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!
The commentary on the airwaves this morning is suggesting Charles probably knew in advance, but authorising? If the king is giving permission to the police to act, we’re in a worse state than I thought.
Agreed.
And I fear you might be right.
And remember, he is officially above the law in this country. Technically all prosecutions are by the Drown and he cannot prosecute himself.
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
“Or will the second chamber simply be offering a second opinion?”
The Second Chamber could be exactly what it is but reconstituted as an elected Senate where elected members serve 6-8 year terms and CANNOT be re-elected. The purpose of the Second Chamber, or whatever you want to call it, would be to provide expertise, straighten out or clean up bad legislation and be a check & balance on MPSs that only seem to be chasing votes, Twitter (X) /Instagram followers and time on your TV screen. Also, IMAO, an elected member of the Second Chamber should be required to prove and have a 10 year previous residence in the constituency they are elected to represent to prevent “London” from being over represented by people “Moving House” simply to serve in the Second Chamber. Purpose of the Second Chamber: Members of the Second Chamber would NOT be chasing votes and approval of The Daily Fail.
No appointed Life Peers and no Hereditary Peers elected by Hereditary Peers. If you hold a peerage and want to serve you must be elected.
FYI: In the US Constitution, the purpose of the House of Representatives is to directly represent the people and the purpose of the Senate is to represent the individual “States”.
Much to agree with
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.
Richard, you slipped into the Scots vernacular there (“fur”) – should have said “Chairlie” though, to do it properly!
🙂
Are you sure he is not a “poxy fur” – a sort of mangy cat that Mr Windsor strokes from time to time (a la Donald Pleasance in You Only Live Twice).
Miaow.
We should be careful what we wish for.
I suggest that the Monarchy should end with Charles death OR in 10 years from now so at least we get some time to debate what comes next.
What we are in danger of getting is whatever those in power put together as the House of Windsor collapses and it may be no better than what it replaces.
Hey Richard, I can’t comment on your old post about where you should hold another event as it is not accepting comments – so I’ll hijack this as there’s no other obvious way of contacting you…
You might consider contacting the IAI about speaking at How The Light Gets In – they do one in Hay in May and another in London in September. I’ve been for the last 3 years and it’s a great festival of ideas, politics, philosophy, economics and science. They have presentations and debates where relevant presenters will attend. It’s a fab opportunity to reach thinking people
https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/hay
Who are the IAI?
“An end to the honours system”
As a Yank, I never understood the UK “honours system” and why everyone coveted an “honour”. Hundreds of these “honours” are given out each year. Does not the multitude of awards given out dilute the value of the award.
In the USA there are two awards for civilians: The Presidential Medal and the Congressional Medal.
Rosa Parks received her “honour” in 1996. She received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest award a civilian can receive from the United States executive branch, from Bill Clinton. In 1999, Parks was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal with unanimous Senate approval . These “honours” were received for a LIFETIME of work on Civil Rights when Rosa had one foot in the grave and one foot on a banana peel.
Bob Dylan received his “honour” in 2012. Dylan received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in May 2012 from President Barack Obama, presenting Dylan with the award, said “There is not a bigger giant in the history of American music”.
The Presidential Medal and the Congressional Medal are highly valued and recipients respected because so few people get them.
How can (or why are) the UK “honours” valued when the Prime Minster seems to hand them out like candy taped to a campaign button?
I apologize in advance if I have offended anyone but, as a Yank, I do not understand why these “honours” are coveted.
The wise refuse honours appointing them officers of an Empire
The whole system stinks
I wish Richards new constitution could be implemented. I don’t think it will. The monarchy will stagger through this. Thats also why I think we should campaign for getting money out of politics – that could start the move towards the other things.
There is a suggestion doing the rounds that The King advised against appointing Andrew as ‘Trade Envoy’ but the then PM, Tony Blair went ahead and gave him the job
There was no King at the time.
Are you refErring to Charles a Price of Wales?
Agree with all of your comments Richard. Hopefully the beginning of the end.
Expect the following PR campaign, Andrew is one rotten apple, he has been picked out of the barrel, lessons will be learnt to make us stronger.