Prince Andrew scandal: 'The right time to abolish monarchy'

We now have, sitting on the throne, Britain’s longest-ever reigning monarch.

Queen Elizabeth has now reigned for more than 70 years, seven years more than the previous record-holder, Queen Victoria.

It should be, and it is, a cause for celebration. The Queen has done the job of constitutional monarch well enough and usually tops any popularity poll of members of the Royal Family.

• READ MORE: Former MP demands that no public money is spent on Prince Andrew's 'shenanigans'

But after the Queen what?

There is a problem. Charles has long been a controversial figure, although in recent years he has seemed to fulfil the role of heir to the throne with greater competence than previously.

However, the latest scandal to engulf him raises serious questions about his judgement.

One can accept the claim that he has not been involved in the day-to-day administration of his charities, but when asked to conduct a private investiture for a Saudi billionaire who has given millions to his charities, surely some questions must have occurred to him. Was this not a case of cash for honours, for example?

The Queen is the longest serving British monarch in history

Of course, there are other royals in the frame for poor judgement.

Whatever might nor might have happened between Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre, it was hardly a sensible decision for him to fly across the Atlantic to visit his “friend” and convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

And Prince Harry has, to say the least also had his critics in recent years.

Why is it that people like the Saudi billionaire, or Jeffrey Epstein or, for that matter, Meghan Markle, are so taken with our royals?

Is it because of their wit, charm and intelligence – or could it be because they are celebrities?

And is that how we want our royals to be viewed?

• READ MORE: Royals ‘wanted to punch Prince Harry' after interview with Oprah - latest claims

Charles’ accession to the throne gives us an ideal opportunity to remove the hereditary principle from our political system and bring it into the 21st century.

This is because the existence of a hereditary monarch also provides justification for allowing hereditary peers to play an active role in the making of our laws through their membership of the House of Lords, and even to hold ministerial positions in the government.

By abolishing the monarchy we would also be removing the hereditary principle from our political system and would thus pave the way for removing hereditary peers from the House of Lords.

Prince Andrew paid a settlement to Virginia Giuffre

So here’s a proposal for making our politics a little more sensible.

When the time comes, Charles should be made acting monarch and First President.

At some point during his reign he should step down and enable a real president to be elected – perhaps not on the same basis that we elect MPs but by some indirect form such as by a two thirds majority of all members of Parliament (minus, of course, the hereditary peers).

Ah, I hear you say, wouldn’t we just find ourselves politicising what should be the non-political head of state?

Not so. In countries where, like us, they have a prime ministerial system of government – Ireland, Germany or Italy for example – the president is a non-controversial, consensus figure and usually not even a household name.

A non-hereditary head of state, apart from making us a more democratic country, would also rid us of the necessity of supporting the large cast of princes, princesses, dukes, duchesses etc, that currently are supported out of public funds – more than £70 million last year.

• READ MORE: Doubledecker bus decorated in platinum and purple ahead of Queen's Jubilee celebrations

Abolishing the monarchy would not mean closing any of the royal places, nor stopping soldiers in fancy dress parading in front of them.

The tourists would still come and visit, as they do to France, for example, which has more tourists than us but abolished its monarchy more than 200 years ago.

And while we’re about it, this would also be an ideal opportunity to rebrand the honours system – every country needs a way of recognising the worthy, but do we really need to call these recipients Commanders of the British Empire? So let’s celebrate the Queen’s platinum anniversary and also celebrate it as a magnificent way of modernising the British State.

• Ivor Gaber is professor of political journalism at the University of Sussex and was formerly a political correspondent based in Westminster