Support for the Monarchy in the UK 1: Ending Sep 2022

[Estel]

To be honest from the tone of some of the coverage you'd expect that a huge majority wanted a referendum on the Monarchy tomorrow and for each of them to beg forgiveness for everything live on TV, which definitely doesn't seem to be the case.

Clearly they will have to work on their image and the new Lord Chamberlain and others do have their work cut out, especially among the 18-24 year olds but it's not as bad as it could be, IMO.

And interesting that Harry and Meghan have actually sunk over all rather than gone up at least a bit.

I think people have already moved on. After the initial outrage, people are more collected in their opinions coz many of their statements have already been picked apart.

Also, people seem more outraged for/at Piers Morgan. ?

 

[rmay286]

Slightly shocked at the Duchess of Cornwall's poll figures ,better news for the Queen, Cambridges & Princess Royal.

I thought the change in numbers for Charles and Camilla from Jan. 2020 to now is due to The Crown. Just saw that someone else already mentioned this.

And as someone said, no they are not the only people ever to cheat on their partners, but many people believe Charles was carrying on a relationship with Camilla right through his courtship with Diana, and that I think is the sticking point for many people.

 

[Mbruno]

One never knows. Like in any monarchy it is a pure guess as no one has actually ever had any say in their country being a monarchy.

The British I know, working and living in the Netherlands, were not too complimentous about their royal family, even wondeting about the way King's Day is celebrated over here. But maybe the well-educated British expats working in my region are not reptesentative for the general British mood at home.

Being a monarchist doesn't necessarily mean being a royalist (or a royal family fan), especially in bigger countries like the UK. In the specific case about the way King's Day is celebrated in the Netherlands (more like a Carnival than a royal celebration properly), I think it is simply not very compatible with upper class British culture, which is more circumspect.



I also don't think there is a clear correlation between educational attainment and support for the monarchy. There are highly educated Britons (Nobel prize winners, university Fellows, etc.) who are monarchists and, vice-versa, there is also a smaller number of highly educated people in the UK who are republicans.



Perhaps it has to do more with political leaning than education, i.e. Conservative voters being generally more pro-monarchy and left-wing Labour voters or nationalists being more pro-republic. Generally speaking, however, a sizeable percentage of the population is just neutral or doesn't have an opinion on the question of monarchy vs republic (less so in the UK than in other Commonwealth realm like Canada).

lso here the Netherlands I seldom see people speaking with approval about the monarchy. No one is simply asked. We assume it is "popular" in the UK, in Sweden, in Belgium, etc. but no one has ever been asked. They simply live in a monarchy and that has always been the status quo. It has never been tested by asking all the milions in the secrecy of the ballot box

I don't know about Belgium or the Netherlands, but in Sweden, Spain and the UK , there are regular national polls that measure support for and opinions about the monarchy and the Royal Family. Those are scientific polls taken with random samples that give a pretty accurate point estimate of approval rate for example within the poll's margin of error and confidence intervals.



We don't need millions of people to cast a vote in the secrecy of the ballot box to measure support for the monarchy or the republic, or for that matter to measure the approval rate of a president or say which party is most likely to win the next election and by what margin. That is what polling is designed to do.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Being a monarchist doesn't necessarily mean being a royalist (or a royal family fan), especially in bigger countries like the UK. In the specific case about the way King's Day is celebrated in the Netherlands (more like a Carnival than a royal celebration properly), I think it is simply not very compatible with upper class British culture, which is more circumspect.



I also don't think there is a clear correlation between educational attainment and support for the monarchy. There are highly educated Britons (Nobel prize winners, university Fellows, etc.) who are monarchists and, vice-versa, there is also a smaller number of highly educated people in the UK who are republicans.



Perhaps it has to do more with political leaning than education, i.e. Conservative voters being generally more pro-monarchy and left-wing Labour voters or nationalists being more pro-republic. Generally speaking, however, a sizeable percentage of the population is just neutral or doesn't have an opinion on the question of monarchy vs republic (less so in the UK than in other Commonwealth realm like Canada).


I don't know about Belgium or the Netherlands, but in Sweden, Spain and the UK , there are regular national polls that measure support for and opinions about the monarchy and the Royal Family. Those are scientific polls taken with random samples that give a pretty accurate point estimate of approval rate for example within the poll's margin of error and confidence intervals.



