BBC BLOGS - Have Your Say
« Previous | Main | Next »

What did you think of the Queen's speech?

08:56 UK time, Tuesday, 25 May 2010

Major plans to reform schools, police, welfare and Britain's political system are at the heart of the coalition government's first Queen's Speech. What is your reaction to the speech?

The Queen said the new coalition government's priority will to be to reduce Britain's deficit and restore growth to the struggling economy.

The 22 bills set out in detail what Prime Minister David Cameron hopes to achieve over the next 18 months.

What do you think of the pledges announced? Are you happy with the measures? Can the government restore growth to the economy?

Follow the live coverage here.

This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.

Comments

Page 1 of 5

  • Comment number 1.

    Are you looking forward to the Queen's Speech?

    Yes, I'm on tenterhooks,

    Its always one of the highlights of my year, finding out what I'm going to be giving the government for the next 12 months.

    Top quality entertainment, she should do it every month.

  • Comment number 2.

    Am I looking forward to the Queen's speech?! Absolutely! It will be great entertainment to hear how much more of my meagre income is goingto disappear in taxes this year. Can't wait.
    Next question, please.

  • Comment number 3.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 4.

    Most of the speech has been leaked so it will not come as a surprise.
    I would suspect that HM will be quietly pleased that her current government will not be hell bent on destoying the country.

  • Comment number 5.

    It's not really her speech is it? She has no real input at all. So why bother with her and the usual pomp and black rod nonsense?

    In my job I am told that my company must modernise, all the while this lot still slam doors in people's faces and such like.

    What I would really like to see is a "proper opposition" doing it's job, as the last lot really did not do that. Agreeing with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is not opposing it is it?

    Maybe this will be the last Queen's speech if this is truly a forward thinking government. Time to move into this century!

  • Comment number 6.

    I hope they will say they have decided not to. This bunch are a farce, sworn enemies being all buddy-buddy for the sake of a bit of power. The sooner they are gone the better.
    We'll just have to suck it up and wait for oblivian.

  • Comment number 7.

    Am I looking forward to it?

    Not really. We'll already know about what the gov wants to do so it's a bit of pomp and ceremony to appeal to those who like that kind of thing.

    I don't know when it's going to be aired, don't care.

  • Comment number 8.

    With the exception of high risk locations like Automatic Teller Machines and shop tills I would like to see the removal of all Surveillance cameras.

    This would include those used for revenue raising.
    EG. The now largely discredited Greed Scameras (I have never been caught by any speed limit enforcement system).

    The stopping of the DVLA and DVLNI selling and exporting data about us.

  • Comment number 9.

    Rejoice! Rejoice! to quote magrot thatcher.

    The first year of this government will be 'call me daves' cry of 'look at me I'm wonderful'.

    The tories will rejoice that they are back in power, ignoring the fact that despite a very unpopular government, with a un-charismatic PM who drove the country into the deepest debt ever, THEY STILL COULD NOT GET A MAJORITY OF MP's INTO THE COMMONS. Instead they had to settle on a grubby little stich-up with a party they described as a joke before the election.

    This queen's speech will be 'call me daves' moment in the spotlight, it certainly will not be the same next year.

  • Comment number 10.

    Why can't we be honest? I am in favour of the 'pomp' and The State Opening of Parliament by the Queen but should she really be reading the Prime Minister's speech? I would suggest that the Queen attends and in a short speech list State visits (which she does at the moment) and give encouragement to the Government and Members of Parliament. She could then invite the Prime Minister to lay out the Government's programme for the forthcoming Session of Parliament possible from the Bar of The House of Lords (or even the side of The Throne as this is technically outside The House of Lords).

  • Comment number 11.

    I won't be watching - work gets in the way of that I'm afraid! I do like the ceremony though. There's nothing wrong with a bit of tradition. As far as the content of the speech is concerned, I hope there'll be some positives in there...

  • Comment number 12.

    Yes, I am, as it's the only chance I will have for a while to admire the crown jewels! I do wish that one day the'd just let her say what she wants - I suspect it would be an eye opener!

