NationStates

Austria-Bohemia-Hungary wrote:

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:Presumably making Lebedev a peer has been cleared by the security services. Hopefully they haven't mistaken him for Rylan like me.

Rewarding CEO's of tabloids with a membership in HoL is just about the dumbest thing ever tbh. Imqho rewarding tabloid chiefs with anything is basically treason.

Listen both of you, He is to be refereed to as The Right and Honorable Lord Lebedev. He is a peer now show him the proper respect and deference. Failure to do so will have you outed in the Evening Standard.

Celritannia wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
Wouldn't governor of the Pitcairns be more appropriate?

Or the British Indian Ocean Territory.

Nah, the pitcairns would be most appropriate, largely because they had a massive pedo trial a while back and it was found that they couldn't give out custodial sentences to everyone who was found guilty because that was like almost every man there.

Agarntrop wrote:

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:Closing pubs so schools can be re-opened - a difficult sell for a populist government.

Holy fuck

We can't let those kids grow up to vote Labour.

Yeah WTF.

Greed and Death wrote:

Agarntrop wrote:Holy fuck

We can't let those kids grow up to vote Labour.

Yeah WTF.

I wish I still had a tory membership card to cut up but I did that in March.

Novus America wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
It's a good second chamber for people who have political experience or those with expertise to scrutinise bills for a longer time.

That only applies though if appointments to it were based on merit over picking political hacks.

Which is why I mentioned an Anti-Crony policy.

CoraSpia wrote:

Greed and Death wrote:We can't let those kids grow up to vote Labour.

Yeah WTF.

I wish I still had a tory membership card to cut up but I did that in March.

Voting Tory is a silly idea, no matter the circumstance.

Celritannia wrote:

Novus America wrote:
That only applies though if appointments to it were based on merit over picking political hacks.

Which is why I mentioned an Anti-Crony policy.

But given such policy does not yet exist, it only might make a hypothetical future House of Lords valuable, not make the current one valuable.

Novus America wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
Which is why I mentioned an Anti-Crony policy.

But given such policy does not yet exist, it only might make a hypothetical future House of Lords valuable, not make the current one valuable.

The current one is still necessary.

Vassenor wrote:

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:Presumably making Lebedev a peer has been cleared by the security services. Hopefully they haven't mistaken him for Rylan like me.

Why wouldn't they sign off on a Russian billionaire in parliament?

Just ignore all that stuff about his dad being ex-KGB.

I thought you'd be delighted Vass. You were going to bat for this guy back in September when it was observed he owned one of your favourite rags.

Celritannia wrote:

Novus America wrote:
But given such policy does not yet exist, it only might make a hypothetical future House of Lords valuable, not make the current one valuable.

The current one is still necessary.

It does not really do all that much, it is more than anything a way to reward partisan hacks and big donors. Not sure rewarding them is necessary.

Novus America wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
The current one is still necessary.

It does not really do all that much, it is more than anything a way to reward partisan hacks and big donors. Not sure rewarding them is necessary.

It can still delay legislation and add amendments if necessary.

Celritannia wrote:

Novus America wrote:
It does not really do all that much, it is more than anything a way to reward partisan hacks and big donors. Not sure rewarding them is necessary.

It can still delay legislation and add amendments if necessary.

It can only delay, and the amendments it offers can be bypassed. It provides little check. I get the argument that eliminating it without and alternative could be problematic, but it desperately needs a major overhaul and reform. Because right now it is a mess.

Novus America wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
It can still delay legislation and add amendments if necessary.

It can only delay, and the amendments it offers can be bypassed. It provides little check. I get the argument that eliminating it without and alternative could be problematic, but it desperately needs a major overhaul and reform. Because right now it is a mess.

It does need an overall.
But it has it's uses.

Novus America wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
It can still delay legislation and add amendments if necessary.

It can only delay, and the amendments it offers can be bypassed. It provides little check. I get the argument that eliminating it without and alternative could be problematic, but it desperately needs a major overhaul and reform. Because right now it is a mess.

It can block in the case of an Act of self-perpetuation. That's important.

CoraSpia wrote:I wish I still had a tory membership card to cut up but I did that in March.

I don’t particularly understand this. I mean, sure, it’s your choice, but what about the decision to close non-essential services like pubs in order to making it safer for children when they go back to school is so egregious that you’d quit a party you previously supported over it?

(Ignoring the fact you already cut up the card, of course, but you seem to indicate you’d do it again over this if you could.)

What's the chance that after Queen Elizabeth II dies, that the monarchy will be abolished? I think it would only happen if there was a huge controversy surrounding a member or all of the royal family

Prizea wrote:

CoraSpia wrote:I wish I still had a tory membership card to cut up but I did that in March.

I don’t particularly understand this. I mean, sure, it’s your choice, but what about the decision to close non-essential services like pubs in order to making it safer for children when they go back to school is so egregious that you’d quit a party you previously supported over it?

(Ignoring the fact you already cut up the card, of course, but you seem to indicate you’d do it again over this if you could.)

