Britain is one of the foremost countries on the world stage, promoting equality, leisure of speech and cultural diversity. Yet it is still a sovereign state with an active monarchy. The British Royal house is one of the most illustrious families on the planet, which is headed by Queen Elizabeth Ii. In today's day and age, is her role and the hereafter role of the royal house needed?
In the following description we will try to argue for and against having The Royal Family, whilst trying to remain unbiased. But finally only you know which you would prefer. What do you think? Does Britain still need the Royal Family?
At the time of writing this article, Britain and the world is captivated in the build-up to the royal wedding between William and Kate, the hereafter King and Queen of England and the Commonwealth. The majority of population in the Uk are seeing send to the wedding, (mainly because of the additional days off work due to it having been made a national holiday) but the ask that comes up every few years is being asked again - Do we still need the Royal Family? But before we begin asking whether we do or not, it is probably useful for population that are a bit unclear, to form the current role of the Royal Family.
The Uk is a unitary state, which consists of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Each has it's own devolved form of government (apart form England) that is finally controlled by Britain's central government, which is located in London at the Houses of Parliament. Here the current government, comprising of a 'Cabinet' of 22 Ministers (Government department Heads), are led by the Prime priest who collectively run the country. The current elected Prime priest and 'Head of Her Majesty's Government' is David Cameron and his coalition of Cabinet members from the Conservative and Liberal Democratic Parties who are accountable for their policies to the Parliament, their own political parties, the electorate of the Uk and the Queen. The Queen 's and hereafter heirs' role within the government is exiguous to non-partisan functions, such as granting honours, the Queen's speech, the every year opportunity of Parliament and welcomes a new Prime priest after an election.
The Queen is also the Head of State of 16 of the 53 independent states of the Commonwealth, which includes Australia and Canada. Additionally, Her Majesty is also the supreme Governor of the Church of England.
A selective few of the Royal house act as representatives of the Queen, participating in hundreds of social and charitable functions throughout the world. Each member of the immediate house may formally visit other countries, where they may meet the Heads of State, which usually results in vast amounts of social and media attention.
The British Royal house is clearly a very busy house aside from their own personal lives, but it can still be argued that their purpose is no longer needed in the contemporary world. So, let's look at each camp that are squabbling it out over this debate. Does Britain still need the Royal Family?
Yes - Long live the Queen!
The Royal house benefits the United Kingdom in many different ways. The most prolific one of all is their economic impact. The history of the Royal house and their many residences and ceremonies help originate a huge number of income from tourism. The upcoming Royal Wedding of William and Kate could originate an estimated 1 billion+ for the Uk economy, which more than covers the 20 million cost of the event. With the emergence of wealthy nations such as China, Brazil and India, more and more tourists are flocking to Britain to sample the culture, with the Royals playing a very big part. They are a link to the British history that population find fascinating; a link that couldn't be artificially created overnight.
As stated previously, the Royal house do a lot of charitable work across the globe, raising millions of pounds for good causes, whilst improving relations and the image of the Uk. It could be argued that without the Royals, Britain wouldn't have such a foremost affect on the world stage.
No - Not in this day and age!
The whole monarchy can be seen to be undemocratic. The British Monarch is not elected. He or she is there because of who their parents are. This is not reflected in contemporary community where we encourage our children to better themselves by working hard not marrying up the social ladder.
In a world where we are participating in wars against terrorism and dictators, then trying to implement democracy in the aftermath, it could be seen to be slightly hypocritical to have a monarch. Not only that, but we are invading Islamic nations with British forces who happen to serve a Queen who is head of the Anglican Church. This may be seen by some as a confirmation that these wars are holy wars.
The Royal house is funded by the British tax payer. It is them who pay for the potential of life that they have, with all the palaces in which they reside. In a time where the general social is facing immoderate cuts throughout society, is it fair that we are persisting to fund the Monarchy?
Conclusion
There are many valid points from both sides as to whether or not we still need the Royal Family. Which ever point of view you agree with, there is not going to be any change. Not in the immediate hereafter anyway. Currently the Queen has an approval rating of 75%, which most Presidents and Politicians will look at with envy. The Queen any way will unfortunately not rule forever. It will be at this time when Charles succeeds that this whole can of worms will be reopened again for the population to squabble about. But finally only you know what you believe is right. So do you think Britain still needs the Royal Family?
No comments:
Post a Comment