We don't need millions of people to cast a vote in the secrecy of the ballot box to measure support for the monarchy or the republic, or for that matter to measure the approval rate of a president or say which party is most likely to win the next election and by what margin. That is what polling is designed to do.

People give "socially desireable" opinions. I would be interested to know how many millions, from old to young, from urban to suburban, from low-educated to high-educated, etc. really think about the current situation where the head of state is delivered by birthright.

In most of today's monarchies, people have never ever been asked. The evolution of state made a specific family reaching that position. Where there were referendums, monarchies did not survive except for one referendum in Belgium where the monarchy was saved by the Dutch-speaking majority.

And where the monarchy has been abolished: Austria, Italy, Portugal, Greece etc. there is no any chance to have it restored, which brings the question: how really deep-rooted was "the love of the people" ? Even in centuries old monarchies like Austria and Portugal.

I assume the polling agencies will have some clue. 60-40 pro contra? Okay, be my guest. I assume the methods will be right. But it remains an assumption on base of 1300 respondents or so.

In the British situation it certainly helps in the enquêtes that they have an iconic Queen serving for such an unvelievable long time.

 

[Blog Real]

One never knows. Like in any monarchy it is a pure guess as no one has actually ever had any say in their country being a monarchy.

The British I know, working and living in the Netherlands, were not too complimentous about their royal family. But maybe the well-educated British expats working in my region are not representative for the general British mood at home.

Also here the Netherlands I seldom see people speaking with approval about the monarchy. No one is simply asked. We assume it is "popular" in the UK, in Sweden, in Belgium, etc. but no one has ever been asked. They simply live in a monarchy and that has always been the status quo. It has never been tested by asking all the milions in the secrecy of the ballot box.

Here in Portugal, no one republic or if they preferred the monarchy. There was never a referendum. And I think this applies to most countries, whether they are republics or monarchies.

 

[An Ard Ri]

It looks like Charles support with younger Britons dropped. Those people probably have more sympathy for Meghan and Harry's complaints about being cut off financially.

The Prince will have to work very hard to turn this approval slump around.

 

[QueenMathilde]

It depends on which survey you read. The DM has one that naturally says M&H popularity is way down.
Meghan an Harry really did damage the royal family. So much for their nice campaign.

 

[tommy100]

The poll shows the monarchy hasn't seem a huge nosedive in support since the interview and clearly over time the RF will likely be able to pull that back, especially with a Jubilee next year. If there isn't a huge shift in opinion in the immediate aftermath I can't see it having a lasting affect. Ironic that Camilla's numbers by age group are the exact opposite of Charles' - the Crown effect may be?

 

[Hallo girl]

It looks like Charles support with younger Britons dropped. Those people probably have more sympathy for Meghan and Harry's complaints about being cut off financially.

I need to disagree on the point re people having sympathy for them being cut off financially.

We have been in lockdown of one form or other for 1 year, people have lost their jobs, some are being furloughed ( paid a percentage of their income by the government to stay home ) to try and save jobs. Major businesses have went to the wall and you really think the young people of the UK are upset for Meghan the independent millionaire actress and her multi millionaire prince because bank of Dad closed.
They should have choked on their words for even complaining, I believe Meghan knows what it is to work hard to earn money and become independent but not Harry. The money Charles gave them was to support them here to help them to do royal duties, they walked away from that.

 

[tommy100]

Harry & Meghan have been publicly a couple since 2017 so anyone up to the age of 22 (All but two of the ages in the "young age group") doesn't know the RF pre-Meghan and Harry sagas and that is important to bear in mind IMO.

 

[Somebody]

Harry & Meghan have been publicly a couple since 2017 so anyone up to the age of 22 (All but two of the ages in the "young age group") doesn't know the RF pre-Meghan and Harry sagas and that is important to bear in mind IMO.

??? You think they didn't exist or had any knowledge until they were 18? Lots of teenagers do know about the royal family prior to reaching the age of majority...

 

[tommy100]

Yes, obviously I think people land on this planet age 18.

