King Cole, not so sure. Charles, after all, seems to be in perfectly good health.
It's not impossible William will be next, but odds must be fairly long.
As an aside, just five years to the Platinum Jubilee.
I'm no royalist but why the hell should we ask the Queen to work until she is 95+? Incidentally, one of my more minor objections to the monarchy (among several major ones) is that it's not much good for those in the monarchy. A life like that in the public eye with few freedoms, forced upon you, is inhumane.
She shouldn't, ideally. But before her, the oldest age that any monarch had lived to was 81.
The problem is that as well as the UK, she's queen of fifteen other countries and while they did all amend their laws in respect of the order of succession recently, to keep in step, that was a process which could take years if necessary. By contrast, one placing either a retirement age or providing for abdication by Instrument would obviously have immediate applicability.
There would be a good case for a Royal Reform Act dealing with quite a lot of issues that need updating (including old age provisions) being passed very early in the next reign. The text of the coronation oath is one such, which is why the window between the succession and the coronation is ideal.
Thanks David – excuse my ignorance but is there any legal impediment to her abdicating on the grounds of her advanced years?
Nope, she just takes her vows seriously.
On her 21st birthday “I declare that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service.”
Abdicating is not necessarily a breach of that declaration, particularly if infirmity meant that she could not serve her people and that not abdicating meant that no-one could do so.
Yes, but advanced years does not necessarily mean infirmity.
Donald Trump and his populist advisers in the White House are one of the main three existential threats facing the European Union – and not Brexit - the chief Brexit negotiator of the European Parliament has claimed.
Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister and arch European federalist who recently returned from a tour of the US, said that it was now clear that Europe had “fewer friends than ever” in Washington.
Setting out the three main existential crises threatening Europe, Mr Verhofstad listed radical Islamic terror, the revanchist Russian president Vladimir Putin and his funding anti-EU, far-Right parties and destabilizing Europe and Donald Trump, the new US president.
Inertia is the strongest force know to man. It's why the Ottoman empire and Byzantium and the Austro-Hungarian empires all lasted about 200 years longer than they should have done.
Why might the Austro-Hungarian empire have fallen in 1718 (rather than 1918)? It only became "Austria-Hungary" in 1867. And much of its territory was gained after 1718.
200 years in total.
I thought that the Austro-Hungarian Empire wasn't an Empire in reality, but more the personal land holdings and feudal overlordships of the Hapsburg family?
"Bella gerant alii, tu felix Austria nube "
Spawniest family in Europe.
As I might have mentioned before, It should have been the Tyndalls. Sir William Tyndall was offered the throne of Bohemia in 1437 but he turned it down and it was offered to the upstart Hapsburgs instead.
Donald Trump and his populist advisers in the White House are one of the main three existential threats facing the European Union – and not Brexit - the chief Brexit negotiator of the European Parliament has claimed.
Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister and arch European federalist who recently returned from a tour of the US, said that it was now clear that Europe had “fewer friends than ever” in Washington.
Setting out the three main existential crises threatening Europe, Mr Verhofstad listed radical Islamic terror, the revanchist Russian president Vladimir Putin and his funding anti-EU, far-Right parties and destabilizing Europe and Donald Trump, the new US president.
Mrs May's use of Trump as a lever seems to be working a treat.
I get the feeling trying to use Trump for anything as far as international relations goes is like juggling with chainsaws. One slip and you might not have a leg to stand on.
Bradd Jaffy Trump: “I noticed Chuck Schumer yesterday with fake tears” over immigration ban/refugees; “I'm gonna ask him who is his acting coach” https://t.co/8rCy8PyyqN
Donald Trump and his populist advisers in the White House are one of the main three existential threats facing the European Union – and not Brexit - the chief Brexit negotiator of the European Parliament has claimed.
Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister and arch European federalist who recently returned from a tour of the US, said that it was now clear that Europe had “fewer friends than ever” in Washington.
