State Opening of Parliament

Rizzo said:

SporadicAddick said:

It's not ceremony for the sake of ceremony. Every bit of the ceremony is essential constitutional process - it's just "dressed" in history. Of course we could relocate Parliament to an office block in Birmingham, get an elected president to open the session and read his / her own legislative plans (no need to attend, Zoom is fine), get some civil servants renting space in Media City Salford to type it up and put it on the internet and be done with it. 

Sounds good to me. And considerably cheaper. 

Be honest, it sounds shit (and net net a presidential system would be no cheaper from a fiscal point of view, and we would be much poorer culturally).  

ShootersHillGuru said:

We think it’s nonsense now. What will people think in another 150 years. 

"We" don't.

PrincessFiona said:

wmcf123 said:

Rizzo said:

seth plum said:

A constitutional monarchy is better than a dictatorship at the very least.

There are systems of government between those two though. They aren't the only choices.

I am no monarchist but given the choice between Charles and President Johnson or Corbyn, I’m with the royal family 

How has the US come to a choice between Biden and Trump?!

Exactly .  Twice .  

On this occasion - It is a celebration of History and the peaceful transference of power in a democracy in line with the will of those people who chose to participate, going back centuries.

A little more reflection might suggest in referencing such History it specifically speaks to the transfer of authority from a tyrannical Monarchy to the people via an institutional monarchy. 

Democracy is forever under attack in many guises and thus any reminder of its origins (however eccentrically out of step with modern values) in this country should be celebrated and supported in whatever guise at every opportunity.

May I politely suggest people take Democracy for granted at their peril.

Grapevine49 said:

On this occasion - It is a celebration of History and the peaceful transference of power in a democracy in line with the will of those people who chose to participate, going back centuries.

A little more reflection might suggest in referencing such History it specifically speaks to the transfer of authority from a tyrannical Monarchy to the people via an institutional monarchy. 

Democracy is forever under attack in many guises and thus any reminder of its origins (however eccentrically out of step with modern values) in this country should be celebrated and supported in whatever guise at every opportunity.

May I politely suggest people take Democracy for granted at their peril.

Plenty of countries are doing fine with democracy without the ceremonial occasions. Like I said in a previous post. Not all of what you see with these ceremonies is ancient. My own personal view is that it’s worth retaining. 

seth plum said:

Rizzo said:

seth plum said:

A constitutional monarchy is better than a dictatorship at the very least.

There are systems of government between those two though. They aren't the only choices.

Of course there are.
However I dread to think what Boris Johnson, Rees Mogg and others would have tried to get up to if there hadn’t been the constitutional monarch Queen Elizabeth the Second around the place to ‘constitutionally’ stay their hand.

Politicians from other parties are also available. 

Super_Eddie_Youds said:

PrincessFiona said:

usetobunkin said:

Chizz said:

Anyway, this is by no means intended to be a political thread, so it would be great if the politics were left out and if anyone wanted to talk about the pomp and ceremony, the tradition, the location, how it works, why it works, why it brings in investment and adds to our soft power or, indeed, whether it should continue, that would be great.  

Is it the best ceremonial event in the world? 

The Keys ceremony at the Tower, continued uninterrupted since 12 century 

Was invited to this through work - I have to admit I had heard of it vaguely but didn't know much about it before

I think my favourite overall experience, if not nearly so much pomp and ceremony, was the closing of the Wagah border - was lucky (again though work) to get VIP seating. Demonstrated so much about India and Pakistan (in how the crowds differed on either side and that women took part for India etc) - and who could kick higher then stomp loudest!

Jealous you’ve actually been to the Wagah border ceremony, can’t imagine I’d ever get to go if not by coincidence for work. I love it, not subtle but really tells the story. 

Very moving is the Arlington changing of the guard, made a real effort to get to that and am glad I did. 

The UK is good at pomp and ceremony, don’t know if we’re the best, not seen them all but there are lots of very good ceremonies the world over. We do it on a hell of a scale, I will say that. 

I was working in Pakistan but watched it from the Indian side - much more of a celebration, at least 3 times as many people, the men weren't; separate. And there was alcohol!

Yorkshireaddick said:

How she’d become Queen then? I didn’t vote for her…

Bloody peasant

Henry Irving said:

JohnnyJoeyDeeDee said:

Chizz said:

JohnnyJoeyDeeDee said:

Acknowledgement of previous difficulties in relationship between monarch and parliament through having an MP ‘held hostage’ at Buckingham Palace until the king returns!

Do we know who it was this year?

Samantha Dixon. Apparently it’s always a junior whip in the governing party

What if all the other MPs were killed in gunpowder plot style attack.

She'd become prime minister by default.

Would make a good TV series.

Could be called Designated Survivor.

Still think the idea needs a bit of work 

sam3110 said:

It's just all a bunch of absolute poncing about really isn't it? 

Is it paid for privately or are our hard earned taxes going on this instead of, I don't know, offsetting the costs of The Silvertown Tunnel?

offset and some by tourism

ShootersHillGuru said:

PrincessFiona said:

sam3110 said:

It's just all a bunch of absolute poncing about really isn't it? 

Is it paid for privately or are our hard earned taxes going on this instead of, I don't know, offsetting the costs of The Silvertown Tunnel?

offset and some by tourism

It’s paid out of general taxation. 

yes, but offset by the revenue from tourism

Huskaris said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

PrincessFiona said:

sam3110 said:

It's just all a bunch of absolute poncing about really isn't it? 

Is it paid for privately or are our hard earned taxes going on this instead of, I don't know, offsetting the costs of The Silvertown Tunnel?

offset and some by tourism

It’s paid out of general taxation. 

Do businesses that tourists spend money with not employee people who pay taxes/employer taxes? Do they not pay corporation tax?

It bring sin a lot of tourism. As well as increasing the UK's standing. There's been various figures published demonstrating it vastly exceeds the costs. The UK may have it's issues but this is one thing the UK does that is the envy of the world - imitated by many but rarely anywhere near as good

PrincessFiona said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

PrincessFiona said:

sam3110 said:

It's just all a bunch of absolute poncing about really isn't it? 

Is it paid for privately or are our hard earned taxes going on this instead of, I don't know, offsetting the costs of The Silvertown Tunnel?

offset and some by tourism

It’s paid out of general taxation. 

yes, but offset by the revenue from tourism

Let’s be clear. Any money that tourism brings to the UK has nothing to do with offsetting the costs of any specific event. The money goes into the general pot and is spent as required by the government. 

ShootersHillGuru said:

PrincessFiona said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

PrincessFiona said:

sam3110 said:

It's just all a bunch of absolute poncing about really isn't it? 

Is it paid for privately or are our hard earned taxes going on this instead of, I don't know, offsetting the costs of The Silvertown Tunnel?

offset and some by tourism

It’s paid out of general taxation. 

yes, but offset by the revenue from tourism

Let’s be clear. Any money that tourism brings to the UK has nothing to do with offsetting the costs of any specific event. The money goes into the general pot and is spent as required by the government. 

The point surely is that increased tourism (as with any other industry) increases the content of the general pot, which is then spent in many ways.  It is widely claimed that the revenue from the tourists drawn to this country because of its quaint (and often faintly ridiculous) fancy dress ceremonies involving the royal family balances or exceeds the cost of maintaining them.

Aside from sporting events, and possibly theatres/museums/ historic buildings (many with royal connections) I'm not sure what else draws many foreign tourists to these islands.  The glorious weather?  The famously polylinguistic native residents?  Our superb economical railway network?

No, I'm not a royalist, but looking elsewhere round the world I'm not convinced that elected heads of state are universally the best thing since sliced bread!