Should there still be a Queen?

[wfooshee]

There is no point in having a Queen but she is a tourist attraction so she is the most boring tourist attraction ever!.

During my recent trip to Bermuda, I stood on a spot she herself once occupied, and enjoyed a similar view, although she was there some time before I was, so I probably saw more houses and boats, and fewer trees than she. Now, was that boring???

 

[Wenders]

We're only using her for the public holiday for her birthday.

Which also means long weekend for your birthday party!

 

[Joel]

The queen has slightly more power in Canada than what i seem to be hearing from Famine. All of our laws must be approved by the governor general (represents the queen) and she is the commander in chief of the military. (hey, here's an idea, can we have a joint Canadian-British army? Please? )

 

[homeforsummer]

She's Commander-in-Chief of the Military in the UK too, and presumably every commonwealth country, but that doesn't mean she influences decisions. Once again, it's more a figurehead position with actual control being a technicality.

 

[Joel]

She's Commander-in-Chief of the Military in the UK too, and presumably every commonwealth country, but that doesn't mean she influences decisions. Once again, it's more a figurehead position with actual control being a technicality.

Yeah I know, honestly, I wish the UK made some decisions regarding our Military I think in Canada's case, I'm content being a subject of the Queen, and It's not worth completely reforming our Parliament, and rewriting our Constitution, just to get rid of a ceremonial figurehead who's never interfered with our politics. The only real time i can think of where the Governor General (representing the Queen) has done anything, is when the 3 opposition parties decided to try a coalition against the party in power (assuming the UK government structure is similar to Canada's, or rather, ours is similar to yours ) The opposition parties decided not to follow through, but used it as a threat, and now use it to try and actually get things done.


Also, what kind of buffs does that cloth armour she wears give? I'm thinking intellect.

 

[PureAwesomeness]

Regarding what the Queen can and can't do: Personal powers of the Monarch (wiki)

Others have been discussed already, but the one that interests me is this:



So the Queen theoretically holds a lot of power, but I suspect in practice she's unlikely to make any major calls as I suspect anything of the sort would more likely be delegated to the relevant person...

And that's exactly why I questioned Famine's claim that the Queen does not have any powers of any kind.

I don't think anyone would disagree that the Queen will probably never exercise her Royal Prerogative. Even if she were to, the result would depend very much on the circumstances and the reaction of others. Nevertheless, it is power.

 

[Zrow]

Seems reasonable, minus that whole pesky "human rights" thing.

Hah, yeah. I assume that Hoppe is joking, right?

 

[YSSMAN]

As someone who has an admitted case of "Anglo-Envy," you can imagine why I wouldn't be all that bothered by it. Then again, Americans typically have this fanciful image of the Royalty that is probably all wrong, especially when most of us thing "English" and then think "Muffin."

Hooray for the Commonwealth, though. That's mighty fancy too.

 

[Keef]

(hey, here's an idea, can we have a joint Canadian-British army? Please? )

Why would you suggest teaming with someone an ocean away when you're already holding hands with The Great Protector?

Plus, we have prescription meds out the wazoo. It was nice doing business with you, come again!

 

[Rykon Zero]

Because we suck.

Actually, better make this a worthwhile post. A queen as a figurehead works nicely, then the idol doesn't actually hold any power. (Yes, I read the post up there. I get it.)

 

[Famine]

And that's exactly why I questioned Famine's claim that the Queen does not have any powers of any kind.

I don't think anyone would disagree that the Queen will probably never exercise her Royal Prerogative. Even if she were to, the result would depend very much on the circumstances and the reaction of others. Nevertheless, it is power.

The Royal Prerogative suffers from the same problems, really. She does all these things - including appointment of the PM and dissolution of parliament - 'cos she's told to... Well, "advised to". It's one of those constitutional conventions again - she is advised to do something and does it, which amounts to being told to do it, only you can't tell the Queen to do something! She has no input on the situation and, frankly, may as well not be there. But she is there simply because that's how we've done things before.

She's always exercising the Royal Prerogative. When advised to by the Prime Minister.

 

[PureAwesomeness]

She's always exercising the Royal Prerogative. When advised to by the Prime Minister.

Yes, I have to concede that is true. I still maintain though that the Queen could (theoretically) do so without the backing of parliament.

 

[homeforsummer]

Because we suck.

Actually, better make this a worthwhile post. A queen as a figurehead works nicely, then the idol doesn't actually hold any power. (Yes, I read the post up there. I get it.)