My point was about more than black and white numbers but about the fact those in the youngest age groups won't have had all that much exposure to the RF before the Sussexes - of course they will have know about them but really how many 15/16 year olds read the newspapers or are all that interested in the RF? Yes I'm sure there are lots of royal supporting teenagers out there but I don't believe there are in the majority. I believe they are likely influenced by the fact H&M have been very "loud" in their time in the RF, those in the older age groups surveyed have had more experience of the RF beyond H&M and are perhaps comparing them to what they see as the "norm" for royals.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

To balance those who claim that polls are reliable and scientific et al: why then organize elections where millions have to cast a vote? Spare this logistic operation: just hire an enquête service bureau and with contacting some 1.536 "representative" respondents they can extrapolate a "reliable" outcome for the country.

Of course no one would ever accept this. That is what I mean with claims as "the monarchy is popular". I dunno. No one has ever been asked in a nationwide operation. In no any monarchy that is. People were born in 1963. Elizabeth was Queen. And now in 2021 Elizabeth is still Queen. Will be okay, probably, but no one has ever asked them to have Elizabeth in the first place. It is the status quo.

Look at Austria which had a gigantic empire. When it crumbled in 1918, no one shed a tear and no any chance for a return to a system Austria had for centuries. That brings the question: how deep rooted is a desire for a monarchy? Is it just "tolerated" or is the love deep, genuine and widespread? We will see under Charles & Camilla, under William & Kate.

 

[AC21091968]

After looking at the graph of Harry & Meghan's popularity (from 2018 onwards), it seems that this is the sharpest decrease in their favourability yet. It just confirms how significant and detrimental the Oprah's interview was on public opinions of the Sussexes. Yes, their popularity has been dropping ever since 2018 (except some increase in early 2020 and 2021), but this decrease is the greatest yet. And most importantly, their popularities are at the lowest level.

 

[tommy100]

I’m sure the RF will take some comfort from this poll (except maybe Charles)

 

[An Ard Ri]

I’m sure the RF will take some comfort from this poll (except maybe Charles)

Most defiantly not the Prince of Wales.

 

[Heavs]

This isn't really so much support of the monarchy in the UK as popularity of it's members in the US but it's interesting none the less in light of everything.

https://www.newsweek.com/queen-eliz...y-meghan-markle-after-oprah-interview-1577010

 

[Curryong]

https://globalnews.ca/news/7704854/royal-family-canada-queen-meghan-markle-role/

And, on another tangent the slide towards a new look at the Crown in Canada, first noticed in these polls about five years ago, appears to be continuing. As with here in Australia and other realms there may well be a reappraisal after the Queen is no longer with us.

 

[Heavs]

https://globalnews.ca/news/7704854/royal-family-canada-queen-meghan-markle-role/

And, on another tangent the slide towards a new look at the Crown in Canada, first noticed in these polls about five years ago, appears to be continuing. As with here in Australia and other realms there may well be a reappraisal after the Queen is no longer with us.

It was always going to happen after the Queen died. Even if Harry and Meghan had stayed with the BRF and been extremely happy there it wouldn't have changed the trend towards republicanism and the idea that everyone's going to reassess after the Queen dies.

 

[Curryong]

It was always going to happen after the Queen died. Even if Harry and Meghan had stayed with the BRF and been extremely happy there it wouldn't have changed the trend towards republicanism and the idea that everyone's going to reassess after the Queen dies.

I know that. I noted in my post that the slide began five years ago in 2016, probably before Harry and Meghan had even started dating. In spite of certain news organisations trying to link Harry and Meghan’s remarks to attempting to bring the monarchy down the interview had nothing to do with the Crown and the Realms. IMO there will almost certainly be future breaking away of the realms from the Crown and there will be nothing that Charles and Camilla or William and Kate can do about it. (Or that Harry can or could do, in spite of charming the Jamaican PM.)

By George’s reign I predict none of the larger realms will be around though there will still be a Commonwealth. I doubt that William will be Ceremonial Head however.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

https://globalnews.ca/news/7704854/royal-family-canada-queen-meghan-markle-role/

And, on another tangent the slide towards a new look at the Crown in Canada, first noticed in these polls about five years ago, appears to be continuing. As with here in Australia and other realms there may well be a reappraisal after the Queen is no longer with us.

I'm not surprised. The younger generations, I.e. those born around 1980 to present don' thave a great affection for the BRF, with exception to the Queen. An example is the reaction when Tony Abbott awarded Prince Phillip the Order of Australia. That ultimately led to his demise.