Setting out the three main existential crises threatening Europe, Mr Verhofstad listed radical Islamic terror, the revanchist Russian president Vladimir Putin and his funding anti-EU, far-Right parties and destabilizing Europe and Donald Trump, the new US president.
Mrs May's use of Trump as a lever seems to be working a treat.
If we're trolling, it's unfortunate that we're so hard line on Russia. We could have a Quadripartite alliance of the UK, US, Russia and Turkey. It'd be all over before the leaves fall .
I bagsy the Ariege. In order to rectify a terrible historical wrong, Mr Tyndall can have Bohemia.
As I might have mentioned before, It should have been the Tyndalls. Sir William Tyndall was offered the throne of Bohemia in 1437 but he turned it down and it was offered to the upstart Hapsburgs instead.
Shame really. I would have made a fine tyrant.
You might not have missed much. My wife shared an office with a Hapsburg prince for a while. Things had degenerated so far that he actually had to work for a living.
I get the feeling trying to use Trump for anything as far as international relations goes is like juggling with chainsaws. One slip and you might not have a leg to stand on.
Jobabob said: "I'm no royalist but why the hell should we ask the Queen to work until she is 95+? Incidentally, one of my more minor objections to the monarchy (among several major ones) is that it's not much good for those in the monarchy. A life like that in the public eye with few freedoms, forced upon you, is inhumane."
Well, it's hard for me to imagine, but maybe she enjoys her work.
That makes all the difference. The powerful theoretical physicist Hans Bethe was publishing important papers into his nineties.
As I might have mentioned before, It should have been the Tyndalls. Sir William Tyndall was offered the throne of Bohemia in 1437 but he turned it down and it was offered to the upstart Hapsburgs instead.
Shame really. I would have made a fine tyrant.
You might not have missed much. My wife shared an office with a Hapsburg prince for a while. Things had degenerated so far that he actually had to work for a living.
Oh let me keep my dreams old chap. :-) Prince of Bohemia has such a nice ring to it.
King Cole, not so sure. Charles, after all, seems to be in perfectly good health.
It's not impossible William will be next, but odds must be fairly long.
As an aside, just five years to the Platinum Jubilee.
I'm no royalist but why the hell should we ask the Queen to work until she is 95+? Incidentally, one of my more minor objections to the monarchy (among several major ones) is that it's not much good for those in the monarchy. A life like that in the public eye with few freedoms, forced upon you, is inhumane.
She shouldn't, ideally. But before her, the oldest age that any monarch had lived to was 81.
The problem is that as well as the UK, she's queen of fifteen other countries and while they did all amend their laws in respect of the order of succession recently, to keep in step, that was a process which could take years if necessary. By contrast, one placing either a retirement age or providing for abdication by Instrument would obviously have immediate applicability.
There would be a good case for a Royal Reform Act dealing with quite a lot of issues that need updating (including old age provisions) being passed very early in the next reign. The text of the coronation oath is one such, which is why the window between the succession and the coronation is ideal.
Thanks David – excuse my ignorance but is there any legal impediment to her abdicating on the grounds of her advanced years?
Nope, she just takes her vows seriously.
On her 21st birthday “I declare that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service.”
Abdicating is not necessarily a breach of that declaration, particularly if infirmity meant that she could not serve her people and that not abdicating meant that no-one could do so.
Yes, but advanced years does not necessarily mean infirmity.
King Cole, not so sure. Charles, after all, seems to be in perfectly good health.
It's not impossible William will be next, but odds must be fairly long.
As an aside, just five years to the Platinum Jubilee.
I'm no royalist but why the hell should we ask the Queen to work until she is 95+? Incidentally, one of my more minor objections to the monarchy (among several major ones) is that it's not much good for those in the monarchy. A life like that in the public eye with few freedoms, forced upon you, is inhumane.