At the very least, without Queenie we'd have to find someone else to put on our coins and bank notes. Imagine the hassle.

 

[Famine]

Hassle? We'd end up with Michael Owen, David Beckham and whoever the dullest retard currently is from Hollyoaks.

 

[daan]

Queen on banknotes? Are you saying Lord Islay was gay?

 

[PureAwesomeness]

Queen on banknotes? Are you saying Lord Islay was gay?

With a hairdo like that...

 

[Hun200kmh]

I'm sorry to get in this thread without any real knowledge on the subject, but constitucional politics interest me so it was a fine read.

Comparing to Portugal, we have a President that - unlike, for example, what happens in the USA - is not the head of government and so, if all things work peacefully, is no more than a ceremonial figure also.

However, he holds a few important powers, he can veto laws both from the Parliament and the Government (but a more substancial majority in Parliament can approve them afterwards and he must sign them then), he can dissolve the Parliament whenever he wants, he appoints and dismisses (not sure if this is the right word) the Prime Minister but he must do the appointment according to the results of the elections, so not much power there. And to "dismiss" a PM is something he only can do in case of constitucional crisis.

However, and apart from the "veto" power, very rarely used, he really only has the "A-Bomb" (in political terms) that is dissolving the Parliament whenever he wants.

Now, about the Queen discussed in this thread, I read Famine's interpretation of their "powers" as being mere formalities and that all things she can do are advised by the PM (in Famine's interpretation this equals being "told" by the PM to do it).

My simple question is. What if she doesn't take the "advice"? I don't care if it is unlikely, let's assume this happens. What happens then?

And the question is put from a "constitucional" point of view. So, if the reply is "the monarchy is finished then" it doesn't really answer my question because in that case we would be talking about a constitucional change.

 

[Nicknamealguem]

At the very least, without Queenie we'd have to find someone else to put on our coins and bank notes. Imagine the hassle.

Or you can always move to Euro (€)

It certainly seems better to have a Queen or a King that attracts tourism (money) and doesn’t have much power, than a President of Republic, that as those same powers than the queen, spends (every 5 years) money for elections and doesn’t attract tourism, at all…

 

[Joel]

Why would you suggest teaming with someone an ocean away when you're already holding hands with The Great Protector?

Plus, we have prescription meds out the wazoo. It was nice doing business with you, come again!

Ahh, 'Twas a joke, and i do sleep much better at night knowing that we have good relations with the US.

 

[homeforsummer]

Or you can always move to Euro (&#8364

I'm actually pro-Euro (probably one of very few that is). People bemoan that they'd have to remove Queenie from the coins if we went to the Euro but that isn't the case. The benefit to a coin is that it has two sides, so Lizzie's head could go on one side and whichever denomination of Euro it is could go on the other. Doesn't take a genius to work that one out. We could even call the smaller denominations Pennies still as opposed to Cents. The French still refer to the smaller coins as Centimes, as they did with Francs.

My simple question is. What if she doesn't take the "advice"? I don't care if it is unlikely, let's assume this happens. What happens then?

As far as I'm aware she does have a power to overrule a decision made by Parliament if she views it as unjust (she has royal advisors outside of the political parties so I'm sure she wouldn't make the decision entirely alone) so I'm sure that also means she can ignore a request from Parliament too.

 

[PureAwesomeness]

I can't help finding the idea of a President Blair rather frightening.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6857807.ece

 

[mindwise]

We could even call the smaller denominations Pennies still as opposed to Cents. The French still refer to the smaller coins as Centimes, as they did with Francs.

I'm certainly happy you're pro-euro.
Every time i travel to the UK (and that's still about 8 times/year) i get that **** with 'exchange rates' yikes...

Besides the euro and the pound are nearly equal in value these days

Wrt to the centimes , it just means "a hundreth" and with 1 euro being 100 euro cents it's sensible

Yet, there is no law as to how to call the coins i think, and indeed the flip-side of the coin (or the flip-side of the flip-side if you prefer) can boast your queen.

That brings me back on topic, and this inhabitant of the kingdom of the Netherlands shouts as hard as he can : Long live the Republic

 

[Danisfast]

Oh, for your interest, the Queen is apparently illegitimate.

The rightful king is living in Australia, according to a recent Tony Robinson documentary.

 

[Casio]

It's true. I am the King.

 

[Jay]

It's true. I am the King.

Everyone in Melbourne thinks that...

 

[DK]

I'm Irish, so I'd say "HELL NO!!!"