There are enough polls that once the Queen dies, a new referendum will take place. And this is seen across the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is a dying concept, and the dramas that have occurred in the BRF over the past 4 decades are a contributing factor, but not the main one. Canada, Australia and other Commonwealth nations have a strong identity of their own and the future is one without being part of the British Empire

 

[yukari]

PRINCE WILLIAM AND DAVID ATTENBOROUGH MOST POPULAR CHOICES FOR HEAD OF STATE IF MONARCHY ABOLISHED, POLL FINDS

(...)

The poll, carried out by YouGov for The Times’ Red Box political newsletter, asked respondents who they would choose as an elected head of state instead of the Queen.

The question in the survey read: “If you could pick anyone currently living to be Britain’s elected head of state, who would it be?”

Of the 1,680 people who responded to the survey, 12 per cent voted for Prince William, followed by David Attenborough with 9 per cent and the Queen with 7 per cent.

(...)

 

[Eskimo]

I'm not surprised. The younger generations, I.e. those born around 1980 to present don' thave a great affection for the BRF, with exception to the Queen. An example is the reaction when Tony Abbott awarded Prince Phillip the Order of Australia. That ultimately led to his demise.

There are enough polls that once the Queen dies, a new referendum will take place. And this is seen across the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth is a dying concept, and the dramas that have occurred in the BRF over the past 4 decades are a contributing factor, but not the main one. Canada, Australia and other Commonwealth nations have a strong identity of their own and the future is one without being part of the British Empire

One has to be seriously naive to think the the commonwealth exists so that it’s members can fawn over the BRF. The Commonwealth is an organization that allows nations with a shared past to cooperate with each in mutually beneficial ways. None of them give a rats a## about the scandals in the BRF

 

[Curryong]

Both CrownPrincessJava and myself are Australians and as such also Commonwealth citizens, so we do know something of the Commonwealth.

Personally I can see the Commonwealth continuing during Charles’s reign as King in the UK. However, speaking for myself, I do believe that the reputation of sovereigns do matter in the realms. The Queen is a testament to that, to the extent that a former leader of the republican movement here stated that perhaps the question could be put on the back burner until after ElizabethII’s death.


As far as Charles’s popularity here is concerned, I lived between Australia and Britain in the days of the War of the Wales’s and can testify to the fact that Diana was extremely popular in both countries.

Among my friends and acquaintances in Australia the mood was anti Charles in those years, especially at the time of Diana’s death and afterwards. Those years did impact on Charles’s popularity here, as it did in Britain, and his popularity has not really recovered much since. I’ve heard several republicans here say in debates on the issue ‘Do we want a King Charles?’ and almost invariably the answer is ‘No!’ I think that you underestimate how much news on the BRF we get here and in most countries in the Commonwealth.

After the Queen’s death I believe that several of the realms, including Australia and NZ will become republics within a few years, whether Charles is Ceremonial Head of the Commonwealth or not, and however he feels about it.

 

[AC21091968]

Both CrownPrincessJava and myself are Australians and as such also Commonwealth citizens, so we do know something of the Commonwealth. Personally I can see the Commonwealth continuing.

However, speaking for myself, I lived between Australia and Britain in the days of the War of the Wales’s and can testify to the fact that Diana was extremely popular in both places.

Among my friends and acquaintances in Australia the mood was anti Charles in those years, especially at the time of Diana’s death and afterwards. Those years did impact on Charles’s popularity here, as it did in Britain, and his popularity has not really recovered since. I’ve heard several republicans here say in debates on the issue ‘Do we want a King Charles?’ and almost invariably the answer is ‘No!’

After the Queen’s death I believe that several of the realms, including Australia and NZ will become republics within a few years, whether Charles is Ceremonial Head of the Commonwealth or not, and however he feels about it.

Without going off-topic, as an Australian, I agree with you on that the support of the monarchy all comes to down Charles. He is not popular not just because the War of the Wales, but also his involvement in politics, including climate change. Even right-wing monarchists in Australia (e.g. some commentators on Sky News Australia) are not exactly fans of Charles and are mostly anxious on Charles III.

I wished he stayed quite on many controversial topics for the sake of the future of the monarchy not just in the UK, but other Commonwealth countries. For example, the Great Reset. Judging by the like/dislike radio of a video on the Royal Family channel, Charles involvement has gone down like a lead balloon.