I don't think it's a case of "asking" HMQ to carry on working until she's 95+ but rather she would see it as her duty.
When she became Monarch she swore an oath before god that she would serve for the rest of her life...
I mean, if she wanted to abdicate and retire nobody would stop her. Everyone would think she's earned a few years rest and wish her well.
I suspect Charles or William, at her age, would do just that. But the Queen would see retirement as an abdication of her duty and breaking the oath she made to her people.
The only circumstances I can see where she would abdicate is if she got dementia or has some other neurological condition that meant she was mentally unable to carry out her duty.
Otherwise she'll carry on, probably celebrate her 100th birthday as Queen, and ultimately die as Queen.
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
Edit: because he is reaping what he has sown these past decade or two as court jester.
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
He shouldn't take it seriously. Much of the questioning is ludicrous, repetitive posturing by wankers.
"Posturing" is exactly right.. tripping over each other in order to get a soundbite to tell their mates about or be on tonight's News. So vain
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
He shouldn't take it seriously. Much of the questioning is ludicrous, repetitive posturing by wankers.
And none of our business. Imagine the furore if an American President tried to tell the UK what its immigration policy should be.
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
He shouldn't take it seriously. Much of the questioning is ludicrous, repetitive posturing by wankers.
And none of our business. Imagine the furore if an American President tried to tell the UK what its immigration policy should be.
Exactly. How much better the world would be if politicians used the phrase "none of our business" more frequently
Hopefully, Merkel and Macron will be in power in Germany and France respectively this time next year. Trump could well help both of them.
We really don't want Schulz to win. He's a passionate eurofederalist who hates the idea of Brexit. He will want to make it hurt.
Merkel and Fillion would be the best of a bad bunch.
But Fillion may have holed himself beneath the waterline now.
Merkel and !e Pen would be best for Britain. On a purely selfish basis.
Macron is hard to call.
In what way would Le Pen be best for Britain?
I don't necessarily agree with Sean - I can see how Fillon might be best for Britain as a bridge between the UK and the EU - but I can also see an argument that were Le Pen to win, it would create absolute chaos within the EU and present it with its biggest existential crisis ever as they grappled with the question "is the project over"?
Of the two - Brexit and a Le Pen win - she poses the greater danger, partly because France has always been a much more integral part of the EU than the UK and partly because France is a continuing part of the EU. As such, EU energies will be devoted to resolving that problem (which, ironically, would result from many of the things that Cameron flagged up back in his Bloomberg speech and which were singularly not addressed in his negotiations and which, had they been, would probably not have led to Brexit). There'd be no united EU front and negotiations would be more likely to go favourably for the UK.
And markets across Europe would tank, which given its importance to us as an export market would have extremely negative consequences for the UK.
Maybe. As I said, on balance I think that Fillon would be better. But US markets have hardly tanked on Trump's election.
Trump is proposing the break-up of the current structure of the US, though. Le Pen is proposing that for Europe with all the uncertainty that means.
I was mildly but not entirely trolling about Le Pen
She would be destabilising. Then again maybe France needs some creative destruction.
In more importemt news, I have a title for my new thriller.
I did toy with THE STORM NEPHEW and THE BAD WEATHER QUINTUPLETS, but I've gone for
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
He shouldn't take it seriously. Much of the questioning is ludicrous, repetitive posturing by wankers.
And none of our business. Imagine the furore if an American President tried to tell the UK what its immigration policy should be.
Of course it is our business - what Trump does has a direct affect on us and perceptions of us. We march hand-in-hand with him, after all. The Prime Minister wants to lead the world in partnership with him. She has put the UK's eggs in the US's basket. She has made US policies a matter for debate in the UK.
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
He shouldn't take it seriously. Much of the questioning is ludicrous, repetitive posturing by wankers.
And none of our business. Imagine the furore if an American President tried to tell the UK what its immigration policy should be.
