The BRF is being modernized A LOT

[Miss Waynfleet]

If Beatrice marries now Dave, do you think she will keep her title or be Mrs. Clark?

She would be HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs. David Clark. As far as I know.

Only the Queen can take her title away through letters patent (she hasn't deprived either James or Louise of that style in my opinion) and I really don't see the Queen doing that to her granddaughter.

Will the Queen give Dave an Earldom? Lets look at the recent history  

Princess Margaret marries Anthony Armstong-Jones - he accepts the Earldom of Snowdon.
Princess Alexandra marries the Hon. Angus Ogilvy - he declines an Earldom.
Princess Anne marries Captain Mark Philips - he declines an Earldom.

We have to look back to Princess Margaret to see a man marrying into the royal family and accepting a peerage - so nowadays it's a fairly archaic practice - but we know how Andrew loves the baubles of royalty.

By the way, can I point out that in my opinion the title of this thread is a complete misnomer - the BRF aren't really modernising at all.

 
Dave is American I believe. Unless he is like the Miller sisters, I don´t think he would take a title.  

[editorathome]

By the way, can I point out that in my opinion the title of this thread is a complete misnomer - the BRF aren't really modernising at all.

Indeed, Tatty. But keep in mind the person who created the thread...

Oh sorry, I didn't even pay attention to that 

Thanks E@H 

[tatty]

In a certain way I think the fact that he's American might make it more tempting for him to accept.

Most things in life have a price, but you cannot buy a British hereditary peerage - new peerages are now almost as rare as a dodo  

 

[My13]

She would be HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs. David Clark. As far as I know.

Only the Queen can take her title away through letters patent (she hasn't deprived either James or Louise of that style in my opinion) and I really don't see the Queen doing that to her granddaughter.

I hope QEII won't force her to be styled "Mrs. Husband's Name"

[Kuei Fei]

If there are going to be less members with HRH, there shouldn't be any duties expected of them.

[TLLK]

If Beatrice marries now Dave, do you think she will keep her title or be Mrs. Clark?

She would be HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs. David Clark. As far as I know.

Only the Queen can take her title away through letters patent (she hasn't deprived either James or Louise of that style in my opinion) and I really don't see the Queen doing that to her granddaughter.

Will the Queen give Dave an Earldom? Lets look at the recent history  

Princess Margaret marries Anthony Armstong-Jones - he accepts the Earldom of Snowdon.
Princess Alexandra marries the Hon. Angus Ogilvy - he declines an Earldom.
Princess Anne marries Captain Mark Philips - he declines an Earldom.

We have to look back to Princess Margaret to see a man marrying into the royal family and accepting a peerage - so nowadays it's a fairly archaic practice - but we know how Andrew loves the baubles of royalty.

By the way, can I point out that in my opinion the title of this thread is a complete misnomer - the BRF aren't really modernising at all.

I doubt that Dave would take a title. I agree with tatty that the title issue isn't proof of any modernization of the BRF. If Charles chooses to alter the Letters Patent and limit the HRH/Prince/Princess titles then I believe it will be for a future generation. He'll ensure that Harry's children have the titles as the grandchildren of a monarch but the practice will stop with William's grandchildren.

[CPKas]

If Beatrice marries now Dave, do you think she will keep her title or be Mrs. Clark?

She would be HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs. David Clark. As far as I know.

Only the Queen can take her title away through letters patent (she hasn't deprived either James or Louise of that style in my opinion) and I really don't see the Queen doing that to her granddaughter.

Will the Queen give Dave an Earldom? Lets look at the recent history  

Princess Margaret marries Anthony Armstong-Jones - he accepts the Earldom of Snowdon.
Princess Alexandra marries the Hon. Angus Ogilvy - he declines an Earldom.
Princess Anne marries Captain Mark Philips - he declines an Earldom.

We have to look back to Princess Margaret to see a man marrying into the royal family and accepting a peerage - so nowadays it's a fairly archaic practice - but we know how Andrew loves the baubles of royalty.

