The royal family has always kept silent about the rumors regarding the monarchy and focuses on its mission and goals to serve its people with the maximum approach.
However, the latest questions about the existence of the Firm may have raised eyebrows among those concerned.
Presenter David Dimbleby left Brits in deep thought with his blunt questions about the role of the monarchy in the modern era.
He discussed the role and power of the sovereign in the new BBC series What is the monarchy for?
The royal family has always tried to approach things through gestures instead of engaging directly in debate, but the questions seem too difficult to answer with words.
The Cabinet is often debated for its primary purpose of existing. However, the pople believe that the monarchy symbolizes national identity and unity. It promotes cultural heritage and tradition.
The royal family also supports charitable and public commitments and promotes tourism and economic benefits.
They are also called nation-unifying figureheads and play a ceremonial role in governance as a symbol of continuity and stability.
THE Question time The host has spent much of his career commenting on the royal family, but over the past two years he has devoted his time to making this three-part documentary focused on the monarchy.
He even asked, “What role is there for our unelected head of state?”
The monarch’s loyalists might also evade the question because they want them to continue with the same mindset.
However, Queen Elizabeth II herself said: “No institution should expect to be free from the scrutiny of those who give it loyalty and support, let alone those who do not.” »
Dimbleby asks what the monarch’s real tangible power is in relation to government and explores cases, such as when Charles’s private letters to government ministers and Prime Minister Tony Blair were made public, to prove whether, in fact, the then Prince of Wales was lobbying politicians.
Dimbleby makes a point: “Charles may not have been able to influence government policy, but he was determined to do so if he could.”
The presenter added that it would be naive to think that the Prime Minister’s weekly audiences with the monarch would have no effect or influence on government policy.
