Queen Elizabeth II Wants A Raise

[Sionnach Glic]

I can just see Her Majesty trying to shove a crown into a package marked Cash My Gold.

[Mikey]

I can just see Her Majesty trying to telling Charles to get off his bum and helpshove a crown into a package marked Cash My Gold.

[SolkaTruesilver]

No no no... Come on. He's been living with mommy for nearly 50 years now. I think she wants him to go out and get a job.

[Mark]

Guys....this is going to sound ignorant as hell, and I certainly mean no disrespect.....I'm really asking.

What the hell does the queen and the royal family DO? I mean, they don't govern anymore after all. What is there purpose?

[Captain Seafort]

What the hell does the queen and the royal family DO? I mean, they don't govern anymore after all. What is there purpose?

1) She's an emergency cut-off valve in case the government decides to do something really stupid (trying to start a dictatorship, trying to nuke someone, etc).

2) Diplomacy. The monarchy as an institution run state visits, making foreigners feel important, and therefore well-disposed towards the UK while staying clear of party-political wrangling. Elizabeth personally can and does advise the PM on how to handle certain issues and individuals, given that she's been doing the job longer than most of the cabinet have lived.

[Mark]

So the Queen has some sort of veto power, as well as being the worlds most awsome PR/Concirge rep?

[Captain Seafort]

So the Queen has some sort of veto power, as well as being the worlds most awsome PR/Concirge rep?

In a nutshell, yes. If it's a matter of insane legislation, then it will simply get refused royal assent. If it's a matter of nuking someone, then the PM and the CDS have to agree. If the CDS doesn't agree then the PM can't simply sack him and replace him with someone more pliable because he isn't in the chain of command - technically the government can only make requests to the armed forces, rather than ordering them about.

[SolkaTruesilver]

we kinda have the same thing here with the GG, which is "officialy" appointed by the Queen of Canada, under the advisement of the PM of Canada.

But I hardly saw the GG do anything in my life except burn money.

[Vic]

So the Queen has some sort of veto power, as well as being the worlds most awsome PR/Concirge rep?

In a nutshell, yes. If it's a matter of insane legislation, then it will simply get refused royal assent. If it's a matter of nuking someone, then the PM and the CDS have to agree. If the CDS doesn't agree then the PM can't simply sack him and replace him with someone more pliable because he isn't in the chain of command - technically the government can only make requests to the armed forces, rather than ordering them about.

Fascinating, I realize that this is waaaay out in right field. Is that what happened to Churchill when he was in the Admiralty? Pissed someone off when he wouldn't go along (he was most certainly not the type to be quiet about either), and got sacked? Or was is some other scandal?

[Captain Seafort]

Fascinating, I realize that this is waaaay out in right field. Is that what happened to Churchill when he was in the Admiralty? Pissed someone off when he wouldn't go along (he was most certainly not the type to be quiet about either), and got sacked? Or was is some other scandal?

1) The two aren't even comparable - Churchill was a politician at the time, not a serving officer.

2) He got binned (I'm not actually sure whether he was actually sacked or resigned to avoid being sacked) after he got most of the blame for the Dardanelles fiasco pinned on him (not entirely unfairly).

[Graham Kennedy]

It's not as simple as it may seem, really. On the face of it, it's like Bill Gates asking the government for social security to pay his heating bill. But that's not really comparable.

As the monarch, the Queen is essentially a part of the nation. The palaces and such that she "owns" are in a sense public buildings - some are directly open to the public as tourist attractions to one extent or another, others are just held "in trust".

Imagine if Obama was expected to pay the White House heating bills, and you'd have a somewhat more comparable situation. Yeah, the man lives there, but the building actually belongs to the people; he's just a tenant, like the presidents who went before and the ones who will come after.

You could make the case that the government should just take over the palaces directly and treat them like any other government building, but the precise balance of power between government and monarch is a pretty touchy subject in the UK. Right now, people prefer to have a monarch and then grumble about how much it costs to have one... go figure.