Can someone explain to me....

The legislature is "in charge"...

You are correct, all that needs to stop in order to bring politics back into the real world. I am in support of leaving the capitalist club that is the EU and not because I hate or fear the French.

 

What if the 'legislature' decide not to bother with any more elections ?

Our Parliamentary system under a head of state has worked fine for centuries - it's not perfect but which system is ? It's only of late that the people elected to parliament have really started to dismantle it.</p>

And there's none made capital out of the EU like the socialists.
</p>

 

Some socialists...

in more ways than one. But for all teh best intentions, the EU is becoming a monster out of control.

Also, in theory, the legislature could now abandon elections if they so wished! The Monarch has Numpty all to do with it except in a quaint cermonial way!

 

RE: Some socialists...

So why change ?

 

Obviously a biased story...

...but raises some interesting points, most notably the VisitBritain line that tourists say the monarchy is 'well down the list' for reasons to come here.

http://www.republic.org.uk/tourism/index.php

 

No.

</p>

The armed forces take orders from the government only with the ongoing permission of the royal family.</p>

And I'd have thought with the eye you have on history you'd have been a little less complacent about obvious threats from fascist hegemony. &quot;Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.&quot;</p>

Stop worrying about the royal family.</p>

</p>

 

Because...er...

</p>

....power to the people!</p>

 

Agreed. nt

 

You mean like Versailles

Yeah real **** hole and doesn't get any tourists does it?

 

Because....

the continuation of something from the past just because its old is not a reason to keep it. If it was to stay, it would have to be much slimmed down...

 

Yes..and that. nt

 

RE: Because....

</p>

But we make money from the Crown Estate, we make money from the tourism, they perform useful ambassadorial duties and they're an ultimate safeguard regarding our armed forces. You don't have to bow if you don't want to, just let them get on with it.</p>

 

RE: Because....

But you are justifying getting rid of 'it' just because it is 'old'. Shall we get rid of all 'old' traditions/ceremonies etc ?
</p>

What exactly does 'slimmed down' mean ? And what is 'it' ? The ceremony around electing a new speaker ? the Monarchy ? Parliament as it stands currently ? The Monarch as head of state ?
</p>

 

Talking of Blair

Just how the hell has he made £152m whilst PM. Funny his expenses were shredded, eh.

 

RE: Talking of Blair

That's different. Just because... it is.</p>

</p>

 

theoretically

in the same way that any bill passing through parliament has to be signed by the monarch, however it would create a huge constitutional crisis if the monarch ever refused.

 

The Royal Family would be hard pressed to do anything...

not at the request of Parliament....a Royalty is likely to be facist anyway...

 

Indeed.

</p>

Butwe'd already be experiencinga huge crisis for them to need to.</p>

 

Hard-pressed, yes.

</p>

&quot;A royalty is likely to be facist&quot;?</p>

WTF?</p>

 

Sorry a Royal...

as per prevoius associations with the BUF and the NSDAP.