Of course it is our business - what Trump does has a direct affect on us and perceptions of us. We march hand-in-hand with him, after all. The Prime Minister wants to lead the world in partnership with him. She has put the UK's eggs in the US's basket. She has made US policies a matter for debate in the UK.
You like that "hand-in-hand" one don't you?!!
Yeah we never used to bother with the USA before. Be interesting to read how important people on here thought they were to us on the day Obama said we would be at the back of the queue
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
He shouldn't take it seriously. Much of the questioning is ludicrous, repetitive posturing by wankers.
And none of our business. Imagine the furore if an American President tried to tell the UK what its immigration policy should be.
Quite.
At least Trump has been elected on the basis of what he is now doing.
Imagine if Labour had been honest at an election and said "We are going to open the borders of the UK to whoever the fuck we like, just to rub the Right's nose in diversity....."
Labour should just have the decency to STFU about who is allowed across what borders. But then, Olympic-qualifying hypocrisy is all they have offered for many a year.
@SkyNewsBreak: Poll by @SkyData suggests 49% of people would support cancelling President Trump's state visit to the UK and 38% of people would oppose it
Scott_P • Posts: 24,783 April 2016 @ShippersUnbound: To use an American phrase, Obama brought a gun to a knife fight...
Roger • Posts: 6,240 April 2016 As celebrity endorsements go they don't get much better. An expert testimony as well
TheScreamingEagles • Posts: 46,841 April 2016 What a Special Relationship. Obama says exactly what Cameron would have wanted him to say. Cameron must have real persuasive powers.
Jonathan • Posts: 5,144 April 2016 There are some pretty upset Leavers indulging in hot headed ad hom attacks on Obama tonight. They ought to cool it.
SeanT • Posts: 16,460 April 2016 C'*nt Obama But REMAIN was always going to win
Boris is completely right. This anti-American bullshit is gestural, hyperbolic nonsense.
As ever, the Progressive Left overplays its hand, and ends up looking clownish. America is not Nazi Germany. FFS!
Not sure how being opposed to Trump is being anti-American. Most Americans are opposed to him, too.
Saying Trump's America is like a 1930s dictatorship such as Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy is, indeed, an anti-American statement. That's your Labour Party, right there.
Dealing with questions from kids is always tricky for a grown up
He gives the impression of not taking it at all seriously. Whatever the calibre of questions, and questioners (I don't think Nick Soames qualifies as a "kid", nor indeed your heroes Bill Cash, the Moggster and John Redwood).
He shouldn't take it seriously. Much of the questioning is ludicrous, repetitive posturing by wankers.
And none of our business. Imagine the furore if an American President tried to tell the UK what its immigration policy should be.
Of course it is our business - what Trump does has a direct affect on us and perceptions of us. We march hand-in-hand with him, after all. The Prime Minister wants to lead the world in partnership with him. She has put the UK's eggs in the US's basket. She has made US policies a matter for debate in the UK.
You like that "hand-in-hand" one don't you?!!
Yeah we never used to bother with the USA before. Be interesting to read how important people on here thought they were to us on the day Obama said we would be at the back of the queue
Of course, the are important to us. But our PM wants to lead the world with them:
"So as we rediscover our confidence together – as you renew your nation just as we renew ours – we have the opportunity – indeed the responsibility – to renew the Special Relationship for this new age. We have the opportunity to lead, together, again."
Of course it is our business - what Trump does has a direct affect on us and perceptions of us. We march hand-in-hand with him, after all. The Prime Minister wants to lead the world in partnership with him. She has put the UK's eggs in the US's basket. She has made US policies a matter for debate in the UK.
US policies are always a matter for debate in the UK, and we always march hand-in-hand with them on most major issues. That doesn't mean that the UK government should be so presumptuous as to try to tell a democratically-elected president of the US, no matter how vulgar and simplistic he is, that he shouldn't implement a campaign promise on which he was elected and which, we are told, doesn't affect British citizens.