  • Comment number 13.

    I'm surprised the position of Black Rod hasn't fallen foul of employment legislation yet, specifically sexism & racism. Does it have to be a black bloke called Rod?

  • Comment number 14.

    Britain is poor and can't afford lots of jobs...but it can afford a lavish, antiquated ceremony in which the unelected head of the Church of England sits at the head of our elected parliament, with people bowing at her feet. Who is paying for all this pomp? Taxpayers. At a time of cuts it's ridiculous. There's a country to be run! 600+ MPs plus a myriad of staff and hangers on (Black Rod...what's he contributing to the country exactly?) which costs millions. Sends completely the wrong message. YOU must cut back, but we must have our needless pomp because...well, because we're MPs.

    Fine, take a photo of everyone on the first day. Then get on with it! Take a leaf out of the books of the devolved parliaments, which are much more businesslike. Oh, and get David Cameron - who is at least elected - to tell us what his govt plans to do, not the Queen. And stop calling everyone 'the Right Honourable Gentleman'. That alone takes up hours over the course of a year - hours us taxpayers are paying for. Ever been to a company meeting in which people address each other by titles? No, and there's a good reason for it: this is the 21st century. Let's behave appropriately.

  • Comment number 15.

    Most of the speech has been deliberately leaked so it will not come as a complete shock.
    I would suspect that HM will be quietly apprehensive that her current government seem to be hell bent on destroying what's left of any social cohesion.

  • Comment number 16.

    You have to laugh at the politicians; they come up with all manner of ideas that are going to be very unpopular (but necessary) and then let the Queen say what they are.
    I genuinely believe they think some of the unpopularity will become focussed on the Queen as a consequence.

  • Comment number 17.

    The Queen's Speech is like the Queen and the Royal Family - unnecessary.

    Didnt see anything yesterday about how much we could save by getting rid of them, never mind selling the huge properties that we provide for them.

  • Comment number 18.

    Yes, this is really interesting because I'm watching it for the first time in my live. I'm awaiting it impatiently considering how exhuberant the ceremony is going to be. I wonder what the queen will say.

  • Comment number 19.

    Not really. We all know that the Government is using the pretext of economic doom for ideological reasons, to shrink the size of the state, producing the traditional tory/liberal belief in a laissez faire society. Of course these policies will lead to discontent, as cuts affect the aspiring middle classes and people realise that they are harmful to economic well being. Massive unemployment in order to reduce wages in the private sector. Its all been tried before. Then, paradoxically, a stronger state will be required - watch out for the riot police to deal heavily with protestors. So remember that lib dems. Meanwhile you people on HYS carry on dreaming up areas to cut expenditure - unemployment benefit, single parents etc. -- just what the government wants. But note that after yesterdays cuts the markets fell because of the situation in Korea. And when all the cuts have been implemented and we are solvent - some mad dictator in the developing world will declare a war and plunge the markets into a panic. Get wise, don't buy all this.

  • Comment number 20.

    Am I looking forward to the octogenarian Queen shuffling along under the weight of a pricless crown, gowns of silk ermine and mink, gold chattels and regalia to then hear how the country will be put into austerity, cutting back on services,funding,jobs,wage freezes and increased taxation? Well no I'm not.

  • Comment number 21.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 22.

    "Are you looking forward to the Queen's Speech?"

    Yep. I always watch it, 3pm on Christmas afternoon with a glass of port in hand.

    Hey, wait a minute...

  • Comment number 23.

    The short answer is ..NO.
    An unnecessary piece that could save us more money..if scrapped.
    Mabybe Cam and Clegg should look into this expense and give it a miss in future.

  • Comment number 24.

    No. Faith schools ring-fence education for the children of the small, less than seven percent, of the population who regularly attend churches. The rest of us find our children become second class citizens, denied equal access to schools we pay for. I view discrimination by creed exactly the same as discrimination by race or colour.

    And how will increased "Free" schools sit with a local authority's statutory duty to provide school places? If the local authority has no control over the local schools, how can it be expected to fulfill this role?

