There are a handful of Sinn Fein MPs elected to the Westminster Parliament, but they don’t take their seats.
There are pressure groups, but there’s none of the main political parties that have any significant republican faction. Labour probably has the most members with republican sympathies, but they are far from making that part of the party platform.
They were definitely worried about that, especially between the abdication and the war. Instructions were even sent to British embassies ordering them not to receive Edward officially if he visited their country.
While your statement is correct technically correct, mister former (?) fridge magnet, I very much doubt that there are a significant number of UK monarchists who dislike the current incumbent.
The interesting fun will be when it’s Charles’s turn. 
I think a lot of the old-time monarchist types might not be so keen on Charles and Camilla, you know, might disapprove strongly of all that adultery and divorce stuff. They do seem to enjoy a good grumble about that sort of thing in the *Telegraph *and the Daily Mail.
Even then I don’t think it will be so bad. Charles is a quirky one for sure, and lacks his mother’s charisma, but he won’t be around long and unless he does something really bloody stupid I think the monarchy will sail along fine.
She has done remarkably well in 60 years on the throne. God save Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - long may she reign!
In short, no: Republicanism in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia
Charles won’t get the throne! I think it will pass on to Will.
And how exactly will this happen? Do you think an 85-year-old woman is likely to outlive a 63-year-old man? If so you may want to spend a little time with some actuarial tables.
Or do you think Parliament will suddenly change the succession law, even though they have made no move to do so in the 30 years since Charles began having marial issues, and the matter isn’t even under discussion?
I knew about Camilla. Who’s Marial?
I meant “malarial”. He’s been hitting the quinine pretty hard.
Also on her usefulness list: Heavy personal arms defense of the realm. (She learned this stuff during WWII, and she’s still got it!)
Isn’t that where the drink ‘gin and tonic’ comes from? Something to force down the taste of the quinine that was taken by the British in India?
Yes. That is when ‘gin and tonic’ became synonymous with the British in the Raj.
My mother received this from my grandfather…she was recovering from scarlet fever at the time…
Maybe so, but as I said [post=14701097]in a recent post[/post], the current government seems to be trying to make the monarchy into a political issue. And I honestly have no idea why: it’s presumably to gain political benefits, but I’d have thought most hard-core monarchists in Canada would already be Conservative voters anyway.
There is truth in what you say, although it was already treated as a political issue in the original wave of ‘demonarchifying’ the Canadian State, and there were some bizarre name-changes.
Like ‘Land Force Command’ and the like?
Weird.
Did it cause a relapse?
(No disrespect to Her Majesty — or missinformation’s mother, for that matter — but that is one scary facial expression.)
Okay, not that it matters, because she’s not alive, but suppose Diana were alive, while still being divorced from Charles. Would she be allowed to attend William’s coronation, when and if?
If you’re still reading this, I asked above, and I repeat, why do you believe that she has not done a good job as Head of State?
That would be up to the new King, and I would astonished if he would order her to stay away, even if he could. By all accounts they were very close.
