What should happen when the queen dies? Should Prince Charles/William continue in the current system, or should we use the opportunity to change the nature of our government? At present the Queen is head of state, in theory she has all sorts of powers which she never uses. It's not really appropriate to have such a dated system at the heart of our government. We could keep the royal family for the sake of tourism but make them symbolic only like a lot of European nations have done. That would mean having an elected head of state instead, a president, normally a senior politician like Tony Blair or John Major who has been PM.

Wouldn't want either one of those shitehawks as President, that's for sure.

I think there is little doubt we will remain a constitutional monarchy when Liz moves on as there is no strong republican movement in the UK at present. If Charlieboy takes over and lasts 20-odd years, things may have changed by that point but I think, on balance, the monarchy probably just about brings more money in through tourism than they take out of the state.

Unfortunately, it means we'll be stuck with some folks who are a complete waste of space such as Edward and Andrew for some years yet.

The good thing about voting out a PM,

Is they do not normally come back,

You have only got to look at the interest of a royal event,

To know how much they are loved by the general public,

I think Charles is a bit of a bore myself,

BUT

I do like William and Harry,

I can not see any change of the structure in my lifetime.

Boot the monarchy out and use all the palaces as homeless shelters

More to the point will I get a day off work?

I don't get this tourism notion??

Tourists can only very rarely get to see any of the monarchy - they just visit the palaces and castles instead

To be honest I really couldn't care less what happens to the monarchy but I'm pretty sure that if they disappear tourists numbers would not be affected

When I visited Versailles I wasn't expecting to see anything other than the grandeur that royalty have / had at their disposal

Quoted from FishOutOfWater

I don't get this tourism notion??

Tourists can only very rarely get to see any of the monarchy - they just visit the palaces and castles instead

To be honest I really couldn't care less what happens to the monarchy but I'm pretty sure that if they disappear tourists numbers would not be affected

When I visited Versailles I wasn't expecting to see anything other than the grandeur that royalty have / had at their disposal

Bugg*r I was promised the ghost of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette...

Quoted from barralad

Bugg*r I was promised the ghost of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette...

I was disappointed not to see them floating around and about...but there was plenty of cake on offer to make up for it!  :P

Quoted from barralad

Bugg*r I was promised the ghost of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette...

Carry on. Don't lose you head.

We can achieve the tourism thing by keeping the chocolate box parades.

I don't think the lack of a monarchy is doing Germany or France much harm.

Treason! To the tower with you all. (hang)

It's not going to make a scrap of difference to tourists what powers the King/Queen has. They come to see the changing of the guard etc and the odd glimpse of the royals  all of which could take place whatever the nature of the goverment. Keep the Royal Family just make it toothless.

I think Prince William should stand for president of FIFA,

I am sure he would beat Blatter. :)