  • Comment number 25.

    How can the Queen announce the goverment will remove the limits to peaceful protest while outside parliament the peaceful protester, Brian Haw, has been arrested? I am outraged, and this has overshadowed the whole speech.

  • Comment number 26.

    Watch the live coverage of the Queen's Speech here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8702876.stm

  • Comment number 27.

    The Queens speech is part of the pomp and ceremony of Government. It is one area that we should consider doing without in these times of spending cuts. The detail can just be annouced to the press.

    It is also an opportunity for the opposition to criticise the Government and for the back benchers to shout Ya Boo.

    The only interesting thing is that during the debate, will the Coservatives wait whilst the Liberal speaks or will they just ignore him as usual?

  • Comment number 28.

    Yes. The Queen has more popular support than any of the politicias.

  • Comment number 29.

    At last a Government our Queen can be truly proud of, a Government of educated leaders as opposed to the riff raff we've had for the last decade, it actually makes you proud to be English again.
    What I would like to see is a return to free market economics as proposed by Keith Joseph in the last effective Conservative Government, I see the Major era as being a major set back for Tory principles.
    My hope is that all this wishy washy stuff that seems to the price paid for the Whigs support will just disappear like the mindless froth it is. Clegg is so consumed by power, I think he will concede to any demands made by Dave "for the good of the country" this is good because he seems to be completely devoid of any intelligent ideas, if we followed his agenda the country would be in an even bigger mess than left by the previous Communist / Facist shambles.

  • Comment number 30.

    No. After all the contents are already in the public domain.

    I'm quite sure that the ConDem's PR guru (unpaid) - Nick Robinson will be along to put the correct "spin" on the proposed legislation. After all we had him on the Today programme yesterday explaining Osbourne's interview comments in language mere mortals could understand and again this morning telling us what HM will read out.

  • Comment number 31.

    With the toffs back in charge I am expecting the following: -

    Higher taxes for the poorest in society.
    Lower taxes for the richest in society, including the tory bankers who caused this recession.

  • Comment number 32.

    RELEASE BRIAN!

    Not terribly excited by Lords, Ladies and Royalty- so 1980's!

  • Comment number 33.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 34.

    I haven't got time to watch people dress in silly costumes and do daft things centuries old. We are in 2010 and this whole thing needs reforming.

    The Prime Minister should read his own speech. End of story.

    I am at work, like many hardworking people.

    This is a reform that needs making, to bring us into the current age. What a waste of time and money...

  • Comment number 35.

    It reminds me of some 12th century circus fit only for tourists.
    The Queen is irrelevent as is the office she holds.However the people get a kick out of her strutting her stuff so hey ho-why not? However whilst your making cuts NICK CAMERON why not cut all the hangers on in the commons and house of lords-that seem to crawl out of the woodwork on the Queens opening of parliament? Its tax payers money after all.

  • Comment number 36.

    Will I watch? No. I never have done and can find no reason to start now. It is, highly unlikely that this speech will change the format by revealing the details behind the carefully crafted "headlines". For that I need the analysis provided by those who can grasp all the implications, and who will have been pre-briefed anyway.

    I would nevertheless recommend anyone who has never watched to give it a try, if only for the ceremonial aspects.

  • Comment number 37.

    I shan't be watching. We know broadly what its going to contain, and anyway the subject matter's better read than listened to.
    As for the pageantry, I think it's an embarrassing display of how our country continues to live in the past. This is a serious occasion, not an excuse for a fancy-dress party We live in the 21st century, and funny hats and grown-ups dressed up like courtiers doesn't help our image where it matters in the rest of the world.
    There are those who say it brings in the tourists and their money, but is that what we've sunk to?

  • Comment number 38.

    It is important to repeal all the meaningless laws passed during the Blair years-laws which have no reference to leading a normal life. And, possibly, to bring in a law to try Blair as a War criminal.

  • Comment number 39.

    4. At 09:57am on 25 May 2010, Lynn from Sussex wrote:
    Most of the speech has been leaked so it will not come as a surprise.
    I would suspect that HM will be quietly pleased that her current government will not be hell bent on destoying the country.


