<% ballot="" ' Check nothing is broken broken = 0 if ballot = "" then broken = 1 end if set vt = Server.Createobject("mps.Vote") openresult = vt.Open("Vote", "sa", "") ' Created object? if IsObject(vt) = TRUE then ' Opened db? if openresult = True AND broken = 0 then ballotresult = vt.SetBallotName(ballot) ' read the vote votetotal=(vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes")+vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no")) if votetotal <> 0 then ' there are votes in the database numberyes = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "yes") numberno = vt.GetVoteCount(ballot, "no") percentyes = Int((numberyes/votetotal)*100) percentno = 100 - percentyes ' fix graph so funny graph heights dont appear 'if percentyes = 0 then ' percentyes = 1 'end if 'if percentno = 0 then ' percentno = 1 'end if else ' summut went wrong frig it numberyes = 0 numberno = 0 percentyes = 50 percentno = 50 end if end if end if %> Votes so far:

100% 0%			>		>
			Yes: <% =percentyes %>%		No: <% =percentno %>%

It's up to the people of Great Britain to define what and who they are both as a nation and as a unique people. If you are no longer unique as a people or as a culture, you might all as well toss in the towel, abandon your quaint old structures (including your monarchy) and apply for US statehood. You're just another amorphous mass of humanity who speaks English as its principal language. It's disgusting to see what your people have done to yourselves in the past three quarters of a century.
James A. F Compton, USA

The Queen should not be accountable, on the condition that most members of her family re-learn the art of leadership by good example.
R.Henry, United Kingdom

The Queen (or King - why personalise it to this particular monarch?) IS accountable; the survival of the monarchy (which was restored, don't forget, after our one and only appalling experiment in republicanism with the wonderful Commonwealth in the 17th century) has been achieved by the gradual transfer of its powers and privileges to the people, via parliament. Like all elements of the power structure in a complex society it persists because it is in some way useful, (though it may not be efficient), and because the mass of the population see no reason for its removal. Focusing on wealth, either real or apparent, is completely missing the point.
Dan Holmes, United Kingdom

As long as I (and other British taxpayers) are paying for her and her 'royal army' the answer is 'YES' the Queens and her hangers-on should ALL be accountable!!!!
Dee Jukes, United Kingdom

Focus Groups is not what Her Majesty needs: She needs to in essence "Netherland"-ize. She needs to be taken off of the public dole and treated more like the overdressed pensioner she is.
Elizabeth Browning, USA

Accountable - yes, to some extent every monarch should be accountable to their people. And using opinion pollsters to discover what the public want of their monarch is simply a tool of the time. But my thought is that the British Royal Family comes under pressure to which the Emperor's family here in Japan have never been subjected, not even to the tiniest fraction of the degree to which the British Royal Family suffers.
I just wonder whether the problem the British Royals stems from is ever setting the precedent of making the public see their views were important on this issue. The phrase of Sir Humphrey in 'Yes Prime Minister' comes to mind, something like 'You should never give people what they want... it only encourages em!'
Andi-Tsuyoshi Williams, Japan

It is time the UK grew up, joined the real world and became a republic.
B Walsh

The Royals should pay a fee for what is basically a money making franchise they have on Britain. I can't believe that at as we near the end of the 20th century the British still are expected to maintain a group of people whose only claim to that maintenance is the bed that someone climbed into.
Unknown, USA

The mass media have now realised they have to be more subtle in their attempts to undermine the monarchy and destroy the British constitution and with it the freedom of the "freeborn Englishman".
W Hall, Greece

Yes, yes, yes. Privilege must be earned, not be by birth in the new millennium. In the past the Queen has kept high standards for herself, but the young royals want the best of both worlds. The public will not accept a royal family with no responsibilities.
Janet, Canada

Abdicate... before the people sour.
Alexander, USA

No! The Queen should not be accountable - the Monarchy never has been. To do so now would simply reduce this treasured institution to the level of politicians and others in public life. The Monarchy should, however, continue to modernise, all the more important following the death of Diana. However, get rid of Camilla!
Walter Harper, Canada

If the monarchy wants to change it must be held accountable. Maybe the Queen can look to her grandchildren, who have been outside the palace more than she has, for additional guidance.
J. S Lover, USA

It's a meaningless question at this stage of British history. Should you lock the barn door after the horse has got out? There is little anyone civilized could do if the royals decided that less accountability is better. The concept couldn't have taken hold earlier when it could have set precedent, now it hardly matters.
D F Schaefer, USA

The people of Britain are Her Majesty's subjects, but she is also their servant. Her Majesty must use whatever means appropriate to remain in touch with her subjects needs.
Chet Cutick, USA

As long as taxpayers money goes to pay the Civil List, the cost of running the palaces, the transport or any of the other luxuries which the Royal Family enjoy - yes!
Joan Simpson, USA

