To counter Polly’s argument

The need for an elected president has become urgent

Polly wants the monarchy gone. So, who should – OK, more importantly, who would the President be? Given that power would still reside with the PM it would be a kicked upstairs job for the second raters. John Prescott. He would have been Blair’s appointment/candidate.

We both need and will have someone to pin the VC on folk. And even Chuck’s a better choice for that than anyone who would get elected.

24 thoughts on “To counter Polly’s argument”

  1. The other point about a president is do you want one that is ceremonial, one that has the constitutional “last word” over parliament or one who is more of a Chief Executive?

    Given our parliamentary system it’s always assumed that we’d want a purely ceremonial president, effectively doing some (or all) of what Queenie does now. I’m not necessarily against that as long as it is someone that is up to that task, not just a washed up politician like John Prescott just doing it so he can have one last chance to dig his snout in the trough and lord it over us plebs.

    The current Irish President seems like a pleasant enough bloke, especially with the dogs he takes everywhere.

    That might be better than another 30 years of Chuckles Buggerlugs III and his offspring doing their maudlin hand-wringing in public.

  2. In theory I’m a republican. In practice, I recognise that elected heads of state are not ideal. Either it’s a political post and is coloured by partisan politics even when the HoS is abroad or it’s apolitical and ends up being a beauty contest for mass popularity. I can imagine we might have had President Rolf Harris or even Jimmy Saville had the past been different. Or President Bob Geldorf which would have been differently obnoxious.

    I think we should return to the Anglo-Saxon way of doing things, which is to say there’s a pool of 20-30 possibles related to the current monarch, and when a replacement is needed pick the one most likely to do the job well and least likely to cause the shit to hit the fan. In current terms that’s probably William who’s pretty bland and conventional.

  3. Why not Simon Cowell and make some money out of it? The British Royal Family are the longest-running reality show anyway.

  4. Tractor Gent wrote,

    “Anne would definitely do a better job than Chuckles.”

    Yo! You misspelt “Anyone.”

  5. I think we should return to the Anglo-Saxon way of doing things, which is to say there’s a pool of 20-30 possibles related to the current monarch, and when a replacement is needed pick the one most likely to do the job well and least likely to cause the shit to hit the fan. In current terms that’s probably William who’s pretty bland and conventional.

    We’ve effectively got that situation right now, in that Parliament could refuse Chuckles Buggerlugs III the crown and do a “Hanoverian succession” style search for a new monarch somewhat closer to their own liking from the outer branches of the Saxe-Coburg Gotha family tree.

    The problem is though that the useless twats in Parliament actually like the ecoloonery coming from Chuckles Buggerlugs III, so it looks like we’ll have to put up with his whiny immiseration for the foreseeable once Her Mag finally pops her clogs. Personally, I’m hoping she hangs on long enough for Chuckles to go first.

    GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!*

    (* – and her fascist regime, obviously)

  6. JG: “Personally, I’m hoping she hangs on long enough for Chuckles to go first.”

    This was already a definite sentiment in the mid-90’s, at the height of the Diana craze. I can’t imagine things have improved.

  7. Will the hypothetical president have a term in office then face re-election? If so, half the time it will still be somebody Polly doesn’t like. Or just maybe is her candidate one Ms.Toynbeee, for life?

  8. The German President also has a largely ceremonial role (except when the parties can’t sort out a coalition), and he costs the Krauts broadly the same as our Royal Family. But who can name him without using Google? Damn few, even among Germans. And nobody ever took a holiday in Berlin in the hope of catching a glimpse of the President or touring his office.

  9. The Australian republicans have come up with a brilliant idea that will guarantee the monarchy for the foreseeable future. They propose that each State or Territory, through a process of their own choosing, should propose a candidate for an elected, ceremonial president. Out of the resulting 11 people, the Federal government would choose 3 to take part in elections.

    It would be interesting to see how one campaigns for a ceremonial position, but, even so, you would end up in a situation where the directly elected President has more legitimacy than the indirectly elected Prime Minister.

  10. OttoK- that’s a v odd system. The last boy standing? i.e meaning the one who (or whose Mummy) manages to murder of all his half brothers? The other odd thing was it from the harem i.e. from concubines not the official wife/ves.

    i prefer the monarchy,our one, but with that but i have to accept a duffer is inevitable now and then. Not least among the amazing things lizzie has done for us is to keep Charles off for so long.

  11. Does . . . does she not understand how her own government is structured?

    A President, in a parliamentary system, is a largely symbolic position – without even the pretense of power to rein in/guide the government. Ie, things would be exactly the same as they are now.

  12. “Parliament could refuse Chuckles Buggerlugs III the crown and do a “Hanoverian succession” style search for a new monarch somewhat closer to their own liking from the outer branches of the Saxe-Coburg Gotha family tree.”

    King Ralph!

    Too bad O’Toole passed on – but you could do worse than Goodman

  13. If it is o be a president, given that whoever has the job is also head of the Commonwealth, why not give the outer reaches a look-in? Australia, Canada, New Zealand f’rinstance?
    On second thoughts, maybe not…

  14. Presidents are strongly tempted toloot the state coffers for their personal and/or family’s benefit. A hereditary monarch does not.
    A President has to indulge in shameless electioneering and usually (at least often)has his/her term of office encumbered by unwise promises.
    A hereditary monarch does not.
    The record of the European monarchies that survived WW1 is far superior to that of European republics.
    So why has an elected President become urgent? Can it be that the proles aren’t suffering enough to support a violent revolution that will sweep Polly into unelected power?

  15. Couple of points :

    The Ottomans went into serious decline once the Sultanic candidates stopped slaughtering each other. The Siege of Vienna was the last throw of the dice, it was downhill all the way from there.

    Austria directly elects her president. Generally speaking they seem to be not a bad bunch ( Waldheim excepted, I suppose) and he can actually veto bills. The last pres. Fischer did just that. Van der Bellen is alas a Green and senile, but does at least try to appear neutral.

  16. ‘the directly elected President has more legitimacy than the indirectly elected Prime Minister.’

    Yeah DocBud. And they’d have the residual powers that Vicky had when the constitution was drawn up in 1901.

    Of course you might think that no one would be that stupid. But have you looked at some of the decisions of the High Court?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *