So, What's The Deal With Prince Harry...

tangled_metal

56p per person based on the £30 million cost (not all the costs nor including any return value to the country). Can I ask how is that 56p worked out? guessing £30 million divided by population but not all the population pay tax so the burden will come from fewer people. I do not have any figures on that and can't be bothered looking but if you post such figures you should work it out based on individuals paying tax (assuming it is paid equally among those earning enough to pay income tax).

Back in the bronze or iron age in Ireland the current thinking is that the king was selected (perhaps elected) and took on the responsibility for his subjects' welfare. He had a lot of power but also had immense responsibility. If things went badly enough the people would replace him. For example famine through bad decisions or freak weather would see him ritually murdered an placed in a peat bog under the hill he got crowned on. Then his replacement would be crowned as part of the ceremony, taking on the responsibilities.

Take out the murder but keep the right of recall, perhaps through petition and vote of the people. And perhaps a powerful head of state might be a good call. Perhaps the right of recall should be made for all elected officials. Let the people have a means to show their views. Electorate with teeth!!! Might result in the Queen getting voted in or not. Why not vote in a monarch or president? I think someone said belgium people vote whoamong their monarchs takes over the reign. Another idea

Monkeypump

nathancom wrote:

re a written constitution: a codified constitution limits the power of parliament and elected governments and gives clarity to the rights and obligations of citizens. It protects all of us from the abuse of power and tyranny of the state dependent on the specific articles.

I know what a constitution is. The question was whether it would make a practical difference. The most obvious example is the USA. As citizens (in the context of your statement) are they really in a better situation than us, with our monarchy?

MaxwellBygraves

I don't know why all those who support the monarchy don't support an opt-in system to pay for them.

So no tax payers money for them, y'all have to opt-in and choose to contribute. If they really do have the support of the majority of people, as you claim, then they'll get their millions, continue as normal and those who don't want to contribute don't have to put in any money.

At least then I can laugh at all the useful idiots chipping in to buy her another golden carriage or something.

Richard_D

Problem with an opt-in, opt-out approach you could say the same about; Health, Education, transport, Legal aid,etc. why pay for things you don't want or need. Can I opt out-of financing MPs second homes?