Accountable for what? She is who she is. Critics of the style of mourning by the Royal family fail to recognise individual differences. Torrents of tears no more signify true grief than the stiff upper lip represents coldheartedness.
Yes, the Queen could perhaps be less forbidding in countenance during public appearances, but she cannot work the crowds like a politician hustling votes. She is, I think, essentially a shy woman. Accept her for who she is. As long as she brings no dishonour to her country or herself, let her be. Perhaps future monarchs will be more open - naturally because of WHO they re.
M Gabrosek, USA

To whom and for what? She is only a figurehead
I Morrison, Bermuda

Off course the Queen should not be accountable. The Royal family do a very good job for Britain and this should not be changed. It is bad enough having a Labour government - it would be even worse if you gave them more power.
Stephen Plunkett, Australia

I don't think most people care any more. They are all slowly but surely diminishing the monarchy.
M. Hedge, Canada

If the monarchy is to be accountable, they should be accountable to parliment but only regarding her public duties/expenses etc. The Queen/monarchy should not be accountable as a private citizen, her own assets and those of her family should not need to be divulged.
Carol Ashby, USA

If you want an accountable head of state, get a president. Of course, there's no guarantee that a president will be held any more to account than a queen.
Cameron Lackpour, USA

The monarchy has never been accountable. The point of the monarchy is to be unaccountable. If the monarchy were to be made accountable, it would cease to lose its purpose as a symbol of times past. As long as the power of the monarchy (which in politics, is more symbolic than real) is not abused, then the monarchy should be maintained in its current and rightful state.
Colby Brose, Canada

If the Queen isn't accountable in the Royal Family, then who is? Someone within the Family must be curious as to what Britain thinks, otherwise why would the pollsters be consulted.
Malinda Sund, USA

The question is not whether she should be accountable. It is rather to whom? Great Britain has enjoyed the services of her Royalty too long to see it fade away.
On the other hand there is a responsibility or Her Majesty to provide stability and fairness in the operation of the government. The idea of a Royalty which is behind closed doors and shares little responsibility seems a serious waste.Especially at the rate of expense caused by their being.
James Lees, United States

The Queen is a constitutional monarch and therefore acts on the advice of her Prime Minister and in turn he must account for her.
B. E Davies, USA

Accountability will would be like playing with fire, bringing out the viciousness of the press upon the whole insitution of the monarchy at the least little conceived imperfection.
Gerald Neath, USA

Of course yes. And why not an inquiry/poll on who should be Queen/King - that would lead to a really advanced "monarchy" concept.
Fernando Silva, Portugal

I feel by using a market research company, the Royals will be able to keep in touch with the British general population and perhaps not make so many unpopular "moves".
Elaine Rodel, South Africa

It should be a two way street, the Queen should listen to the people as much as the people should listen to the Queen. The Queen asked her people to be united rather than dividing themselves over her ex-daughter-in-law's death. Did the people listen? Can anyone tell me which in-law would do the same to honour the burial of an ex-daughter-in-law ?
B. Lung, Hong Kong

Changing to suit public opinion doesn't change the absurdity of a monarchy.
Chris Lawton, England

I believe in the traditions that the monarchy must adhere to and that shouldn't change. However, what better way to get in touch with the people than to spend time with the people? Diana knew this more than any one of the royals. The difference between her and the other royals is that she WANTED to be with the people and it showed.
Denise Dobbs, USA

It's not just a question of the Royal Family being accountable or even of 'modernising' them, post Diana. The whole structure of the British democratic system is class-based with the Queen at the top of the tree.
To 'modernise' the Royas is to 'modernise' the British Democratic system and this will never happen simply because ALL politicians, which ever flavour, expect and generally get high honours (KB, Lords etc), which entitle them to a seat in the unelected House of Lords. They will continue to support the Monachist position.
What Britian needs is a Nelson Mandala type of character, with the charisma to carry the changes through. I don't see one at the moment. Tony Blair comes close, but he supports the 'establishment' view. Who knows it may happen, then we could get rid of that limp-wristed anthem 'God Save the Queen' which hardly stirs the patriotism and passion in me, or other 'citizens' of Great Britian, and yes, before you ask, I am passionate about my country and its history and its position in the world. However I want to look forward to the next millennium not the last. Long live the Republic of Great Britian.
John Knight, UK

Of course she should be accountable if this is supposed to be a democracy. It's not so much the Queen we should get rid of but the aristocracy in the second chamber.
RichardWadsworth, UK

She should be an ordinary citizen like the rest of us. The sooner we replace the monarchy, the sooner our country can stop worrying about our leaders' skiing holidays, clothes sense, sexual habits etc. and get on with worrying about education, health, homelessness and environmental problems.
Simon Bayliss, England

To my "cousins" across the Atlantic: have you no sense of history? Off with your heads! The Royals are one of the best live tourist attractions in the UK. You couldn't do better if you paid an advertising agency the same amount you subsidize the monarchy.
The Royal family also provides another vital service: they provide entertainment to commoners. You certainly can't rely on the BBC for entertainment!
D. Stewart White, USA