In any case, the reaction is ludicrous. Perhaps people like Yvette Cooper and Ed Miliband really do think Trump has introduced a ban on Muslims. There's much fake news about, and perhaps they've fallen for it.
For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending Trump' policy. I'm defending his right to be an idiot, within the bounds of US and international law, since he is, for better or worse, the democratically-elected president. Comparisons with the 1930s are completely bonkers. So far he has put in place a 90-day ban on the granting of visas to citizens of a few countries. He hasn't bombed anyone, or set up an internment camp in Guantanamo Bay to which people are sent without trial, as Blair's bestest friend did.
Scott_P • Posts: 24,783 April 2016 @MrHarryCole: Here we go. Leave.EU: "Obama doesn’t have authority to deny us a deal, as he will be long gone before any such proposals are on the table."
Of course it is our business - what Trump does has a direct affect on us and perceptions of us. We march hand-in-hand with him, after all. The Prime Minister wants to lead the world in partnership with him. She has put the UK's eggs in the US's basket. She has made US policies a matter for debate in the UK.
US policies are always a matter for debate in the UK, and we always march hand-in-hand with them on most major issues. That doesn't mean that the UK government should be so presumptuous as to try to tell a democratically-elected president of the US, no matter how vulgar and simplistic he is, that he shouldn't implement a campaign promise on which he was elected and which, we are told, doesn't affect British citizens.
In any case, the reaction is ludicrous. Perhaps people like Yvette Cooper and Ed Miliband really do think Trump has introduced a ban on Muslims. There's much fake news about, and perhaps they've fallen for it.
For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending Trump' policy. I'm defending his right to be an idiot, within the bounds of US and international law, since he is, for better or worse, the democratically-elected president. Comparisons with the 1930s are completely bonkers. So far he has put in place a 90-day ban on the granting of visas to citizens of a few countries. He hasn't bombed anyone, or set up an internment camp in Guantanamo Bay to which people are sent without trial, as Blair's bestest friend did.
You defend his right to be an idiot; others say he is an idiot. When you issue blanket bans based on nationality and place of birth you are, of course, returning t the 1930s.
AndyJS • Posts: 17,621 April 2016 Many important British political figures have potentially insulted the next president if Trump wins, and Obama has ridiculed Brexit which is still a possible outcome of the referendum. Interesting state of affairs.
Comments
Quite prime ministerial I must say.
EDIT Mr Dancer,
Charles will surpass Edward VII in September this year
Shame really. I would have made a fine tyrant.
Take back control indeed.
Bradd Jaffy
Trump: “I noticed Chuck Schumer yesterday with fake tears” over immigration ban/refugees; “I'm gonna ask him who is his acting coach” https://t.co/8rCy8PyyqN
Charles 26 July 1858 to 9 September 2017
Edward = 59 years, 1 month and 14 days
I bagsy the Ariege. In order to rectify a terrible historical wrong, Mr Tyndall can have Bohemia.
"I'm no royalist but why the hell should we ask the Queen to work until she is 95+? Incidentally, one of my more minor objections to the monarchy (among several major ones) is that it's not much good for those in the monarchy. A life like that in the public eye with few freedoms, forced upon you, is inhumane."
Well, it's hard for me to imagine, but maybe she enjoys her work.
That makes all the difference. The powerful theoretical physicist Hans Bethe was publishing important papers into his nineties.
@DPJHodges: Government's stated opposition to this policy actually makes it worse. It's divisive, wrong and stigmatises Muslims. But we don't care.
Boris doing well not just to say "Oh fuck off"
I was right! Soubry next..
"Mo Farah going 'home'" to America
Our videos have been in several congressional hearings, but not enough. Here's one with @EricHolder on #VoterFraud https://t.co/dZo3dhDxyN https://t.co/DGXAdO7H1N
It's a view...
When she became Monarch she swore an oath before god that she would serve for the rest of her life...