Here is an Australian economist Youtuber explaining The Great Reset and it's controversial

 

[Curryong]

Yes, Charles has long been regarded as a meddler and an eccentric in Britain, and is more or less ignored most of the time in Australia. I don’t think the Great Reset was much help to him.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

Both CrownPrincessJava and myself are Australians and as such also Commonwealth citizens, so we do know something of the Commonwealth.

Personally I can see the Commonwealth continuing during Charles’s reign as King in the UK. However, speaking for myself, I do believe that the reputation of sovereigns do matter in the realms. The Queen is a testament to that, to the extent that a former leader of the republican movement here stated that perhaps the question could be put on the back burner until after ElizabethII’s death.


As far as Charles’s popularity here is concerned, I lived between Australia and Britain in the days of the War of the Wales’s and can testify to the fact that Diana was extremely popular in both countries.

Among my friends and acquaintances in Australia the mood was anti Charles in those years, especially at the time of Diana’s death and afterwards. Those years did impact on Charles’s popularity here, as it did in Britain, and his popularity has not really recovered much since. I’ve heard several republicans here say in debates on the issue ‘Do we want a King Charles?’ and almost invariably the answer is ‘No!’ I think that you underestimate how much news on the BRF we get here and in most countries in the Commonwealth.

After the Queen’s death I believe that several of the realms, including Australia and NZ will become republics within a few years, whether Charles is Ceremonial Head of the Commonwealth or not, and however he feels about it.

100% agree. And now the Republicans use the prospects of King Charles and his consort Queen Camilla as to why we should become a Republic when QEII dies.

 

[CrownPrincessJava]

One has to be seriously naive to think the the commonwealth exists so that it’s members can fawn over the BRF. The Commonwealth is an organization that allows nations with a shared past to cooperate with each in mutually beneficial ways. None of them give a rats a## about the scandals in the BRF

Perhaps you should have read all of the text you had in bold. I said it's NOT THE MAIN factor, but you can bet that the events of Diana's death, the poor way the Queen handled it, cost of Royal visits, Charles marrying Camilla, Harry and Meghan and the major one - Prince Andrew and his friendship with Eppstein, have damaged the BRF, thus Australians questioning our head of state and membership in the Commonwealth.

It has been discussed why we should be part of the Commonwealth of Nations since our biggest ally is the US, and agreements to cooperate etc are done through other means. An example - only 14 of 40 Australian Universities are part of the Association of Commonwealth Universities. Less than half. Why? Because the Commonwealth is not a high priority. TV channels are becoming less interested in showing the Commonwealth Games because of lack of viewership, the appetite to hold the Commonwealth Games is not there.

As I am born, raised and living in a Commonwealth country, I know exactly what the sentiments are. I am certainly not naïve

 

[Iluvbertie]

I live in a very multi-cultural part of Sydney (like the highest rate of multiculturalism in the country according to the PR put out by the local council). What I do find is that there is a lot of interest in the Commonwealth and the monarchy here as it seems to guarantee them rights that they left their homelands to get. A republic to many of them equals the very real chance for religious persecution to become part of their lives again.

The young people I teach have always been interested in the royal family although they do wish there were some 'young royals' as George is 'too young' and Harry is 'too old' for them to relate to. Many of them have parents younger than Harry and I am talking about kids in their mid-teens.

 

[AC21091968]

Sir Keir Starmer was asked in an interview with The Sunday Times on the British Monarchy. Sir Keir stated that he is a Monarchist and was never going down the Republican move.

A 2005 video clip recently emerged of Starmer saying he “often used to propose the abolition of the monarchy”, but he says now: “I am a monarchist. I do believe in the Queen. I believe in the royal family.” When, then, did he change his position? “I’ve never gone down the republican route.” Regarding the clip, he insists: “I was making a joke. It was a throwaway remark.” Frankly, I’d be surprised if the 16-year-old socialist who joined the Labour Party was the monarchist he is today.

Keir Starmer: ‘I’m not like Boris Johnson. There’s almost nothing we have in common’
Has the Labour leader really got what it takes to be prime minister? He tells Decca Aitkenhead about his challenging first year and why he’s trailing behind in the polls
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...3?shareToken=f40dff380632a795ee6341b7373fa5a3

For some reason, I was able to access the full article and kept a copy. If you are interested, please PM me.