By the way, can I point out that in my opinion the title of this thread is a complete misnomer - the BRF aren't really modernising at all.

 
Dave is American I believe. Unless he is like the Miller sisters, I don´t think he would take a title.  

He has dual British-US nationality.

[Jonathan]

I might be wrong but haven't we already discussed this.

Has anyone thought of a kiddies section for royal dish.

 

[Jonathan]

Also Princess Margaret was the daughter of a King-Emperor so it would have been natural for her husband to take a title. plus at the time of her wedding she was 3rd in line to the throne

[Crawler]

I think the Monarchy will eventually end but only when people realize that they really have no purpose. There is also the monies involved in supporting them that could be used in better ways.

[Jonathan]

I don't think the monarchy will end. People like moaning about them to much but at crunch time they are always defended.

I'd rather have a King or Queen than Dictator Thatcher, Blair, Brown...............

[just a serf]

I'd rather have a King or Queen than Dictator Thatcher, Blair, Brown...............

A dictatorship isn't the only alternative to a constitutional monarchy.

[luvcharles]

I think the Monarchy will eventually end but only when people realize that they really have no purpose. There is also the monies involved in supporting them that could be used in better ways.

Like supporting Presidents and their families and ex-presidents etc, maintining the royal palaces that belong to the people properly (rather than half-heartedly as now because the royal families live there), hosting State Visits (this is one of the things currently paid for by the BRF from the money they get from the state), paying for the president to represent the people abroad - I could go on but there wouldn't be all that much saving between a royal family and having politicians do the same jobs.

[Crawler]

Presidents get a salary for doing the job of running a country. Their families are supported off of that salary.
The Palaces could pay for their own maintenance by opening them up to the public and there would also be tourists money.
Presidents do take trips abroad but it is to meet other world leaders and not so they can have a taxpayer funded holiday by calling it a royal tour.
The people pay astronomical amounts of money for the royals to essentially cut ribbons and unveil plaques IMV.

[luvcharles]

Currently The Queen doesn't get a salary for doing the job of Head of State.  The money that is paid to her will still have to be paid to carry out the duties of Head of State as that money is to pay for State Visits, to pay for the official staff - who will still need to be employed by a President to do the same jobs, to pay for some of the maintenance of state owned properties, to pay the expenses associated with the state occasions such as Trooping the Colour and State Opening of Parliament.

Take the Private Secretaries of The Queen - currently they are paid from the money she receives from the government but if they country were to become a republic people in those positions would still need to be paid - from government money - no saving there.

A President will still need a home to live - presumably BP and Windsor would still be the homes of the President or would new homes have to be built or bought and then maintained - again no saving there - as either the current homes would continue to be lived in (as I would expect) or if opened, in the case of BP, more often that money would be needed to bring the backlog of maintenance up to date first and then would presumably be used to maintain the newly acquired homes for the President.  Windsor and KP are already opened to the public year round so there is no more money to be made from them anyway - even if more rooms were opened up.

The 'royal tours' aren't holidays but are visits made at the invitation of the country being visited and they do meet the Heads of State and Heads of Government on those tours and discuss matters of interest between their two nations.

A holiday to me is where I go and do only what I want to do not where I go somewhere and have to meet people, go to formal dinners, open buildings, watch shows I don't want to do etc.  That isn't a holiday but work.

Other than The Queen and Duke of Edinburgh none of the rest of the family are paid by the government - The Queen reimburses the government for the moneys that previous legislation allowed to be paid to some members of the family e.g. there was legislation that allowed for moneys to be paid to Andrew but since 1991 The Queen has personally paid that back to the government from her private wealth.  Yes she took a long time to agree to pay tax (because her father had negotiated a deal with the Baldwin government to be exempt from tax after the abdication crisis as prior to George VI the monarchs did pay tax on their private income and Charles always paid tax on his private wealth).

When you look at the costs of a monarchy and the costs of a Presidency they are comparable.  Costs aren't a reason to remove the monarchy.