    You can suspect all you want, but one thing is certain that no-one will ever find out what the Queen thinks (apart from maybe the incumbent PM). Whether you think the Queen's views are close to yours (which is what you imply) is irrelevant and highly speculative of you. We'll never know so there's no point speculating.

  • Comment number 40.

    17. At 10:28am on 25 May 2010, pzero wrote:

    The Queen's Speech is like the Queen and the Royal Family - unnecessary.

    Didnt see anything yesterday about how much we could save by getting rid of them, never mind selling the huge properties that we provide for them.

    ''''''''''
    Your ignorance is pretty typical. We'd save about £8million a year but loose about £190million!

  • Comment number 41.

    The new government will be telling us that we need to cut back on public spending and they'll be using the queen as their mouthpiece. How ironic is that? How is this ridiculous expensive annual farce supposed to set a good example? When can we have an inquiry into the royal's expenses?

  • Comment number 42.

    We've had a few technical problems so the live coverage page has moved to http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/politics/live_event/

  • Comment number 43.

    HoHoHo The mystic preachers are out in force on the BBC today!

    How hysterical and ridiculous a vision of 'new' politics. To talk about 'change' 'big society' 'radical reform' and 'revolution' at the exact same moment as we witness old aristocratic tradition, ceremony and sickening pomp at it's most perverse!

    We truly exist in an Alice in Wonderland where the words spoken have no relation to reality!

    The irrational babble of the fakers, evaders and deceivers is obvious to all at this 'democracy' Show!

  • Comment number 44.

    I like the pomp and ceremony of the Queen's Speech. This is the sort of thing that makes our country stand out from all of the other bland European states. And remember, unlike many countries such as the US, which made up all their ceremonies artificially, ours are based on centuries of history. Tourists love it, and line the street to watch the Queen arrive. I can't see that happening in most places.

    It isn't the occasional ceremony that is ruining the country. There are plenty of things wrong with our politics - with the men in grey suits - so let's concentrate on fixing those, rather than blaming our traditions and heritage, which are above politics.

  • Comment number 45.

    I see BBC up to its usual tricks taking off good programs to put on mundane tripe. So no will not be watching.

  • Comment number 46.

    It's great symbolism on the day of the state opening of parliament, for a government that claims to be doing things in a whole new way, that the first thing they have done is to arrest peaceful protesters outside the Houses of Parliament. Actions speak louder than words on this day.

  • Comment number 47.

    It must be a real chore having to read out the Ministerial Broadcast.

    I would far rather Her Majesty proclaim ...

    "My government will arrest all high-ranking bankers and fund managers and take them to The Tower. There, I shall deal with them appropriately."

  • Comment number 48.

  • Comment number 49.

    The grandeur of tradition is all very nice of course, but fails to draw a illuminate what the plans for this coalition really are, and they are by no means democratic, nor are they anything more than Conservative. Expect the very nature of democracy to be changed for the worse, as the mere mentioning of fixed-term parliaments alone has served to make clear. The next one, or two years maximum, if democracy is maintained and fixed terms parliaments are not implemented, will be of little benefit to the poorest and least well off in Britain. To make it clearer, think of Robin Hood in a parallel universe; This government will steal from the poor, and give to the rich, and at the very least secure, if anything, another recession in the coming years.

  • Comment number 50.

    Never seen so much BLING in one ceremony...diamonds, gold, pearls, sapphire,glitter, more gold...too much to take...they look out of place...they look like pimps

  • Comment number 51.

    Totally agree with post 14 by "Education not indoctrination", complete nonsense, outdated pomp costing tax payers a fortune & wasting way too much time. A boon for news24 though as something to televise! The reduction of wasted time due to unnecessarily meetings is something previous companies that I have worked for initially do as a matter of course as a cost cutting exercise. Apparently Nick Clegg is not supportive of all this tired old ceremony either, hopefully he has the clout to make more real changes. Hopefully he can also suppress the usual Tory screwover of regular people when they start to favour the minority middle/upper class.

