There seems to be a general agreement that Jeremy Corbyn's reply, to David Cameron's tribute to the Queen in the Commons yesterday, was appropriate for both Royalists and Republicans. Paying tribute to the Queen, as someone who has worked hard and devoted her life to serving the nation and it's people throughout her time as the monarch, is clearly true and few can disagree with his tribute since it would apply to anyone who with decent values who had followed her example.
Whether the nation would have been better off as a Republic during the past sixty five years is impossible to judge - although it is fair to say, if we compare the voting turnout of the French to ours, that retaining a monarchy does appear to reinforce the concept of a ruling elite even when a democracy.
At the time that Blair took office in 1997 the Royals were under some pressure - primarily because of the national division caused by the divorce of Charles and Diana and her untimely death. This harsh judgement of the monarchy in many quarters was demonstrated by the failure of Labour to replace the Royal Yacht Britannia - which did not seem such a harsh decision at the time - even though by most calculations this would have been a good investment.
As the memory of Diana has faded over time, the Royals - particularly the Queen, William and Kate along with their children - have successfully made the institution popular once again. However, whether this popularity has been greatly magnified by events since then - which have demonstrated the dark natures of many of those from our political class [those who would most likely replace the monarchy as President if we became a Republic] is difficult to say. The behaviour of these, along with the many billionaires who have materialised since the advent of the internet, has demonstrated the very high standards of the Queen has set and maintained throughout her reign.
One of the key points that was made during the 'Royally approved' TV programs about the Queen was the subtlety she applies to her role in government. She does not seek to tell the premier of the day what he should or shouldn't do - she just asks questions and remarks on previous similar events from the past - knowing that the present incumbent will consider what she has said in relation to the new situation that has arisen.
She also tends to arrange visits or send invitations to various individuals or groups to indicate her views on issues current to the time. Perhaps we can conclude, judging by the nature of the programs that related to her 90th birthday - that the issue that concern her and her advisors most at present is the decline of the family. This has been cause in the main, without doubt, by the pressure this government and the Coalition have put on mothers to return to work before their children have started school.
Given that there are unemployed wanting work and many others who would wish for significantly more hours work each week - encouraging mothers to be separated from their children before either are ready does appear to be particularly cruel when the most obvious conclusion is that this is only done to increase to competition for jobs and thereby keep wages to a minimum to enable global corporations to maximise their profits at a time when the wealth gap between the richest and poorest, globally is widening exponentially.