The Queen's Diamond Jubilee

[SiHart]

It's the Diamond Jubilee year and so quite a timely moment to ask what you think of our reigning monarch, Queen Elizabeth II and the Monarchy in general.

[Rob McCow]

I think she does her job very well. Having a Queen as a figurehead may not be very useful in practical terms, but it does attract a lot of interest. A lot of people like to see the Royal family dressed up in fine / silly clothing, as the recent Royal Wedding showed.

Overall I think she causes more good than harm.

[Richard Brinck-Johnsen]

I agree that The Queen in particular does a brilliant job.
I'd also much rather the continuity and tradition that sets us apart from most of the Western World than have someone with lots of money like Lord Sugar or Richard Branson as President! It's very telling that you need a lot of money to run for President in the US and it would cost us a small fortune to switch to a republic with potentially dreadful results.
With every passing year it seems likely that Charles' reign will be even shorter than Edward VII's after Queen Victoria so here's to William and Catherine!

[duncan]

I think William will do a terrific job and we will have a more friendly monarchy than we have had before. The queen does a great job, god bless her, but she looks miserable most of the time.

[Stuart Wallis]

Wouldn't you if you were married to Stavros Mountbatten!

With every passing year it seems likely that Charles' reign will be even shorter than Edward VII's after Queen Victoria so here's to William and Catherine!

I have this strange image of Charles having turned into a Miss Haversham figure by the time he becomes king - old, wrinkly, and sitting in his regalia and a copy of the Coronation Chair in a dusty old room in Windsor Castle. I reckon the shock of learning he's acceded will do for him a la the ending of Blackadder series one - "Camilla! Camilla! One's King at last - uurrrgggggh!"

The Queen's now surpassed George III's 59 years and gone second in the list of longest-reigning British monarchs, and she's done a grand job all told. Only another three years and seven months, and HM will have broken Victoria's record

[Dino]

Well I'm going to be a stick in the mud and hope the line ends with her.

"Who would you want then? President Blair?"

We had that anyway! The top three tourist attractions in 2010 London are nothing to do with the monarchy. Maybe the wedding changed that, but knowing their luck everyone went onto the Tate afterwards.

[Awesome Wells]

The only national event in 2012 I give less of a **** about than the Olympics.

[Alex]

Yeah, can't say I'm a fan myself. When you think about the situation it's all a bit ridiculous, as we have one family who supposedly are better than anyone else due to some dubious old bloodline rubbish, and these days hold no real power anyway, and only serve to open hospitals and schools. Personally I'd have no problem if we let the Queen serve until she passes on, and then abolish the whole thing. It's never going to happen in my lifetime though, not unless David Icke's been right all along!

[Richard Brinck-Johnsen]

I wonder if people actually have any idea how much money it would take to radically alter all the current government institutions which rely on our current head of state to operate. If we abolish all of that there would be a lot to sort out and it would make the money currently spent on the civil list seem like peanuts by comparison!

I agree that the Olympics can get lost but I do feel quite strongly about this.

[Si Hunt]

we have one family who supposedly are better than anyone else due to some dubious old bloodline rubbish

I think this is a really simplistic view! They arn't just some family we give all our money to, our royal family are entwined with the history of the country going back hundreds of years. As Richard notes, there's a whole structure of state built around them, a whole tourism industry. Many people love the monarchy, it gives us a proud heritage, in some ways (albeit not always in recent times) it's given people figureheads, almost role models to look up to (I'm thinking William and Kate here, and Diana). It's a massive industry and history, not just some old family we hold up because they happened to have a certain bloodline.

Si.

[Stuart Wallis]

Also, the monarch holds an important role in the balance of the way the country's run. Just as the Civil War and certain parliamentary acts passed since place a cap on the royal family's state powers, so the monarch has the right to refuse to sign any proposed Bill they think is totally against the good of the nation, and to abolish a government that's gone too far; and if that government won't stand down, she can stop martial law by abolishing the armed forces.

[Philipnet]

the monarch has the right to ... abolish a government that's gone too far

which generally happens every four to five years

[Larry]

Yeah, can't say I'm a fan myself. When you think about the situation it's all a bit ridiculous, as we have one family who supposedly are better than anyone else due to some dubious old bloodline rubbish, and these days hold no real power anyway, and only serve to open hospitals and schools. Personally I'd have no problem if we let the Queen serve until she passes on, and then abolish the whole thing. It's never going to happen in my lifetime though, not unless David Icke's been right all along!

I think that's a bit unfair if you watched the program on her on BBC1 last Monday and tommorrow night you'll see that The Queen, dose s quite a bit more than that -. She is in some ways The Chairman of the board and our representetive abroad her State Visits are always hugely popular and go a long way to fostering good relationships with over countries. Certainly the New Yorker's greatly appreciated her vist to ground zero and in times of disaster in this country and around the world a visit from The Queen can be a source of great comfort to people in ways that an MP, simply could never hope to match.