  • Comment number 52.

    Despite being 21 years of age, this is the first time I have actually watche the Queens's speech in its entireity. It made feel even prouder of our proud culture and traditions - I especially liked the commical elements; the doors being slammed in the face and the "No royal commisions today" comment. It just seemed very British; reserved and peaceful, but beauitful and humourous at times. Really enjoyable.

  • Comment number 53.

    Perhaps she should "twitter" it instead? Seems to be the in-thing at the moment.

  • Comment number 54.

    Having just watched the ceremony, I must say the Americans and other countries; with the exception to other 'Royal' sovereign nations, have nothing comparable to the Queen's speech and the state opening of Parliament. I am, once again, proud to be British. God save the Queen.

  • Comment number 55.

    #47 Often rejected

    I like it, a lot. Can we add the following to the end please?

    ".... and personally!"

    Her Majesty would love it, just love it.

  • Comment number 56.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 57.

    We expect to see Ma'am wagging her finger at her Lords, Ladies & Gentlemen, reminding them of the oathes she took at her Coronation.

  • Comment number 58.

    Luckily I don't suffer from Insomnia...however, if I did, I would look to the Queen's speech as a temporary cure.

  • Comment number 59.

    It seems the Royal family costs the taxpayer £41M per year. Taking into account the embarrassing spectacle most of them make of themselves, there's some good money to be saved there.

    Also does it really take >600 MP's to run our little country, before we even start on the Lords. America has 535 in both houses and look at the size of their country. Is it that American's work harder than us!!

  • Comment number 60.

    Splendid stuff! One of the many reasons I utterly love Britain - what a rich history we have! I love all the tradition surrounding royal events.

  • Comment number 61.

    Why not auction a carriage or two to pay off the deficit?

  • Comment number 62.

    If nothing else, at least Mr Windsor has a face suitable for dealing out misery.

  • Comment number 63.

    I didn't watch it on telly as I was standing on the end of Westinster Bridge watching the procession, the only Brit apart from all the policemen on duty etc

  • Comment number 64.

    It's a disgrace, the financial problems affecting this country and the bleak outlook for the less finacially stable. Nevertheless, the queen and her extended family of hangers on and staff are draining a huge amount from the coffers. The whole idea of the monarchy is outdated and she, together with the rest, should go. The property that is owned by this bunch should be sold off or given as housing for the less well off.

  • Comment number 65.

    So were struggling for money yet we can waste it on all this pomp and for what. There really isnt any need for it all

  • Comment number 66.

    No I’ll not be watching, I’ll have my hands over my ears. Lot’s of policies designed to divide and stratify society, ensuring to those that have most, more shall be given while those who little will have even that taken away. Just the sort of policies you’d expect from a couple of Eton boys. And then there’s the budget to come, expect 20% VAT on everything as a minimum. And the stock market’s crashing, expect the second dip of the recession to be deeper than the first, after all the Tories are the natural party of recession, remember the 80s?

    All those pathetic people who used to bleat about Brown on these forums will shortly have something really serious to complain about.

  • Comment number 67.

    Yesterday the Government were talking about MPs sharing cars and walking rather than taking cars. Today we have all this pomp. How much did that cost? Surely the queen could have come by car without all the outriders and hangers on! We're in the 21st Century now and currently times are hard.

  • Comment number 68.

    State paegentry, nobody does it like Britain! But, whose in charge of health and safety? Those footmen, perched precariously on the back of those coaches looked rather dodgy to me. Security too looked lax with those maces stook out of the window. I once had a piece of wood from B&Q stook out of my car like that, and got stopped by the Police. All very concerning. I think we need a public enquiry and a quango or two to sort this mess out!

  • Comment number 69.

    Did I watch the Queens speech? I'm at work making money for the British economy so how could I?

  • Comment number 70.

    "At last a Government our Queen can be truly proud of, a Government of educated leaders as opposed to the riff raff we've had for the last decade, it actually makes you proud to be English again."

