Another heir to the throne

[transmanche]

Even then though it's hardly a walk in the park - under the US system, and I believe it was President Truman who said it, their power is more to persuade. Unless they have both chambers of Congress on their side they are very weak. It all stems from Montesquieu who had the three branches of power theory and how you can't have a role in more than one - hence the executive and legislative in the US really need to be of the same ideology for anything to happen.

I take your point, but what the US President has is the power of veto (which takes a 2/3 majority in both houses to overcome) and the (albeit limited) ability to issue Executive Orders.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I take your point, but what the US President has is the power of veto (which takes a 2/3 majority in both houses to overcome) and the (albeit limited) ability to issue Executive Orders.

But then he also relies on them to successfully pass any bills he wants in the first place. Between them the two chambers also control his annual budget (negotiation), approve his appointments to any office or official position, ratify any treaty he signs, have full control of the war budget and are actually the only ones who can declare war or give clearance to deploy troops, and of course they can also impeach and try him.

I had to know this system off by heart for A Level

 

[Brunswick]

And they are elected for the people by the people unlike what the uk has

 

[Bungle73]

The person making all the decisions, ie the Prime Minister IS elected (well not directly but I'm keeping things simple), along with their government. The Monarch, while the "official" Head of State, is just a figure head with no real power, so I don't see the problem.

 

[Brunswick]

No real problem? I for one don't want them as the unlected head of state and look at the rubbish and overkill on bbc and sky news at the moment

 

[Butts]

No real problem? I for one don't want them as the unlected head of state and look at the rubbish and overkill on bbc and sky news at the moment

Are you a member of The Tooting Popular Front and an advocate of "Wolfie" aka Citizen Smith

 

[HST Power]

I don't have a problem with the Monarchy. But when the News go into overdrive it really annoys me. As has been said, there's covering the story, and then there's overkill.

 

[jon0844]

There will be overkill for days yet, but it's partly because there's not much else to talk about. We've done the heatwave. There's no football and parliament is about to, or has, gone on recess.

So, expect to hear nothing but royal baby news for days/weeks. But that's not the fault of the royal family.

 

[Oswyntail]

No real problem? I for one don't want them as the unlected head of state ....

Why not? They are politically neutral (in theory, but at least not bound to any party) and so can hold the loyalty of the army, the police, and public servants. This adds a check on the ability of a rogue PM and his party to commandeer power. For instance, the PM does not have the power to order the police to lock up the opposition.

... and look at the rubbish and overkill on bbc and sky news at the moment

I don't have a problem with the Monarchy. But when the News go into overdrive it really annoys me. As has been said, there's covering the story, and then there's overkill.

But that is, in itself, nothing to do with the Monarchy. The media go into overdrive for just about anything. I would say the coverage of the birth will be as nothing compared to the upcoming coverage of the start of the soccer season, for instance. The media just give the public what they want.

 

[Darandio]

but it's partly because there's not much else to talk about. We've done the heatwave

Until the flooding......

 

[starrymarkb]

No real problem? I for one don't want them as the unlected head of state and look at the rubbish and overkill on bbc and sky news at the moment

Would you prefer a Ceremonial President or and Executive President -and what powers should they have...


(is not a Royalist or Republican so persuade me which is the better and why!)

 

[ainsworth74]

Why not? They are politically neutral (in theory, but at least not bound to any party) and so can hold the loyalty of the army, the police, and public servants. This adds a check on the ability of a rogue PM and his party to commandeer power. For instance, the PM does not have the power to order the police to lock up the opposition.

I've occasionally wondered just what would happen if a PM/Government did go rouge an the Monarch issued a command to the military in opposition of the Government just who they'd listen too! The Monarch is head of the armed forces and the Army, RAF and Royal Marines all swear allegiance to the Monarch. I guess it would come down to who the men/women on the ground decided to listen to.

Still it would constitutionally interesting! Also just a bit terrifying for the rest of the population I'd imagine.

 

[Trog]

With a republic you get a say who you want to be your president here you have no choice it's done by birth and that is not right, if elected ok but I for one can't stand the royals and all the hangers on

Look at the people in government, almost anything would be better than them. Election is no magic wand after all the Germans elected a Mr A. Hitler and look how that turned out.

Leave well alone, any change will almost certainly be for the worse, would you want to lick a stamp with for example Tony Blairs picture on it?

 

[jon0844]

Until the flooding......

Quite.

Thanks to 24 hour news channels and social networking, we now have most reported news being way over the top, with speculation and padding to satisfy demand.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

No real problem? I for one don't want them as the unlected head of state and look at the rubbish and overkill on bbc and sky news at the moment

Feel free to leave if you don't like the way things are done in this country!

 

[Aldaniti]

Look at the people in government, almost anything would be better than them. Election is no magic wand after all the Germans elected a Mr A. Hitler and look how that turned out.