I suspect Cora is opposed to it being a case of having to close one or the other.

Maccian wrote:What's the chance that after Queen Elizabeth II dies, that the monarchy will be abolished? I think it would only happen if there was a huge controversy surrounding a member or all of the royal family

Slim. Prince Andrew is embroiled in the Epstein case - which would be a "huge controversy" - but realistically for that to harm the throne we would have to be talking about both Charles and William being involved.

Maccian wrote:What's the chance that after Queen Elizabeth II dies, that the monarchy will be abolished? I think it would only happen if there was a huge controversy surrounding a member or all of the royal family

Like Prince Andrew?

Apparently some Coldstream Guards had a pub fight with some of the Queen's footmen. I wonder what that was about.

Maccian wrote:What's the chance that after Queen Elizabeth II dies, that the monarchy will be abolished? I think it would only happen if there was a huge controversy surrounding a member or all of the royal family

Close to non-existent in the UK as currently constituted.

I think it likely a 50/50 chance that the Australian monarchy will be abolished in the decade following the Queen's death, though. Some of the smaller Commonwealth Realms may also follow, though I think the Canadian and New Zealand monarchies are broadly safe.

It looks increasingly likely that Prince Andrew has been a very, very naughty boy; to the extent that a formal criminal investigation would likely have been launched at this point if he wasn't the Queen's son. Certainly he shouldn't be travelling to the United States in the near future. Andrew's alleged behaviour is clearly a problem, but he's fortunately nowhere near the crown; that the [currently] eighth in line for the throne is an irresponsible cockwomble who has allegedly been encouraged to fuck underage girls by criminal acquaintances is not inherently an argument against the institution of constitutional monarchy (though it could easily be used as an argument against privilege without responsibility). Many large extended families have an idiot in their ranks; so long as it's only Andrew, there's not really an issue.

That said, there is a potential issue when the irresponsible cockwomble is first in line to the throne. We seem to have dodged a bullet with Prince Albert Victor, and had an ever closer shave with Edward VIII; though sometimes the irresponsible cockwomble can surprise once actually on the throne (see Edward VII). George V, George VI, and Elizabeth II have, however, set a firm model for what the UK expects from its harmless constitutional monarchs over the last century, and so long as Charles III/George VII and William IV follow a similar model once on the throne, we won't have a problem.

Celritannia wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
Wouldn't governor of the Pitcairns be more appropriate?

Or the British Indian Ocean Territory.

The Governor of the Pitcairn Islands is always the UK High Commissioner to New Zealand. The Commissioner of the British Indian Ocean Territory is currently held by the Director of Overseas Territories at the FCO in London (he's also currently the Commissioner of the British Antarctic Territory).

Neither position would therefore involve much in the way of exile; and even accepting that Wellington is a very long way away from London, we would likely embarrass the Kiwis if we made Andrew our high commissioner to New Zealand.


The most isolated remaining British territory with a resident governor or commissioner is probably Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha*, which handily also has a fine tradition of royal exile. Even better, Tristan da Cunha - the most isolated inhabited island on the planet - has a resident administrator currently held as a rotational job share. Surely Her Majesty's subjects residing in Edinburgh of the Seven Seas would benefit from a longer-term administrator with strong royal connections?


* The Falklands are actually easier to get to, with flights from both RAF Brize Norton and Santiago, Chile (when COVID-19 restrictions aren't in place), for a total of three flights a week. St Helena's airport only opened in 2016, and normally only offers a weekly flight to Johannesburg via Namibia.

The Archregimancy wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
Or the British Indian Ocean Territory.

The Governor of the Pitcairn Islands is always the UK High Commissioner to New Zealand. The Commissioner of the British Indian Ocean Territory is currently held by the Director of Overseas Territories at the FCO in London (he's also currently the Commissioner of the British Antarctic Territory).

Neither position would therefore involve much in the way of exile; and even accepting that Wellington is a very long way away from London, we would likely embarrass the Kiwis if we made Andrew our high commissioner to New Zealand.


The most isolated remaining British territory with a resident governor or commissioner is Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha, which handily also has a fine tradition of royal exile. Even better, Tristan da Cunha - the most isolated inhabited island on the planet - has a resident administrator currently held as a rotational job share. Surely Her Majesty's subjects residing in Edinburgh of the Seven Seas would benefit from a longer-term administrator with strong royal connections?

Fair enough. I'm still trying to decide if sending him or Nigel out to Rockall to re-cement our claim to it would be better though.

Anybody want to convince BoJo to spare some of his millions of pounds he owns personally to help poor Cornwall out?
<.>

The Archregimancy wrote:The most isolated remaining British territory with a resident governor or commissioner is probably Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha

No. Don't send him to Ascension. I loved my time there, and I don't want the image of the place ruined by being chosen as a place to offload troublesome Royals. Exiling Napoleon to Saint Helena was fine, but the image of the islands will be collectively damaged permanently by an alleged Epstein-linked sexual abuser being offloaded there.

I hadn't picked up that the Tory MP they've arrested was a former minister. Rather narrows down the list of possible people.