Registered: Mar 2004
Local time: 06:00 AM
Location: The Historic City of Portsmouth, England
As a Royalist I would defend Englands right to have a monachy with every fibre of my being. But to answer your enquiry the ruling monarch does have some political power.
Should all of the Members of Parliment be killed in some sort of attack during a majory political conference in the Houses of Parliment the it would fall to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth to rule until a new Parliment could be elected.
Her most britanic majesty is head of the Commonwealth, which consists of 15 countries, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu and of course the United Kingdom. This alone makes her the most Powerful monarch in the world and shows that part of the British Empire still exists.
While Queen Elizabeth is Head of State and theoretically holds all executive power, it is the Prime Minister who is the head of government. In the United Kingdom the Queen has extensive theoretical powers, her role is mainly, though not exclusively, ceremonial. The Queen is an integral part of Parliament (as the "Crown-in-Parliament") and theoretically gives Parliament the power to meet and create legislation. An Act of Parliament does not become law until it has been signed by the Queen (known as Royal Assent), although no monarch has refused assent to a bill that has been approved by Parliament since Queen Anne in 1708.
Although the abolition of the monarchy has been suggested several times, the popularity of the monarchy remains strong. Support for a British republic usually fluctuates between 15% and 25% of the population, with roughly 10% undecided or indifferent.
For me it is the Monarchy that seperates Britain from America. If we didn't have a King or Queen then we would just be another republic and there isn't really anything special about a republic. (No offence intended to America.)