The British Monarchy

Kirkstall Blue said:
I don’t think what they have has any bearing on my life, they have no power anymore the power lies with who we elect and allow to govern us. So the Royals won’t distract me by from what’s going on in Downing Street.
At no point in my history have I felt threatened by the Royals or their wealth. I’m ashamed of some of the choices our government made/make so I criticise anything I think could be done better eg: such as the WFP
Agitating for change is not a good thing when the few manage to overturn the many Johnson and Brexit, for eg:
Click to expand...
This is, unfortunately, not the case. I have posted below some passages from the ‘And what do you do?’ Book I have mentioned on this thread previously.
The book gives a lot more detail on how the royals directly influence our government & therefore our lives.
The book was written when the queen was still alive, but the facts have now rolled onto the king & current prince of wales. The book is well worth a read.
Quotes below.
‘There are, however, two unelected individuals who, behind the scenes, have acquired the unique right to be consulted on, shape, and even block legislation that affects their private interests in a way they do not like.

Those individuals are the Queen and the Prince of Wales.
The precise mechanism is one called Queen's or Prince's Consent' and it was sought 146 times between 1970 and 2013. It remains very much alive today and, indeed, updated guidance on how it should operate was issued by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel as recently as July 2015. It is the Counsel's role to decide if such Royal consent is needed for a bill. If the conclusion is that it is then Queen's Consent has to be obtained before a Bill can start its journey through the democratically elected Parliament.

It is therefore completely different from royal assent, which is the required rubber stamping by the monarch after a Bill has completed all its parliamentary stages.

Assent is uncontroversial. Consent is not.’
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
Robbed the poor ? robbed the third world but so did many other countries France Holland and the Spanish.?

Oh and 14 years of Tory rule robbed the poor and Reeves just robbed the WFP while we are distracted with The King Harry and Meghan.
There was a time for Britain to become a republic it’s past, maybe in the future I don’t know? If we had a situation like in Ireland then the people would vote for it I would, oh and look at what Scotland just did to the SNP. and home rule.
Click to expand...
Yes, they did rob the poor. They appropriated everything that wasn't theirs through bloody land grabs and they continue to steal from the public to this day.

But thanks for clarifying.
 
Queen's/King's/Prince's Consent is given on advice of the govt.
It could be used to block a private member's bill, but again, the govt would have to advise for it. In 2014, there seemed to be 4 examples of it having happened (and thus led to the Bills being withdrawn, all on advice from the gov, and one of them being in 1868).
Parliament officials agreed in 2014 that removing it could be done by both Houses essentially making a statement that they thought it appropriate to do so - nobody has, which suggests it's not a problem for governments.

It seems to me to be a fairly meaningless issue to attack a constitutional monarchy, the same largely hypothetical argument about a monarch refusing Royal Assent to a bill.
In the past, Charles as Prince of Wales both petitioned against a bill (as anyone can) and also gave Prince's Consent to it.
 
red 2 hats said:
I didn't mind Queen Elizabeth, held her council and did the job she was born into.

However, times change, and so has my opinion, when Elizabeth died, that should've been the end of them, Charles I can't stand, and everytime I hear some gimp saying here's Queen Camilla I burst a blood vessel, she's an old trout who got lucky by dropping her knickers for old big ears ( not the European cup )

I watched the documentary on the duchy of Cornwall and Lancaster and how they milk the public for every penny.
Wish they'd just fuck off into oblivion.
Click to expand...

Cromwell had it sorted, the dickhead southerners let them back in. At least he had them controlled by parliament. Sadly only by the hooray Henry's.
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
Robbed the poor ? robbed the third world but so did many other countries France Holland and the Spanish.?

Oh and 14 years of Tory rule robbed the poor and Reeves just robbed the WFP while we are distracted with The King Harry and Meghan.
There was a time for Britain to become a republic it’s past, maybe in the future I don’t know? If we had a situation like in Ireland then the people would vote for it I would, oh and look at what Scotland just did to the SNP. and home rule.
Click to expand...

The Third World didn't exist when the Netherlands and Spain were "robbing them", it is a political term.

Third World doesn't mean developing country it means non-aligned to NATO or the Warsaw Pact in the context of the Cold War.
 
We have robbed our own people for centuries ever since time began the strong overcame the weak. That’s why it’s important to vote for only those politicians we believe will make life better for the weaker parts of our society.



If people think Charles and William have anything to do with the running of the crown estates you may be mistaken it’s mostly moorland we have local government for planning permission and carrying out the laws of the land. The money raised is paid straight back out to the many hundreds of managers and workers operating the estates they don’t do it for nothing.

If you believe in conspiracies then there is a group you can join it’s called the sovereign project they believe we are freemen who don’t have to pay rates. :) if you own your deeds it tells us clearly who owns the rights to the mining below my house and for so many miles above.

I prefer to keep my eye on Rachel Reeves
 
I just think they are redundant like horse tram drivers or lamp lighters.

The King/Queen used to run the country. They did what the PM does now.

Now they are just a fifth wheel on a bus. At most, the equivalent at national level of a ceremonial mayor.

But ceremonial mayors don't get millions a year and the job is not hereditary in one family. Imagine how we'd laugh if the Lord Mayor of Manchester was always the senior member of some random family off Ryder Brow Estate. That would be every bit as rational.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.