The United Kingdom has been embodied by a Monarch for over 1,000 years in both England and Scotland, respectively. In 802, King Egbert regained control of the Kingdom of Wessex following exile at the court of Charlemagne. His reign encapsulated the idea of Monarchy; stability, continuity and order. Egbert was the first King ever to establish rule over all of England. Since then, the role of the Sovereign has changed, but the role of the Monarchy has not. Stability, continuity and order are all critical aspects of the ‘Monarchy’s significant contribution to the constitutional settlement. In 1956, the United Kingdom, the French Republic and Israel invaded Egypt with the intention of seizing the Suez Canal. Following the utter humiliation of retreating from Egypt, an entire French Republic collapsed. What of the United Kingdom? It remained completely constitutionally intact. Our current Sovereign Queen Elizabeth II did her utmost to keep her government afloat and to calm the impending constitutional crisis. She was just four years into her reign. But nevertheless, her resolve protected and upheld the constitutional settlement of the United Kingdom. But it is not just the United Kingdom that has benefited from the institution of Monarchy; the Danes, the Norwegians, the people of Liechtenstein, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Swedish and Monacoians have all be benefited from the constitutional certainty of Monarchy. So, with it being crystal clear that the Monarchy is embodying stability and continuity, what are the arguments against the Monarchy and are they legitimate?

1) The Monarchy costs too much. The Monarchy does not cost the taxpayer a penny. This a bold statement, but below I have provided the context:The Monarchy is funded through the annual contribution of the Crown Estate. The estate is a private company, separate from the government, and owned by the Monarch in the right of Crown, that operates property portfolios and tourist attractions. Their property portfolios range from car parks and shopping malls to castles and arable farming land. Every year they generate more and more income as their property portfolios expand. They contribute around £300 million every year to Her ‘Majesty’s Treasury[1].The Sovereign Grant Act (amended in 2018 to make way for Buckingham Palace repairs) makes it clear that 25% of income to the Treasury from the Estate will be given to the Queen to finance the Royal Family and official royal engagements that support the Armed Forces, local communities and local businesses across the country. The argument that we could abolish the Monarchy and take all £300 million does not add up because the lands would just be sold off and the Treasury would then lose all of that income. The Queen and the Prince of Wales also have private incomes vested in the Duchy of Lancaster and Cornwall. Both the Queen and the Prince of Wales voluntarily pay tax on all of their private incomes. The value of the British Monarchy amounts to £67.5 billion, ‘that’s including tangible assets and intangible value. The Monarchy contribute a gross uplift of £1.7 billion to the British economy every year; this is excluding the contribution from the Crown Estate. Royal Warrants on branding also contributes £200 million to the British economy every year. [2]

All of these figures do not factor in the international attraction of the Monarchy that causes millions and millions to flock to the United Kingdom to visit royal residences that home a modern, functioning monarchy. VisitBritain has released statistics that show that the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge saw an additional 600,000 people come to London for the weekend, 60% from the UK, 40% from overseas, spending £107m. The value to ”brand ‘Britain’ due to global media coverage was approximately £1 billion[3]. Let us assume that the Monarchy costs us too much money; no indication getting rid of it would save money. The UK would have to write a constitution, and it is unlikely anyone would do it for free so you would have to pay someone to write and pay people to scrutinise the making the Constitution, so already it would cost a lot. We would have to create a new flag which again would most likely cost money (and change our identity in the process), besides, we would have to change our country’s name to lord knows what. Introduction of new Passports and new money that would cost a lot of money. Moreover, we might not have to change our voting system but if we did it would cost a lot of money, but we would have to create the position of president and give him a salary, the prime minster’s salary is close to £180k a year, the president’s salary would be similar to this, in the grand scheme of things would amount to a large amount of money. To sum up, there is no real indication that getting rid of the Monarchy would save us money, if anything it would cost us more money.

2)The Monarchy is not a big part of British culture. If anyone sincerely makes this point then they’re dishonest, culture and history are almost the same, and it is virtually impossible to deny the impact that the Monarchy has had on British history, our architecture, laws, empire and current demographics have all been influenced by the Monarchy. Our language has been very influenced by the Monarchy, too (queens English). Last time a republic was tried in the UK, it did not last very long. And please do not use the argument “Monarchy is outdated.” Because by that same logic so is a republic, in how, the idea of the Republic is old. So as we can see, the Monarchy has been a driver of our history and culture.

