The Telegraph has reported, not very long ago:
And as I posted those words, I noticed this from the BBC:
The time has come to pull the whole, rotten, eugenically justified edifice of royal privilege down and replace it with:
- A constitution
- An end to monarchy
- An end to the honours system
- An elected head of state
- An elected, regionally representative Senate
- A House of Commons elected by proportional representation
- State-funded political parties
- A ban on corporate donations to any party and strict donation limits from individuals
- Proper regulation of think tanks and lobbyists
- Proper controls on the media
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
That written constitution should also enshrine the right of any member nation to leave the union if its people so choose.
Agreed
We will soon find out how deep seated the Royal Family is in the British psychie. If the monarchy survive this then we’ll know the UK isn’t going to move with the times and a former empire will be left behind on multiple fronts. Decay happens gradually.
We live in interesting times.
Yes to all.
As for the media, in the case of print only ownership by UK citizens, normally living & paying taxes in the UK. Foreign ownership banned.
Agreed
As far as I know, only one MP – Rachael Maskell – has been arguing (for quite some time now) that Parliament needs to do something about Andrew, like remove him from the line of succession. The Government have told her they won’t make Parliamentary time for such a debate! If they can’t even get their heads around doing something about Andrew, what hope is there for the wider constitutional changes that are so clearly needed? Yet another example of the strategy-free-zone that is this Government.
So Charles has authorised this. The police would not be able to act so publicly without his okay. However, even though he removed Andrew’s titles, it’s not possible to arrest and prosecute Andrew without bringing down the whole house of cards. Interesting times!
I am an unicameralist. If Scotland and Wales can function effectively without a second chamber as do the majority of democratic countries (79–81 systems are bicameral, 107–111 are unicameral) why do we need a second chamber at all?
Who will have supremacy if both chambers are elected? Will legislation have to achieve a majority in both Houses leading to the situation we often see in the USA? Or will the second chamber simply be offering a second opinion?
Noted
Jonathan Dimbleby has just been interviewed on BBC1 and claims this makes the Monarchy stronger.
His argument appears to be that there is a wider majestic notion of Royalty, and Royal individuals sometimes fail to live up to the ideals.
He is 81 so that might explain his fossilised view.
Oh he was described by the news presenter interviewing him as a friend and confidant of Charles!
He is a proxy fur Charles.
And a fool.