There are 82 replies in this Thread which has previously been viewed 4,216 times. The latest Post () was by Rice.
The line waiting to file past the Queen’s coffin is now taking 14 hours from front to back. Young and old are patiently and cheerfully waiting as they inch forward, standing the entire time, to pay respects to their Queen.
And no jumping the queue! David Beckham stood in line for 12 hours.
Why 98 and 40?
Trying to find the answer to that, but no luck so far.
I’ve never seen this very moving footage before. If there was ever a person who deserved a state funeral and the adulation of a grateful nation, it certainly was Sir Winston Churchill.
An interesting view on mourning from a South African journalist.
Trevor Noah is a very popular comedian, not exactly a journalist, but he certainly does have his point of view. I wonder if people in countries that formerly were part of the Empire actually could blame a monarch who didn’t reign until the last half of the 20th century, and who had no political power in any case?
This did make me wonder, GlasgowJohn and UK Man , how your parents felt about the monarchy and how both of you feel?
Actually, I think now is the time and the place to debate the future of the monarchy.
After the accession of Charles, it is too late and the debate will be false.
Already we have seen or heard accession oaths that do not accept all religions that are practiced in the UK - this is a disgrace for all.
There have been jokes by BBC Journalists laughing at Roman Catholics. the second most important religion in the UK.
Charles is trying desperately to reinstate his brother Andrew into society. Why? He or his dear mother paid someone 12 million pounds to keep quiet.
Is Andrew the type of person we want in a position of authority?
This is a debate that should happen now and I think it should happen before the coronation.
This did make me wonder, GlasgowJohn and UK Man , how your parents felt about the monarchy and how both of you feel?
My parents were once invited to attend a garden party at Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh where they met the Queen. My father kicked the bucket when I was 11 years old so I don't recall him saying yea or nay regarding the monarchy. Although I suspect he didn't give a hoot about the Royals to be honest as he was a bit of a silly arse. My mother OTOH never said anything against them so I have to assume she was all for them.
As for me I have nothing against them. Having said that I would say Charlie boy wasn't the best choice to be King for the age we live in.
Trevor Noah is a very popular comedian, not exactly a journalist, but he certainly does have his point of view. I wonder if people in countries that formerly were part of the Empire actually could blame a monarch who didn’t reign until the last half of the 20th century, and who had no political power in any case?
This did make me wonder, GlasgowJohn and UK Man , how your parents felt about the monarchy and how both of you feel?
My family is a bit of a mixture - one-half Irish and one-half Scottish Presbyterian - Ok the Presbyterian grandfather got thrown out of his church because he married a Catholic.
My father was always encouraging the whole family to read and think about things. He always said you should be ruled by someone you voted for not by someone who was born in the right place at the right time with the right parents,
The Monarchy doesn't rule as such but they affect the way government works - you pay taxes to His Majesty, not to the government..the Prime Minister is the Head of His Majestys Government.
The Royal Family doesn't pay income tax or inheritance taxes.
Occasionally, people will say they are good for tourism. Maybe, but no one will tell you The French chateau system brings in ten times more cash than the Royal family.
Right now, UK ltd is in a bloody mess. Maybe it's time for a radical change.
- Ok the Presbyterian grandfather got thrown out of his church because he married a Catholic.
I never could grasp what that shit was all about. That attitude still goes on today which is very sad. 
The Monarchy doesn't rule as such but they affect the way government works - you pay taxes to His Majesty, not to the government..the Prime Minister is the Head of His Majestys Government.
The Royal Family doesn't pay income tax or inheritance taxes.
Given that the democracies where I have voted so far never followed my will (or at least, the representatives I choose weren't very effective/delivering on their promises), I agree with your father on principle but I know that the reality is not that.
I am very puzzled that in this time and age there are people in Europe who feel allegiance to a king or queen, even if they do not rule like in the middle ages or a couple of centuries ago. It seems radically opposite to democracy that some people get a special treatment. Again, you could say the same about any very rich/powerful people anywhere in the world.
I suspect a lot of people who show up at the Royal parades and events are there just because they are fancy and are curious to see the faces of those featured incessantly on newspapers and tabloids!
The Queen was really cut for the role, Charlie boy doesn't seem a great fit. However, they will have to make do with him as this is how a kingdom works: you follow the line to the throne. Sometimes you get a good one, sometimes you do not.
Must admit every time I see Charles I think of a Mike Yarwood impression.
Display MoreWhilst mourning the Queen's death, I'm not grieving as I was for my parents. Nowhere near. I do however respect the occasion and will be watching the funeral.
I have ambivalent feelings towards the Royal Family, not least the way Diana was treated both in life and more especially on her death. It took Tony Blair to actually step in and ask the Queen to show more respect.
And let's not forget the pain that Princess Margaret had to endure for not being allowed to marry Capt. Peter Townsend, the real love of her life, which reminds me of the sham that was the marriage of Charles and Diana.
As for Andrew, I was shocked to learn that the Queen had poured £2 million into his defence and as for Charles bringing him back into the fold - I can't see that happening.
Yes, the monarchy needs to be modernised and I believe that Charles is the one to do it. He appears more open minded than his mother, especially on a multi-faith perspective.
The BBC's coverage has been wall to wall with Huw Edwards leading the commentary and a total absence of any objective discussion is obvious. Perhaps after the funeral, the BBC will come to its senses. Not to mention this fixation with Harry and Meghan vs William and Kate which I find nauseating. It took guts for them to brake away and I applaud it.
But more than anything else, it's the unearned privilege which sticks out for me and if Charles can go some way to tackling that, it will be a start at the very least.
I like your objective analysis of a subject that clearly is emotionally so close to you.
I understand that working members of the Royal Family perform a service to the country, and as such, they are (very well) compensated. What I don’t understand is why the Royals pay neither inheritance tax nor wealth/income tax on monies from the annual Sovereign Grant, the Queen’s Privy Purse, the income from the Crown Estate, etc.
Perhaps King Charles (who largely through investment of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall reportedly parlayed his financial portfolio into one worth billions) will start the modernization of the Monarchy by offering to pay taxes just as his subjects are required to do?
Perhaps King Charles (who largely through investment of his income from the Duchy of Cornwall reportedly parlayed his financial portfolio into one worth billions) will start the modernization of the Monarchy by offering to pay taxes just as his subjects are required to do?
Would he be paying taxes to himself?
Only in the sense that ALL citizens pay taxes to the crown, which turns the collected taxes over to run the government. One of the many quirky things hard to understand for those of us who haven’t lived in a constitutional monarchy.
I don't fully grasp if anybody but the Queen is a subject/citizen, or if all Royals have a special status.
It also seems that many royals just have money and a title, but no other privilege. Only the closest family members of the Queen actually have a special treatment and perform institutional duties.
I think the Queen was a great monarch and gave a much sought psychological stability, especially in the latter years where many European PMs didn't last even for a full term. She was a reference point.
She was there before and after the UK joined the EU, never made a political faux paux, unlike her family members. Never spoke out of place. She was impeccable. But as Splinter says, the royal family can be cruel toward its own members, so I am sure we are not getting the full picture of what the royal life entails. In a sense, it is better to be just rich than rich with ties like them.
Charles doesn't seem to have a great temper and is not poised as his mother. It took Buckingham Palace 20 years to clean up his image and Camilla's. The Americans loved Diana, and the more they spoke highly of Diana, the more the Royal family seemed a dirty and antiquate business.
