• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor arrested


Pantomime Mackem said:
I’m a monarchist as I believe a powerless figurehead is a better model for head of state than an elected president (even a powerless one). I spent a short spell as a CPS lawyer and the word “Crown” in my job title meant something - that I was serving the country, not the government. I imagine the military feel the same. But I don’t see how they survive this and feel sorry for William and Catherine who’ve done their best. If there is a path forward for it as an institution the changes need to be huge:

- proper job descriptions and standards of conduct, enforced as they would be in any workplace

- opt in for its members. If people don’t want to do it, fine go and live your best life doing something else

- titles only for the monarch and those of his/her kids who opt in to doing it, and only for so long as they’re doing it, and in the kids’ case only once they’re 21

- greater financial transparency.

- advisers who are prepared to properly check and challenge and an organisational culture where that’s the norm

- an acceptance by the monarch and those who sign up to doing the traditional royal job that they do what WE want, not what THEY want. This is my worry about William: that he’s pursued very personal hobby horses. They are incredibly worthy ones: mental health, Earthshot. But his gran (although her reputation is about to take a mauling) was much better at listening to the people and bending to their will (eg after Diana’s death). Catherine I think gets this, not sure William does

- send the kids to state schools or if they must go to private schools I beg you not f***ing Eton which as far as I can tell produces arrogance (even in William)

- (this is an outlier) you’re head of the Church of England. Go every week and listen to what it says because even if you don’t believe there's some important messages about humility, helping others, living a decent life
Click to expand...
The arguments against this usually go 'do you really want President Blair' etc.
I don't really see why we would need to replace the monarch with a head of state at all.
In at least the last decade of her life the Queen never set foot in Australia or Canada. She can't have been doing very much for them in this 'essential' role. They managed perfectly well with just a PM. OK so they have a governor general. I bet nobody even knows their name.
Get rid and have a single elected leader who is the PM.
 
Skylon said:
And getting 150 grand a year from charlie
Click to expand...
The amount being paid to Handy is undisclosed as it's from Charlie's personal wealth. Although he was on £250k per year when he was on the books. So I expect he's getting at least that amount.
 
MSC said:
Strange take. You'd say the same if you learned several folk on benefits were claiming the same combined I take it?
Click to expand...

We’re talking about the King here , £150k is chicken feed compared with his income over the years

Haven’t got a clue why you’re bringing folks on benefits into the conversation like.
 
buster said:
We’re talking about the King here , £150k is chicken feed compared with his income over the years

Haven’t got a clue why you’re bringing folks on benefits into the conversation like.
Click to expand...
Are you happy that the tax payer funds Handy's personal security?
 
Snugster said:
Yep, waste of time and resources removing him.
Click to expand...
In the extremely unlikely event of him succeeding to the throne there would be a constitutional crisis of such enormity that it would probably result in the end of he monarchy anyway. So bring it on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top