3) Monarchical power is undemocratic. The Sovereign contributes to the democratic settlement through constitutional arbitration. Republic, an organisation, seeking to abolish the Monarchy, attempt to replace it with a Presidential republic. The Westminster model is arguably the best in the world, being effective but accountable. And more importantly, how do you define “undemocratic”? Because according to freedom house, out of 100 we are 93 (100 being most free), so if democracy and freedom are the same then we are incredibly free. [4]

4) The Royal Family do little. This comment is often made by people who have little knowledge of how the Royal Family operates. ‘Republic’s Emma Dent-Coad claimed that ”Harry ‘can’t actually fly a helicopter… He tried to pass the helicopter exam about four times… So he just sits there going vroom vroom”. Emma seems quite happy to disrespect a veteran who served to defend her freedoms; this is just the tip of the iceberg in regards to how disdainful Republic is. ‘Emma’s comments caused national outrage with many calling for the whip to be withdrawn and for her to be sacked. But the truth is that the Royal Family attend thousands and thousands of engagements every year that support the Armed Forces, local communities and businesses and charities. Since the early 1980s, Charles has promoted environmental awareness. Upon moving into Highgrove House, he developed an interest in organic farming, which culminated in the 1990 launch of his own organic brand, Duchy Originals, which now sells more than 200 different sustainably produced products, from food to garden furniture; the profits (over £6 million by 2010) are donated to The Prince’s Charities. One of them being The Prince’s Trust, which aims to help vulnerable young people get their lives on track. It supports 11 to 30-year-olds who are unemployed and those struggling at school and risk of exclusion. Many of the young people helped by The Trust are in or leaving care, facing issues such as homelessness or mental health problems, or have been in trouble with the law. The Prince’s Trust is one of the most successful funding organisations in the UK and the UK’s leading youth charity, having helped over 950,000 young people turn their lives around, created 125,000 entrepreneurs and given business support to 395,000 people in the UK. [5]

Research from the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) reveals that the Queen is among the world’s greatest supporters of charities and has the helped the many organisations of which she is patron raise over £1.4bn. The Queen is a patron to 510 charities in Britain, including Cancer Research UK, the British Red Cross and Barnado’s. The wider Royal Family support a grand total of 2,415 charities in Britain, with this figure rising to almost 3,000 worldwide.There is also a long military tradition in the Royal Family; the ‘Queen’s father George VI served in the First World War as a Midshipman on a Frigate, the Queen herself served the Army as a mechanic during the Second World War, Prince Philip served in the Royal Navy during the Second World War and actively patrolled the English Channel and the North Sea, coming into contact with German U-Boats regularly, Prince Andrew served in the Royal Air Force in the Falklands War and Princes Harry and William did rotations in Afghanistan

5)The Monarchy has been friendly towards ethnic minorities. Not the greatest reason to support the Monarchy but it is important to keep in mind that they have been kind towards underprivileged minorities. Queen Victoria knew Urdu (Common language in South Asia), and one of her best friends was Abdul Karim an Indian Muslim, Victoria also criticised Prime Minster Salisbury had suggested that only white Britons could represent a British constituency and Victoria adopted a granddaughter from Nigeria by the name of Sara Forbes Bonetta. George V and VI were very fond of the African colonies and believed that they would become a jewel of the world. Meghan was also welcomed and received very well by the Queen.

6)The Monarchy is still popular. YouGov research, with a resounding 68% of the British public believing the institution to be good for the country, while only 9% said it was bad. 17% didn’t have an opinion on it. [6]

In conclusion, the monarchy is a vital part of the United Kingdom and gives to our country culturally and economically. And there does not seem to be a genuine reason to be against apart from “principles”. God Save The Queen.

[1] https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/our-business/2019-annual-report/[2]http://brandfinance.com/images/upload/bf_monarchy_report_2017.pdf [3] http://theconversation.com/fact-check-do-tourists-visit-britain-because-of-the-royal-family-88335[4] https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2019/united-kingdom[5]https://www.teleg0raph.co.uk/finance/yourbusiness/10293727/Princes-pride-as-charities-inspire-125000-to-start-their-own-business.html[6]https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2015/09/08/monarchy-here-stay