Was that why they stuffed Philip into the background? For speaking up?
Queen Elizabeth has passed away.
- Thread starter Dovetail
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
- Status
Was that why they stuffed Philip into the background? For speaking up?
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
I agree but it would be the end of the monarchy. One side or the other would want KC Spaniel III out and eventually that'd be the end.
They can only hang on to power by being utterly neutral and pretending to have a semi mystical function over and above the everyday.
in americanized terms, you risk having too many chiefs when notable government figures start voicing their opinions.
Eventually the king would make an enemy of both political factions that have actual authority and he'd have to resort to running a podcast to make money.
Eventually the king would make an enemy of both political factions that have actual authority and he'd have to resort to running a podcast to make money.
Terry - Somerset
Established Member
The monarchy is a brand which for most embodies dignity, honesty, decency, concern for community and individuals within it. The Queen did an excellent job in promoting and reinforcing the brand over 70 years. It is the main reason why UK PLC punches above its weight in world affairs.
One of the strategies in maintaining the brand has been to strive for privacy, often against a media desire to expose. The reality is they are a figurehead - they have only a ceremonial impact on the parliamentary process.
We knew little about what she thought, what made her happy or sad, what opinion she held on world affairs (climate change, Donald Trump, China, Brexit, immigration etc). KCIII recognises his own views on climate, the benefits of talking to plants etc will have to be moderated.
The monarchy benefits the UK in extending global influence, encouraging tourism, supporting business. That one may object to the monarchy on the basis of some sort of social "principle" is a failure to objectively and successfully challenge the positives.
One of the strategies in maintaining the brand has been to strive for privacy, often against a media desire to expose. The reality is they are a figurehead - they have only a ceremonial impact on the parliamentary process.
We knew little about what she thought, what made her happy or sad, what opinion she held on world affairs (climate change, Donald Trump, China, Brexit, immigration etc). KCIII recognises his own views on climate, the benefits of talking to plants etc will have to be moderated.
The monarchy benefits the UK in extending global influence, encouraging tourism, supporting business. That one may object to the monarchy on the basis of some sort of social "principle" is a failure to objectively and successfully challenge the positives.
PhilipL
Established Member
This is certainly good for tourism in Edinburgh. Just taken a walk down the High Street and loads of camera crews. Mainly French and German tourists at the best vantage spots. Goodly few English and Aussie accents. Spoke to a PC who told me she was drafted over from Cumnock in Ayrshire and just told to stand there. She had no idea what was happening. Don't believe the claim that 20,000 are queuing to get into St Giles.
and all the uk florist, imagine if instead people donated to a charity in her memory rather than contributing to a huge pile of compost that needs to be cleaned up later she would have left another legacy.
AJB Temple
Finely figured
It is untrue that the Monarchy has no effect on legislation. The Queen and PC as was, intervened with their veto in relation to many tax and disclosure issues that directly benefited them, as was quite widely reported recently.
The argument that the royals bring in a lot of tourist revenue cannot be proven as we don't know what would have happened were all of the royal palaces and grand houses opened properly for tourism. The army could still parade around for show, just focus it on Westminster instead.
The argument that the royals bring in a lot of tourist revenue cannot be proven as we don't know what would have happened were all of the royal palaces and grand houses opened properly for tourism. The army could still parade around for show, just focus it on Westminster instead.
AJB Temple
Finely figured
Indeed. The Dutch have benefited hugely from this unexpected windfall.
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2003
- Messages
- 7,921
- Reaction score
- 1,348
She made her opinion quite clear on two of those things: Brexit and Trump.
As for the benefits of royalty you list, I can't see much change if the UK was a republic.
- Joined
- 10 Aug 2020
- Messages
- 1,651
- Reaction score
- 442
Well, this is a quite interesting thread. Not at all what I expected. And posted in this topic due to it's the general topic forum. And this is not woodworking.
I still wish all of the effected well at her passing. And I still wish King Charles III well, as it is not easy to loose your Mom and have to uphold all the traditions I am seeing.
To those that don't like her, it, him, etc. Best wishes to you also.
I still wish all of the effected well at her passing. And I still wish King Charles III well, as it is not easy to loose your Mom and have to uphold all the traditions I am seeing.
To those that don't like her, it, him, etc. Best wishes to you also.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Well thanks for that!
It's not about liking them personally, it's the institution of the monarchy which causes alarm.
Adam W.
A Major Clanger
It's a good excuse for a bit of cosplay.
Keith Cocker
Established Member
And if he hadn’t then everyone would have been moaning about him “hiding away at Windsor” like they did when his mother stayed at Balmoral to look after her grieving grandchildren rather than feeding the national schmaltzfest
It's a shame the moderators aren't a bit more active on this forum. They could have stepped in and asked for this thread to be condolences only and anyone could have started a new thread to discuss their grumbles / merits of the monarchy. Other forums I participate in the moderators are a lot more active
As I said it is all theatrical.
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
Versailles is a bigger tourist attraction and the French had the sense to get rid of their monarchy.
Maybe in the spirit of honesty and modernity Charles will end the Monarchy's exemption from the F.O.I. act? I won't be holding my breath, though.
Argus
Established Member
Versailles is a bigger tourist attraction and the French had the sense to get rid of their monarchy.
Maybe in the spirit of honesty and modernity Charles will end the Monarchy's exemption from the F.O.I. act? I won't be holding my breath, though.
When it comes to adjusting the monarchy, we set a trend and beat the French to it by about 130 years or so......we installed a proto-Putin for 10 years, as did the French in the 1790s, though neither lasted.
History tells us nothing we don't want to hear.
I am not an ardent royalty fan but I think you are wrong Noel. The idea of, as a republic, a president Thatcher, Blair, Jonstone or Truss and the amount of fuss & expense that would entail does not persuade me to remove royalty. It is the position they deny that I believe is crucial, & I suspect a president ould not come any cheaper.
QE2 represented a time when most people understood and respected Gentlemanly behaviour. A time which has probably now passed along with her.
I’m a great supporter of freedom of speech and expression. The art of knowing when and how to make a point is what brings about great change or maintains the status quo. It takes a lifetime to gain a reputation and a second to loose it.
I’m a great supporter of freedom of speech and expression. The art of knowing when and how to make a point is what brings about great change or maintains the status quo. It takes a lifetime to gain a reputation and a second to loose it.
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2003
- Messages
- 7,921
- Reaction score
- 1,348
You're thinking more of an American political presidential system than the European type where there is a PM and a president. France has Macron and Borne, Austria has Nehammer and Van der Bellen, Ireland has Martin/Varadkar and Michael D Higgins.
I haven't looked up costs for others but I do recall reading that Higgins costs Ireland less than 5m Euro per year. Nice likeable little man he is too.
- Status
