably not many. Most of those Blackpool visitors are Brits, which does our economy no good. It isn't generating money, it is just moving it about from one place to another. We generate money from overseas visitors, not from ourselves.

[marky]

i was in the forces and as such swore to protect my country and the queen having a royal family is an honour i live on a council estate and still proud to be british as we all should so stop the anti royal and stand up and be proud ( with a big please )

Originally Posted by punky

Like Graham, I couldn't find about Blackpool or the Royals in there either, but i'll give you the benefit of the doubt, so lets say that Blackpool does attract more than all the royal attractions put together.

How many of those Blackpool visitors are from outside the UK? How many people in other countries, when planning their trip, say, nah, sod Buckingham Palace, let's go to Blackpool? Probably not many. Most of those Blackpool visitors are Brits, which does our economy no good. It isn't generating money, it is just moving it about from one place to another. We generate money from overseas visitors, not from ourselves.

You see that's the point. We keep all the heritage stuff that tourists like but rid ourselves of the costly inbreds.

Originally Posted by andyl

You see that's the point. We keep all the heritage stuff that tourists like but rid ourselves of the costly inbreds.

I want to keep the costly inbreds.Who else can we point the finger at and laugh?They are worth it from an amusement angle alone.So much more classy than Posh and Becks...

[SMHarman]

One thing - President Blair, how does that sound? How much would the presidential jet cost, we know he wants one.

The Austrailians had a referendum to abolish the monarchy, the thought of President Keating (?) was one of the many that kept them a monarchy.

[marky]

perish the thought of blair force 0ne

Originally Posted by Incognitas

I want to keep the costly inbreds.Who else can we point the finger at and laugh?They are worth it from an amusement angle alone.So much more classy than Posh and Becks...

I have to concede that point. The other thing in their favour is they almost singlehandedly keep the populist press profitable, what with all those Di conspiracy theories, fancy dress outfits, disparaging comments about foreigners, alleged exam cheating......
__________________

Originally Posted by SMHarman

One thing - President Blair, how does that sound? How much would the presidential jet cost, we know he wants one.

The Austrailians had a referendum to abolish the monarchy, the thought of President Keating (?) was one of the many that kept them a monarchy.

Does abolishment of the monarchy automatically mean the creation of a presidential role?

[philip.j.fry]

Originally Posted by markymoan

i was in the forces and as such swore to protect my country and the queen having a royal family is an honour i live on a council estate and still proud to be british as we all should so stop the anti royal and stand up and be proud ( with a big please )

I'm proud of my anti-royal stance

Originally Posted by markymoan

i was in the forces and as such swore to protect my country and the queen having a royal family is an honour

Do you believe that for yourself of because it was drilled into you by the army? No offence, but if you want to persuade someone to charge at a heavily-armed foreigner who is probably going to shoot you to pieces, it is easier to get you to do it if you're convinced that you are fighting to serve a glorious, powerful almost mystical figure like a king or queen than it is to get you to die for esoteric notions like democracy and freedom.

i live on a council estate and still proud to be british as we all should

I lived on a council estate for the last five years and I'm still proud to be British too. Why, do council estates tend to make people ashamed of being British?

so stop the anti royal and stand up and be proud ( with a big please )

I don't agree with your implication that to be anti-Royal is to be anti-British. It would be interesting to get everyone who is interested in this thread to compile a list of things that define Britishness. Then we can compare it with what the royal family stands for and perhaps find out whether, in fact, having a royal family is becoming increasingly un-British.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by andyl

Does abolishment of the monarchy automatically mean the creation of a presidential role?

I think it does. The queen currently presides or queens (is that a verb) or rules over the country. She has the executive power to enact laws etc, this is delegated to the elected parliment.

If she is abolished then someone has to have the executive power to enact law, to be the ultimate arbiter of the country, to preside over the country.

I'm not fully aufait with global politics, but for example, France who ditched their monarchy have a President. I don't know if there are examples to the contrary.

[punky]

I don't think our monarchy really defines Britain. Lots of countries have monarchies, so we aren't special there. Our monarchy is descended directly from Germany, so its not even that British.

Originally Posted by SMHarman

I think it does. The queen currently presides or queens (is that a verb) or rules over the country. She has the executive power to enact laws etc, this is delegated to the elected parliment.

If she is abolished then someone has to have the executive power to enact law, to be the ultimate arbiter of the country, to preside over the country.

I'm not fully aufait with global politics, but for example, France who ditched their monarchy have a President. I don't know if there are examples to the contrary.

France and the USA have executive presidents who hold power in a far more real way than our monarchy does. Executive power might technically rest with the Queen but she does not really make policy or ask her legislature to allow her to do things. Those powers are delegated to such an extent that she might as well not exist. Our queen is more like the presidents of Ireland or Germany, who are figureheads, albeit elected.

[punky]

The way I understand it, is that all republics generate a presidential post, which is the new head of state (what the royals were), although I don't really see the need, it is just more beaucracy.

[marky]

we could go down the they are german road but then again st george was a turk and we are a multi racial nation.

and i apologise for the council estate comment as where i live there is a good sense of community and i wouldnt live anywhere else.
everybody is entitled to there opinion this is a free country and thats what makes britain great

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by markymoan

we could go down the they are german road but then again st george was a turk and we are a multi racial nation.

and i apologise for the council estate comment as where i live there is a good sense of community and i wouldnt live anywhere else.
everybody is entitled to there opinion this is a free country and thats what makes britain great

I thought the Royal family were responsible for making Britain great?