I have huge respect for The Queen, she is a politicaly very shrewd person who is well aware of what's going on in the worls and only a foolish P.M would try to pull the wool over her eyes . She also despite what some may think genuinly cares about the people's of the UK and Commonwealth and it will certainly be a very sad day when she dies.

[Richard Brinck-Johnsen]

Can I just add that having watched both episodes of "The Diamond Queen" over the last two Mondays it really has thrown into sharp relief how much hard work the Queen has done and continues to do. The visit to the ROI was a great achievement.

[Anthony Williams]

and if that government won't stand down, she can stop martial law by abolishing the armed forces.

Indeed - however, it's worthy of note that the armed forces swear allegiance to the Queen, not Parliament.

I love the fact that Britain has an apolitical hereditary ruler, who acts of Head of State from when their predecessor, until their own death. I look at that in comparison to the USA, where every four years, we watch the Presidential candidates metaphorically sling mud at each other in an extremely undignified way.

Unsurprisingly, I'm very pro-the Royal Family

I would say more, but I have to head off to work in a minute (boo! )

[WhiteCrowNZ]

When you think about the situation it's all a bit ridiculous, as we have one family who supposedly are better than anyone else due to some dubious old bloodline rubbish

I totally agree. You cannot have an equal society as long as some people are born into a position.

I do accept that Elizabeth does her job with a lot of grace - we could so easily have someone just awful in her position (King Phillip for instance). However I do disagree with the position.

I also dissagree that with swearing alligiance to the UK, you are essentially swearing an alligience to the monarch, someone who all your democracy cannot change. So if you had an irresponsible monarch you are powerless to do anything about it without committing an act of treason, whereas even an idiot Prime Minister can be voted out.

[Richard Brinck-Johnsen]

The monarch no longer has that sort of power. As demonstrated in the TV drama To Play The King if the monarch ever tried to publically oppose or exercise more power than the PM then the PM would have no choice but to demand their immediate abdication.
The only downside to our constitutional system is that by acting in the monarch's name, the head of the government (=The PM) has effectively the same power as a President due to the Royal Prerogative. It's a good thing that we do at least have the opportunity to vote in a new government every 5 years.

[Junkyard]

The position and power of the monarchy does not derive from a 'dubious old bloodline', at least not any more, but from several Acts of Parliament begining with the 1689 Bill of Rights (or 1690 Claim of Right if you're Scottish). This is a useful link if you're interested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_P...United_Kingdom

Changing to a Republic is not always the best idea as Spain found out between 1931 and 1975. Which is part of the reason why we have retained our monarchy, as have the Japanese, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Dutch, Belgians and Thais.

[SiHart]

So, it's all over now... and what did you think of it all- a decent celebration or a waste of money?

[Philipnet]

I loved every moment I watched at work, whilst I slept through the days - as I worked nightshift !

[Paul Clement]

I managed to avoid the whole thing, thankfully. I cannot be bothered with the royal family. Would love to see the end of the monarchy, but cannot see it happening, unfortunately.

[Rob McCow]

I found it compelling viewing! Even when it was fairly boring, for some reason. I could have watched those boats all day... and I did!

The concert was intermittently superb, although utterly insane. I'm sure Paul McCartney is working on which lesser Beatles songs he can roll out for the Olympics now, after treating us to 'Ob La Di' in honour of the Queen. My suggestions would be 'Martha My Dear' and 'Maxwell's Silver (Bronze, or Gold) Hammers'.

Still, a good few days where you could be proud to be British. Back to the grindstone of being ashamed to be British now!

[duncan]

I don't care much for the Queen. She looks miserable most of the time, so, I only watched two programmes over the Jubilee weekend.

The first one was the programme that showed Gary Barlow's journey across the commenwealth in order to make the Jubilee song. It was great until his audience with The Queen and it looked as though she really didn't want to be there and couldn't care less.

I also watched the concert which was great. Well, apart from Grace Jones and Sir Paul McCartney that is. I would have bet my mortgage on him performing Live and Let Die.

[Richard Brinck-Johnsen]

There were some interesting artistic choices during that concert and leaving Gary Barlow's personal taste aside (as presumably he had most input into the line-up) there really should have been more representation of the earlier of the first thirty years of the Queen's reign.
My parents loved "Ob-la-di" and quite frankly after McCartney took half an hour to sing "Hey Jude" at the golden jubilee concert (or was that the Diana one?) I was relieved not to have that get another outing.

Last night my parents and I caught up on Prince Charles's home movie tribute programme from Friday which was probably the best thing they broadcast and proved that when she's not in the public gaze the Queen actually smiles a lot!

[Nyder]

Any occasion that brings people together and makes them happy is fine by me. Yes Her Maj does have an unfortunate "gurn" at times which makes her look like she's thoroughly fed up. I'm sure she's not!

As to the concert - I dipped in & out. The comedians were lamentable - even Peter Kaye. My fave act? Grace Jones!! I'm twirling a hoola hoop as I type this.

The crisp variety of course :-)