Well, it’s
over, thank goodness. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, an American actress, were
married in Windsor today, so maybe we can get back to real news stories in the
mainstream media. The BBC goes into its hushed tone, that it dusts off for every
Royal news story and tries to make it seem as though everyone in the country is
held rapt by the event.
This week, every
conceivable angle to the story has been reported. London’s Evening Standard has
run multi-page stories devoted to stories about the couple, everything from
Harry’s army career, how they met and a look through the bride to be’s wardrobe
of outfits and tastes in home furnishings. One piece called the marriage, ‘a
modern day fairy tale'. Everything you could possibly want to know about the
event and its surrounding trivia. Yawn!
The media has
been quick to claim that the wedding, will bring tourists flooding into the
country, with all their spending in support of the British economy that it will
bring. But the truth is, that royal weddings tend to lead to less tourists
coming to London in comparable times of the year, as foreign tourists stay away
from the weekend in question. The same was true of the London 2012 Olympics
when tourism in London fell.
This does
demonstrate the sensitivity of the establishment and media though, to charges
of wasting public money, especially when austerity is being forced onto the
country for an eighth year now. It has been reported that the couple will pay
for the private part of their wedding themselves, but I doubt this would be the
full costs, things like policing and so forth. Not to mention that Harry’s
money is from the civil list anyway, paid to the royals by us taxpayers. The official
costs will not be released, but estimates put it at around
£32 million.
Perhaps the
most ridiculous claim this week came from international trade secretary, Liam
Fox, who said that the marriage will be good for a future US/UK trade deal. I
doubt it will make the slightest difference to trade deals, but you have to admire
the chutzpah though.
Rough
sleepers have been cleared off the streets of Windsor, being temporarily housed on
hired buses, but will be back on the streets again tomorrow. The intention was
not an act of kindness to the homeless, merely a desire to remove the eyesore
of these people spoiling the view. These two very different worlds cannot be
allowed to be shown at the same time.
The media
always manage to find members of the public who are excited by these events,
but I think the number of British people interested in the royals generally has
probably fallen over my lifetime. Around where I live in London this week,
there has hardly been any bunting or union flags being displayed in the area. A
big contrast to Charles and Diana’s wedding in 1981, which was very visible
with street parties and much flag waving. The population of London has changed
a lot since 1981 though, with many more Londoners having been born outside of
the UK, but even amongst the UK born, I sense a growing ambivalence to the
monarchy.
So, is there
hope for lifelong republicans like me, that we will see the end of all this
nonsense in the near future? I have to say, I doubt it. There may be a window
of opportunity when the current queen passes on, as I think the British people
think on the whole she has done a good job, but for the rest of the royals, I
suspect that is not the case.
But generally
the British seem to think a constitutional monarchy is the lesser evil of an
elected presidency, another politician, almost certainly. I could go along with
a much reduced civil list and more public use of the royal land and property
portfolio. And make their weddings private affairs, but a republic, is probably
not likely anytime soon unfortunately.
No comments:
Post a Comment