Does the United Kingdom really need the Royal Family?

Question

Or are they just a waste of the tax payers money?

Answer 1

i dont think so.....its not like they do anything very important....

Answer 2

No and Yes. This country will never be a true deomcracy until we have a democratically elected Head Of State, rather than someone out of touch with reality, who belives she is better than her 'subjects' through only an accident of birth.

Anyone who thinks we will become a dictatorship if we lose the monrachy is off their head. Firstly, the queen is NO balance to Tony Blair's power, no monarch has refused to ascent on a bill in more than 300 years, she wouldn't dare and would be overruled by the commons anyway. Secondly, why do you have no faith in your own powers as part of the electorate? The people of Britain wouldn't allow a coup to happen, more than that the UN wouldn't allow it to either. Thirdly, Tony Blair will be in power for less than a year now, it's hardly a concern.

Suprisingly enough, hundreds of country's have seen the light and shed their royal families, they did not automatically become dictatorships because of that.

The amount of revenue the royal family brings in through tourism is nothing compared to how much they cost. They think they're above paying tax like normal people on the money they stole form us in the first place. And numerous polls and surveys have shown that the tourists come for the palaces, not the monarchy (you never see them anyway) and would continue to visit this country if they were no longer in power.

If I hear God Save The Queen once more I might throw up.

God End This Royalist Tyranny.

Answer 3

It's not going to happen -- at least not for the next two potential Kings (Charles and William) -- the majority of the UK public does not want them to "go". If the monarchy was dissolved - the State would have to reinvent itself. Look at Nepal - the king's palace was kept by the government but the royal family is still getting a large number of their princely estates; after all their family did amass those things over the years. If the Queen/Royal family did "leave" - they 'd probably just pop off and live at Sandringham year around. EDIT - personally, I took my BA in History (focusing on Ancient Greece and England). I just love the history of ancient things -- loved visiting the ruins in Greece/Crete, loved the Great Estates in England. There is so much beauty in the buildings, tracing the development of architecture, art, society, politics. It is the foundation of my own culture - so how could you not appreciate that??!! :) Besides, I really appreciate old things - love antiques. Modern stuff like IKEA makes me ill. So - I follow the old adage - "If it ain't broke - don't fix it". The british monarchy seems to be serving the UK quite adequately - so if they don't want a change -- I'm in their camp!!

Answer 4

If you do some research proper research, you will find that the tax payer would be worse off if we had a President or some such other Blair, Bush - take your pick. The Royals do a lot of work which aids business and trade and tourism for this country, a lot of it unreported. Just consider the options and look closely at what they actually do. Its hard work, and no privacy, and sycophants kissing your *** all day. Who else but a politician longs for this adulation.

Answer 5

The UK really does not need the monarchy when you think about. The monarchy does not bother me, though, but it is rude living off of tax payers money.
It does not affect me. I am under 18 still and I am in school.
Eventually the UK will abolish their monarchy but not anytime soon. All good things come to an end. And that is that.

I KNOW it won't be here forever. That's the thing.

Royalty does do good things for the economy like bringing in tourists and it is also traditional.

Answer 6

This is a tricky one, but I think assassin has hit the nail on the head.

As an intelligent democrat, I'd have to say that having an hereditary head of state is anti-democratic and wrong.

The problem is.......what would we get if we ditched the monarchy?

We'd probably end up with the Irish model, where they have a President who is just a figurehead (unlike the US).

So if we didn't have the Queen I reckon we'd have Tony as Prime Minister and some ghastly, no-hoper, Labour loyalist like John Prescott as President.

Frankly, I'm prepared to ditch my democratic principles and continue paying for Camilla's frocks rather than have John Prescott poncing about the world making Britain a laughing stock.

And given the amount of taxpayers' money politicians seem to spend on themselves (eye-wateringly high expenses, flash country houses for ministers, Lord Irvine's wallpaper etc,), who's to say a President would be any cheaper than the royal family?

Answer 7

No! Look at the United States, it doesn't have a monarchy leading it or in it, but the country is more develped than UK! Seriously, having monarchy is just added tax. Also, they don't do anything to help the government, they just support charities. You don't have to be royalty to support charities! Another thing, they just add more fuss to this world. For example, when the Queen dies, it will make another topic thta will disorganize the process of our world and when the Queen dies, more people will use energy because they will go UK to give respect, they use planes and planes use gas and we are running out of gas, People will wath more TV; it will require then more electricity.

It is also unfair, because all of the attention is towrd the royal family. I think every family has equal rights, but when royal families are here, almost all the time; they get more rights than the people.

Also, them members of the royal family get their heads rounded. What I meant by that is that they get too much nice stuff but they never stay low. Their profiles are so high! People, keep in low profile!

So in conclusion, there are many ways that you and I can think of why the UK doesn't need monarchy.

TO ALL MONARCHS, ESPECIALLY THE UK ONES, YOU BETTER BE GOOD AND LOW-PROFILED, OR ELSE THE PEOPLE WIILL KICK YOUR HINEYS OFF YOUR THRONE!

Answer 8

Having a constitutional monarchy is better for the UK (and many European countries) than a presidency would be. But I think that we do spend too much money on the Royal Family. I would prefer to see just the central working royals getting allowances and I would make those allowances net of their earnings from other sources such as their land holdings.

Answer 9

Don't think you have thought this through buster.
Firstly , The United Republic sounds awful.
Secondly, How are you and your legions going to remove our Royal Family? All the Defences of the Realm belong to the Queen and every serving member of the armed forces, the police etc swear an Oath of Allegiance. You may have a bigger problem than you thought. Apart from that, we will never get rid of the First Family of the United Kingdom.

Answer 10

It's not a question of "need". The occupants of Buckingham Palace are a fixture of the UK and an essential part of the country's culture. To remove someone of that magnitude you must have a replacement, and the Royal Family cannot be replaced.

Answer 11

No, we don't need them. All they are is a bunch of murderers, throughout history they have done nothing but walked around amongst the poor dripping with priceless jewels. They live in another world, totally blind to what's going on around them. They should do what they done to the Russian Royal family. Take them into a room, line them up against a wall and shoot them.