    Huzzah let's all celebrate the return of a PM we can be proud of: A relative of the Queen born with a silver spoon in his mouth and educated at Eton. A good looking cipher for the Captains of Finance and Industry who can always be relied upon to put the good of the nation above their own wallets. My prediction is that Mr. Cameron will be the best PM since Lord Salisbury. Hopefully he will make Britain great again by abolishing the Welfare State and rolling back those pesky regulations that stop me from employing five year olds as Chimney Sweeps / Mine workers. Child Labour and crushing desperate poverty, it's what built the Empire.

    This Queen's Speech is the thin end of a very large wedge.

  • Comment number 71.

    But it's not the Queen's Speech.

    It's Cameron's speech coming out of the Queen's lips.

  • Comment number 72.

    40. At 11:11am on 25 May 2010, theoldgoat wrote:
    17. At 10:28am on 25 May 2010, pzero wrote:

    The Queen's Speech is like the Queen and the Royal Family - unnecessary.

    Didnt see anything yesterday about how much we could save by getting rid of them, never mind selling the huge properties that we provide for them.

    ''''''''''
    Your ignorance is pretty typical. We'd save about £8million a year but loose about £190million!
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    It is your ignorance that is typical. We would save considerably more than £8 million and the latest tourism figures are knowhere near £190 million get your facts correct before spouting such tripe. Also dont be so stupid to believe tourists just visit the UK to see Buckingham Palace, i know i dont just go to the states to see the White House.


  • Comment number 73.

    "This is the sort of thing that makes our country stand out from all of the other bland European states"

    Quite right. Those bland Frenchies boringly guillotined most of their aristocrats over two hundred years ago. Never mind the fact that the economy is in the toilet and the deficit hawks will strangle growth and job creation just look at that Ermine and sparkly crown and Black Rod's garters and everything will be alright.

  • Comment number 74.

    No, it's simply a meaningless fripperry a hangover from the Middle Ages.

  • Comment number 75.

    No. I'm working.

  • Comment number 76.

    After announcing cuts which will cost the jobs of anything up to 100000 people, most of whom have given the public useful service, we are going to have the spectacle of the most highly paid civil servant in the land reading a speech written by the PM that he could perfectly well read himself.

    Top priority for public expenditure savings and modernisation surely ought to be the abolition of the monarchy. Selling off the Royal estates would probably pay off a big slice of the national debt. Although maybe a few might be kept as a tourist attractions with the queen and her family being paid a small sum for twice daily appearances. Tourists might be willing to pay to see the queen re-enact queen's speeches from the past.

  • Comment number 77.

    I love the pomp of such occasions; the slow, careful, almost clockwork efficiency of the process covering everything from the speech itself to the minutiae of transporting the crown back and forth.

    It is a glorious spin-free moment in our otherwise media-infested political system. We need those.

    What I especially love, though, is the grinding of the teeth you hear from all those who hate our traditions or hate our queen, and probably hate anything else to do with our country.

    You have to wonder why they continue to live here if they hate it all so much?

    Bitterness is such an ugly emotion on a nice sunny day!

  • Comment number 78.

    and how many actual Socialists have the BBC had on there show to criticise these stupid ideas? none...so much for due impartiality and fair representataion and debate, seems the Murdoch Right Wing concensus on all things economic has now taken root even here in the Publicly funded broadcaster...

  • Comment number 79.

    I have just been to try and go for my lunchtime walk in the park and the whole of St James's Park is closed off - the whole park so the queen can drive up one side of it! This is insane. I could clearly see the queen had several hundred soliders protecting her. What do they think members of the public might do? Throw ducks at her? My taxes paid for the coach and the ermine robes and now I am stopped from taking my much needed lunchtime escape from my concrete corporate cage. I should like to know who is responsible who the organisation of this malarky so I may make my views known directly to them.

  • Comment number 80.

    4. At 09:57am on 25 May 2010, Lynn from Sussex wrote:
    Most of the speech has been leaked so it will not come as a surprise.
    I would suspect that HM will be quietly pleased that her current government will not be hell bent on destoying the country.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Id say thats a pretty premature comment to make.

    after all, how long did it take Blair to show his 'true colours'? 2 years some say, 4 years others.