Leave well alone, any change will almost certainly be for the worse, would you want to lick a stamp with for example Tony Blairs picture on it?

Blair as president makes me feel nauseous and should be the only example we need not to want such a system. The monarchy has had it's problems but I feel that QE2 has served her country well over the years and has maintained a certain dignity in the position of Head of State. I might not get a chance to elect them but then a fair proportion of the electorate probably shouldn't have the vote anyway. When you take into account tourism etc. the monarchy probably costs us nothing but even if it did, I'd rather give it to the Queen than bent politicians fiddling their expenses.

 

[IanD]

That Susannah Reid on the BBC is looking surprisingly rough this morning doing her live broadcast from outside Buck House. Shows how good the studio make-up artists are.

 

[starrymarkb]

That Susannah Reid on the BBC is looking surprisingly rough this morning doing her live broadcast from outside Buck House. Shows how good the studio make-up artists are.

Does it matter what she looks like - FFS! If it was a guy 'looking surprisingly rough' would you be saying the same?

 

[IanD]

Does it matter what she looks like - FFS! If it was a guy 'looking surprisingly rough' would you be saying the same?

Yes I would.

Bill Turnbull was looking particularly smart in the studio.

Whereas that "ghastly man", as Prince Charles would say, Nicholas Wichell also looked haggard and washed out. Shows how good the studio make up artists are.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I wonder what the BBC will spend more time on....this birth and its implcations or the win by Andy Murray of the men's singles at Wimbledon...

 

[bnm]

Election is no magic wand after all the Germans elected a Mr A. Hitler and look how that turned out.

Hitler was never elected leader in a popular vote. He was appointed Chancellor by President Hindenburg in 1933. Soon after he pushed through the Enabling Act giving the Chancellor sweeping powers to enact laws without recourse to the German parliaments, the Reichstag and Reichsrat. The Act bought an end to the Weimar Republic. On Hindenburg's death in 1934, Hitler transferred the few remaining presidential powers to the chancellorship and appointed himself Fuhrer.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

But when the News go into overdrive it really annoys me. As has been said, there's covering the story, and then there's overkill.

I wonder how much bad news has been quietly slipped out in the past couple of days...?

 

[jon0844]

The NHS is now run under contract by G4S, and schools are now following a new syllabus laid out by News International.

I think that's about all we missed.

 

[IanD]

The NHS is now run under contract by G4S, and schools are now following a new syllabus laid out by News International.

I think that's about all we missed.

I thought it was the other way round.

 

[Robert Taggart]

Damn the Restoration - 1660 style - long live the Commonwealth !

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That Susannah Reid on the BBC is looking surprisingly rough this morning doing her live broadcast from outside Buck House. Shows how good the studio make-up artists are.

Is that you speaking with your "John Inverdale" hat on...

 

[Welshman]

That Susannah Reid on the BBC is looking surprisingly rough this morning doing her live broadcast from outside Buck House. Shows how good the studio make-up artists are.

Going off the main topic now slightly, but why is it now necessary to have TV reporters actually on the spot to report the news? There's always some poor person posted at the actual scene, out in all weathers, and no doubt looking a bit rough and worse for wear. Very often you can't see any more by his/her being at the scene, be it a hospital, police station, court, or whatever. Does it somehow detract from the truth of the story if it is reported from within a warm, dry studio?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Going off the main topic now slightly, but why is it now necessary to have TV reporters actually on the spot to report the news? There's always some poor person posted at the actual scene, out in all weathers, and no doubt looking a bit rough and worse for wear. Very often you can't see any more by his/her being at the scene, be it a hospital, police station, court, or whatever. Does it somehow detract from the truth of the story if it is reported from within a warm, dry studio?

Whilst we are on this theme, why do the BBC weather forecasters have to report from locations external to the broadcasting studio in all weathers. I really feel for those who have to make their reports in winter in bitterly cold conditions, whilst the other presenters are in climatically approved surroundings inside the studios.

 

[transmanche]

Going off the main topic now slightly, but why is it now necessary to have TV reporters actually on the spot to report the news? There's always some poor person posted at the actual scene, out in all weathers, and no doubt looking a bit rough and worse for wear. Very often you can't see any more by his/her being at the scene, be it a hospital, police station, court, or whatever. Does it somehow detract from the truth of the story if it is reported from within a warm, dry studio?

Even worse than that is when the BBC, reporting on a story about the BBC, has a reporter live on the scene. Standing outside New Broadcasting House. Just yards from the news studio. Where the presenter is sitting.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Since the British monarchy was re-established in 1660, what logical reason is there for a British constitutional monarch to be Head of the Armed Forces ?

I am sure someone with full British monarchical knowledge on this forum will come up with the logical reason for this to be so.