I mean, if she wanted to abdicate and retire nobody would stop her. Everyone would think she's earned a few years rest and wish her well.
I suspect Charles or William, at her age, would do just that. But the Queen would see retirement as an abdication of her duty and breaking the oath she made to her people.
The only circumstances I can see where she would abdicate is if she got dementia or has some other neurological condition that meant she was mentally unable to carry out her duty.
Otherwise she'll carry on, probably celebrate her 100th birthday as Queen, and ultimately die as Queen.
Every odds on shot weighing in today
It's National MP Virtue Signalling Day!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/30/francois-fillon-british-wife-quizzed-penelope-gate-fake-job/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed:+AmericanNews-LatestUsaNews+(+The+Telegraph+American+news+-+Latest+USA+news)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWwyVQ2IQuE&t=77s
Well, birthday. It would actually be her 101st year, of course.
Edit: because he is reaping what he has sown these past decade or two as court jester.
Hopefully.
"Your specialist subject?"
"Getting answers wrong"
https://twitter.com/iandunt/status/826111354385887232
lefties would buy it just to burn it
He is a shambles. It's embarrassing to watch
Yeah we never used to bother with the USA before. Be interesting to read how important people on here thought they were to us on the day Obama said we would be at the back of the queue
I'll have a look!
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/3610/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-obama-s-back-of-the-queue-response-on-a-us-trade-deal-is
Imagine if Labour had been honest at an election and said "We are going to open the borders of the UK to whoever the fuck we like, just to rub the Right's nose in diversity....."
Labour should just have the decency to STFU about who is allowed across what borders. But then, Olympic-qualifying hypocrisy is all they have offered for many a year.
@SkyNewsBreak: Poll by @SkyData suggests 49% of people would support cancelling President Trump's state visit to the UK and 38% of people would oppose it
@ShippersUnbound: To use an American phrase, Obama brought a gun to a knife fight...
Roger • Posts: 6,240 April 2016
As celebrity endorsements go they don't get much better. An expert testimony as well
TheScreamingEagles • Posts: 46,841 April 2016
What a Special Relationship.
Obama says exactly what Cameron would have wanted him to say.
Cameron must have real persuasive powers.
Jonathan • Posts: 5,144 April 2016
There are some pretty upset Leavers indulging in hot headed ad hom attacks on Obama tonight. They ought to cool it.
SeanT • Posts: 16,460 April 2016
C'*nt Obama
But REMAIN was always going to win
"So as we rediscover our confidence together – as you renew your nation just as we renew ours – we have the opportunity – indeed the responsibility – to renew the Special Relationship for this new age. We have the opportunity to lead, together, again."
In any case, the reaction is ludicrous. Perhaps people like Yvette Cooper and Ed Miliband really do think Trump has introduced a ban on Muslims. There's much fake news about, and perhaps they've fallen for it.
For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not defending Trump' policy. I'm defending his right to be an idiot, within the bounds of US and international law, since he is, for better or worse, the democratically-elected president. Comparisons with the 1930s are completely bonkers. So far he has put in place a 90-day ban on the granting of visas to citizens of a few countries. He hasn't bombed anyone, or set up an internment camp in Guantanamo Bay to which people are sent without trial, as Blair's bestest friend did.
Trump's just trolling the whole EU, isn't he?
Scott_P • Posts: 24,783 April 2016
@MrHarryCole: Here we go. Leave.EU: "Obama doesn’t have authority to deny us a deal, as he will be long gone before any such proposals are on the table."
@kyliemaclellan: Boris says government only became aware of Trump's immigration policy when it was enacted on Friday evening
https://twitter.com/garygibbonblog/status/826117295369916416
AndyJS • Posts: 17,621 April 2016
Many important British political figures have potentially insulted the next president if Trump wins, and Obama has ridiculed Brexit which is still a possible outcome of the referendum. Interesting state of affairs.