    Even though youre most likely correct, it would be foolish to write it off completely.

  • Comment number 81.

    Britain has many ceremonieslike this that are antiquated and outdatedin modern society but set us aside from the rest of the world in our supposedly democratic system. Just one minor question about democracy really. Why is Harriet Harman in the house when she is no longer a serving MP? She lost her seat, her job and her right to represent the people in this country when the voter did not vote for her therefore she should not be there.

  • Comment number 82.

    I'd rather stick pins in my eyes than watch this archaic nonsense. No wonder the rest of the world looks at us with derision with such a monarchy...

  • Comment number 83.

    Education not indoctrination wrote:

    "Britain is poor and can't afford lots of jobs...but it can afford a lavish, antiquated ceremony in which the unelected head of the Church of England sits at the head of our elected parliament, with people bowing at her feet. Who is paying for all this pomp? blah, blah blah...."

    ###

    I wondered where angry of Tonbridge Wells had gone to.

  • Comment number 84.

    To lighten things up a bit.
    How about "complaining" about comments 26 and 42.
    (With tongue deep in cheek).
    Hang on isn't 42 the answer to everything.
    Ref. Hitchhikers guide to the universe.

  • Comment number 85.

    I cannot recognise the legitimacy of a government which has an unelected, hereditary monarch as its mouthpiece. It's time to start the revolution.

  • Comment number 86.

    The images of ermine, gold, and jewels on display in the House of Lords hardly give the impression of a country on austerity measures, do they? Get rid of the lot of them.

  • Comment number 87.

    Every time I see meaningless, fawning, drivel like this my opinion of Oliver Cromwell soars.

  • Comment number 88.

    Black Rod sounds like a porn stars name.

  • Comment number 89.

    I watched a bit of it and come to the conclusion that no one does pagentary like the british.Ok the dress and ceremony is from a byegone age but that is the appeal of it.
    As for some of the snide political comments posted just what part of THE COUNTRY IS BANKRUPT do they not understand.For every £4 we spend as a nation £1 of it is borrowed.Try this at home and seen how long you can survive.
    As for cuts you aint seen nothing yet. An awful lot of sacred cows will need to be slaughtered in the future or we will become another Greece.

    Dave H

  • Comment number 90.

    At 11:55am on 25 May 2010, Dr Malcolm Alun Williams wrote:

    Having just watched the ceremony, I must say the Americans and other countries; with the exception to other 'Royal' sovereign nations, have nothing comparable to the Queen's speech and the state opening of Parliament. I am, once again, proud to be British. God save the Queen.
    Oh that might just be because they are republics and in the case of the US fought a war to rid themselves of the blessings of monarchy

  • Comment number 91.

    Less than a week ago, Nick Clegg was asking the public to nominate laws they would like to see repealed, and today the Queen is reading out their plans. Hardly seems long enough to consult the public, listen to their opinions & plan their next step. Could it be empty promises from our new leaders ? I'm hoping it is not.

  • Comment number 92.

    What an absolute pantomime it all is ... And an expensive one !!
    If the government's interested in saving money and making cuts, they should start with the monarchy and all their hangers-on.

  • Comment number 93.

    Well I watched it and to be quite honest it was rather boring, everything the Queen said, had already been said by the bbc news reporters. Anyway most people are waiting for this emergancy speech in June maybe then the country will know if the government are actually going to help us common people.

  • Comment number 94.

    "65. At 12:04pm on 25 May 2010, roverpete1981 wrote:
    So were struggling for money yet we can waste it on all this pomp and for what. There really isnt any need for it all"

    --------

    Since most of the people involved get paid whether they are at the ceremony or doing something else, why don't you tell us how much money is being wasted?

  • Comment number 95.

    theoldgoat wrote:
    pzero wrote:
    The Queen's Speech is like the Queen and the Royal Family - unnecessary.
    Didnt see anything yesterday about how much we could save by getting rid of them, never mind selling the huge properties that we provide for them.

