Frequently Asked Questions

There are many ways you can help the campaign, see the Action Page for more details. The quickest and easiest way is to become a member. Visit the Join page for details. By becoming an official supporter of Republic you help us show the strength of feeling in this country, and help us fund a better campaign.

If you don't want to join you can still help us financially by making a donation.

You can also get actively involved by starting or joining a Republic Facebook group, which are aimed at establishing active campaigning groups. Or you could get involved nationally by offering you experience, skills or enthusiasm to the national committee. Call Graham Smith on 07747 608770 or email contact@republic.org.uk for details.

YES. Anyone who shares our aims and objectives is allowed to join Republic. You can join online or by sending us a form. Visit the Join page for details.

No. Patriotism is a devotion to ones own country and concern for its defence. Republic supporters are standing up and saying they want the best and most democratic system for their country. We want a system that gives power to the people. You can't get much more patriotic than that.

Not anymore. Amazingly a law has survived into the 21st century that actually prohibits publicly calling for the abolition of the monarchy. However, in June 2003 the Law Lords declared that, although the law remained on the statute books, it was incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998. As reported in the Guardian, "the Human Rights Act required the 1848 act to be read in such a way that advocacy of republicanism was not a criminal offence." (Clare Dyer, The Guardian, June 27 2003.)

Republic is not a party seeking political office. Instead we seek to influence those who do stand for, and win elections. For an issue such as this we need to gain widespread and cross-party support. We will only get a referendum when the Prime Minister agrees to one, and that won't happen if we're opposing the PM's party.

It is also the case that Republic draws its support from across the political spectrum, particularly from those who already support existing parties. So standing in elections ourselves would undermine our broader appeal, and for little gain.

No, Republic has no opinion on the status of the various parts of the country. We are campaigning for a republic as an alternative to the monarchy. If the country remains in one piece then we would want it to be one republic. If parts such as Northern Ireland or Scotland leave the union in the future then we would still want a republic for what is left. Republic does not advocate changing the status of any constituent part of the UK.

Republic has no opinion on the EU or the euro. We are advocating a republic as an alternative to the monarchy in this country. The question of our relationship with Europe is quite separate and is one for the people to decide over the coming years.

No. Republic represents support for a democratic head of state from across the political spectrum. While the issue has historically been popular with the left it is not confined to them. We know that as well as having many members who are not affiliated to any party, we also have many members who support Labour, the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Respect, the Green Party and UKIP. We also have members from all social and religious backgrounds. As Republic has no view on economic and social matters, other than those that relate to the monarchy and the operation of our democracy, we cannot be classed as left wing or right wing. We are a non-party political organisation.

Not at all. Have Republican forms of government made France, Germany, Italy or America into anarchies, or destroyed their traditions and freedoms? Anarchy (the absence of any authority at all) and Monarchy (the belief that one single family has the exclusive right to authority) each seem as daft as the other to us.

At the risk of confusing our American readers, British republicans are simply democrats: we are perfectly ordinary, middle of the road citizens who believe that everyone in our society should have an equal voice in electing the Head of State; just as we expect that right in electing our Government, or our local council. Some fortunate countries seem able to to manage this already: why should it somehow 'not work' here too?

Of course there are. This does not mean that this is not an important issue. The question of a republic goes to the heart of who we are as a nation, and what sort of democracy we want. Monarchy determines how power is exercised in this country, and who holds onto it. In recent times the idea of more democracy and more control over our politicians has become an increasingly important one. The proposal of a republic is right at the heart of that debate.

There is no evidence for that. Tourism income may even increase in the absence of a monarchy. Revenue from royal residences such as Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle currently make up less than 1% of Britain's total tourism income. That income is concentrated almost exclusively in London. There is no benefit for Scotland, Wales or regional England.

Britain is quite capable of bringing in tourists without the help of the royal family - just compare visitor figures for Windsor Castle and Windsor Legoland. In 2005 Legoland attracted almost 1.4 million tourists, Windsor Castle was visited by a little over 900,000. Buckingham Palace saw 110,000 pass through its over-priced doors.

Of course, if the monarchy were gone we would be able to have more tourists visiting Buckingham Palace, as they would be allowed full access to the site all year round.

France has been a republic for over 130 years and now attracts three times as many foreign tourists as Britain. The Palace of Versailles far outstrips Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace combined as the biggest tourist attraction in Europe.

It is insulting to Britain to suggest we need one family to attract tourists. We're better than that.

Like most details of a future republic, matters such as these would be for Parliament to decide at the time.

But by the time we reach the stage of legislation to provide for an elected Head of State and the abolition of the monarchy, Republic envisages that a wide-ranging constitutional conference will have covered matters like the future status of members of the former royal family in some detail. We would expect them to become citizens like everybody else; and we would expect assets that were deemed by a legally established Parliamentary Commission to be state assets (as opposed to private property) to revert on trust to the nation.

Republic's constitution commits us to campaigning only in lawful and peaceful ways; and we see that as extending to the treatment of the ex-royals too. If the transition to a republic were to uncover malpractice by any of them, then they should be as subject to the due process of law as any other citizen; but unless that were the case, our view is that what became of them after the transition would be entirely up to them, as free citizens at last, to decide for themselves.

That's for the people to decide. If you don't want them, don't vote for them. Do you think the British people would elect these former Prime Ministers to the post of president? It's unlikely, and because it's unlikely it's also unlikely that Blair or Thatcher would stand. They have held the nation's most powerful office, why would they risk their reputations on seeking to win an office that would most likely be ceremonial.

If they were elected then that would be the people's choice. That's democracy. So the question really misses the point. We're not campaigning for a particular president, we are campaigning for the right of the people to decide.

Is your question not answered here? Send it to us and we'll do our best to answer it for you. Simply send an email to: faqs@republic.org.uk