Despite being firmly positioned on the south-west of the political compass, and generally being liberal, I’m quite happy that we have the royal family, which, judging by reaction to the Prince William/Kate Middleton engagement announcement isn’t exactly a majority view these days.

The thing is, while one can rattle on about becoming a ‘modern’ republic and the ‘parasitic’ nature of the royals, doing so often misses important points:

1. The royals cost British taxpayers about 60p per year. Yes, you read that right—we are ripped off by royal scum to the cost of a medium-sized chocolate bar. In return, the royals drive a ton of tourism to the country.
2. A UK president wouldn’t necessarily be cheaper. Given that the UK of late clearly looks towards the US rather than Europe, it’s safe to say—also when considering our mental media—that any British presidential election would be close to what the Americans have to suffer. It would be noisy and expensive, and the tax-payer would likely end up covering much of the bill. In the long run, there’d also be costs relating to ongoing engagements, security and so on—it’s hardly like we ditch the royals and replace them with nothing at all (or Timmy Mallet offering to be president for free).
3. The royals are largely impartial. The UK’s head of state is not affiliated to a political party. Although that might officially end up the case with a UK president, it’s unlikely. We have such reactionary politics in the UK that any elected president would likely side with the Tories or the Labour Party, whether through official means (as in, an election rather like the mayor of London) or unofficially (technically impartial, and without ‘political power’, but nonetheless backing—or not—the current government).
4. Elizabeth II’s been a pretty good head of state. While the royal family’s had its fair share of scandal, the queen’s largely done a good job. I’m not sure replacing her with whoever Rupert Murdoch decides wants to be head of state would benefit the UK in the slightest.