    ''''''''''

    Your ignorance is pretty typical. We'd save about £8million a year but loose about £190million!



    If the Monarchy was abolished all Royal land and property would return to its rightful owners, the people of the United Kingdom (although held in trust for them by the State).

    The Crown Estate and all profits generated from it would go directly to the treasury and we'd also have vast Royal estates that we could then turn over to the National Trust to run as tourist attractions. Abolishing the Monarchy wouldn't cost us a penny, it would save us millions of pounds and also allow our country to become a Democracy instead of the quasi-representative constitutional Monarchy we have at the moment.

    pzero isn't ignorant at all, in fact he's onto a winner with this one.

  • Comment number 96.

    29. At 10:54am on 25 May 2010, TrueBlueTory wrote:
    "At last a Government our Queen can be truly proud of"
    How do you know? It has only been in existence for a few days!
    "a Government of educated leaders as opposed to the riff raff we've had for the last decade",
    Nasty party is alive and kicking.
    "it actually makes you proud to be English again."
    Not British?
    "free market economics"
    Oh dear, you have a short memory.
    "last effective Conservative Government"
    When was that then?
    "the Whigs support will just disappear like the mindless froth it is. Clegg is so consumed by power,"
    You haven't sussed it have you? It wasn't a coalition for Clegg's sake it was so that Dave could save his political skin because he didn't win the election.
    "an even bigger mess than left by the previous Communist / Facist shambles."
    Communists? Fascists?
    It must be hurting that Dave has proclaimed himself "a liberal Conservative."
    Last qtn: Are you SystemF in disguise?

  • Comment number 97.

    It makes me proud to see a question over the Queen's speech has aroused such ire in regards to the monarchy and the ceremony itself.

    I have no clue why anyone would be in a hurry to abolish the monarchy. They are a dignified bedrock to the running of our country, and bring in considerably more revenue than they cost. The alternative is what? Another layer of elected people? A President? What a fantastically bad idea.

    It seems we can be a little (?) hypocritical in this country...politicians misbehaving? I know, lets abolish the monarchy and elect the House of Lords, we can have more politicians....mmmmh? Do not like any of the parties much, lets have an indecisive election....then complain about the coalition which arises...want PR...get a coalition...mmmmh? Understand we have a HUGE debilitating deficit - ask for that to be tackled, but complain if it affects us directly...NIMBY....

    There is a reason why committees do not lead, about why purely responding to the popular will is NOT a good idea, and why in the modern age, many countries seemed to be trying to render themselves ungovernable.

    So, no, keep the monarchy please, and concentrate on the real problems.

    And as for the contents of the Speech: unsurprising and vague. I have never judged a politician by their words; I am waiting to see what they actually do.

  • Comment number 98.

    The new government is already proposing to end the chauffeur driven priveleges of government ministers. this is an excellent gesture as these people are not a ruling class but citizen legislators. True to form the, Ministry of Propoganda or BBC as it's also known is bleating about the poor chauffuers who may lose their jobs. Perhaps we should re-instate the coach and four to employ more equerries and thus satisy the ludicrous BBC

  • Comment number 99.

    The concept of the queens speech is an embarrasment to any country that thinks itself a modern democracy.
    One government cut that would be useful would be to remove the Saxe-Coburg Gotha family from their publically financed position.
    But with the decision to review the 'royal' handout required in june - will this 'Shameless' family offer to make a public spirited sacrifice and take a pay cut ?? Don't hold your breath

  • Comment number 100.

    Outgoing-PM Gordon Brown said that he loved the job but hated the pomp and ceremony of the job. The straitjacket of ritual behaviour adds costs and delays to our government. The coalition should appoint a commissioner for reducing unneeded rituals in government. I think the Queen must feel that she lives in a glass box, and pirouettes when her handle is turned.

    There is too much ceremony in public life, some of which does not work in attracting young people or modernists. A delicate balance must be found, the existing pomp sometimes looks pompous.

 

Page 1 of 5

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.