Since the Queen is just an ornamental head, there is really nothing she has to be accountable for, unless it is the money spent by the royal family. But it is a good idea for her to find out what the public thinks, since they are the ones who are paying.
Shyam Raghunandan, India

Many countries are envious of our system and we should be fortunate to continue with it, albeit with some modifications which are appropriate as times and attitudes change. Long live the queen.
David James, Cyprus

The Queen should not be held accountable unless you want to reduce her to the level of American presidents. She needs mystique and distance to ensure the monarchy and Great Britain survive. Rule Britannia!
Beverly Rozaire-Brown, USA

Let the Monarch use whatever method she feels appropriate to assess the need for her to change the style of the monarchy. But Britons should resist the urge to meddle in this process. There is already too little "government" by principle and too much pragmatism in public institutions. The world is starved of true leadership that an independent, unelected and responsible monarch is able to exercise if left to do so.
John Miller, Canada

Wake up. The monarchy will not survive if she is not made accountable. This country is living in the past.
Mikko Kuronen, UK

The real question is whether or not there should be a monarchy at all.
Steve Cleary, UK

As the Queen has no real power any more and is just a figure head, there is no reason for her to become accountable.
Craig Willcocks, UK

The monarchy or the Queen cannot be held responsible/accountable since they are not running the government. If the Queen was to be held accountable, she should be reinforced with all the powers of the government, which will result in a monarchy again!
Sulove Bothra, India

In America, if you are recieiving money from the taxpayers, you are accountable to them.
Denise Bredt, USA

My personal opinion is that the monarchy is nothing more than a draw for tourists and has little relevance to the work of running the country. But England without a monarchy? Why, who would go?
Sharon R. Murdock, USA

Accountability is what a constitutional monarchy is all about. My recollection of history is even Queen Victoria felt the need to respond to the public's wishes. The problem arises when the public is subject to hysteria, as in the period after the Princess of Wales's death; that flag incident at Buckingham Palace was an embarassment to the UK, as the Murdoch press manipulated the public terribly. The Queen was treated shabbily, and had no defence.
Mike Melnick, USA

From the perspective of a Brit living in the USA, I am only now becoming aware of how farcical this lavish soap opera has become. Why on earth does the British Tax Payer pay for this institution which only brings ridicule on our country.

This is a self serving institution run purely for those who earn their living and privileged status from it. What right do these people have to brainwash and mould a young boy like William purely for their own ends. The British public should let William know that if he doesn't want to perform this bazaar role which will undoubtedly screw up his life he can just walk away from it.
Doug, USA

The real issue of the monarchy is and always has been that its existence makes us subjects of the monarch/state with duties and not citizens of the state with rights. As such, when she dies she should not be replaced and the whole institution should be consigned to history.
Therion Ware, Malaysia

The British Royal family has been, and still is to most Americans over the age of 35, the hallmark of dignity and wisdom. As a "yank" I hope that the British people will maintain their Queen/King above the fray of politics.
Patrick Burke, USA

The Queen must be accountable only to her own conscience and her own immense sense of responsibility; accountability implies subservience and the Monarch must remain above popular whim and political pressure.

The constitutional advantages of this type of monarchy over other forms of temporary, accountable, electable heads of state are obvious - look at the Nixon debacle or the current embarrassments of Clinton - our monarchy gives stability and permanence as wellas a disintered voice at the highest level of government.
Mervyn, Canada

As head of state, the Queen is already accountable for her actions. As a private individual,The Queen like the rest of us has her conscience. That is good enough for me.
Garry Chantler, Greece

Yes, as a part of the structure of the state she should be accountable to the citizens. However, there is a paradox in the idea of a hereditary monarchy which is democratic. Monarchy is a remnant of absolutism and has no relevance in a democracy.
One other thing. Whenever I hear commentators speaking of reforming the monarchy the disussion rarely if ever considers the fact that the Queen is Head of State not only of the UK but of over a dozen other countries such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Jamaica etc. Certainly, if there is to be a radical redesign of the monarchy the people of these other nations should be consulted, yet British constitutional experts and commentators speak as if the Queen is only a British institution without regard to the Commonwealth. Why?
Andy Lehrer, Canada

The Queen should do what she thinks is right and not be swayed by public opinion.
Daniel Jackson, USA

Be thankful that you have a monarchy. They take off many burdens from the govt. If you had no monarchy, you never would have had Princess Diana.
Robert Waters, USA

I think the death of Diana suddenly woke the monarchy up - like it or not they are accountable.
I think there is a threshold for what the public will tolerate and if they cross it, then the people may very well decide they don't want a monarchy anymore.
What we are witnessing now are the final attempts of dying institution to survive. At the rate we are going we shall be a republic, but with a monarchy - a caring, sharing, peoples monarchy. What's the point? Let's just abolish them now, instead of putting off the inevitable.
Seth Kendall, UK

Provided the Monarchy remains ceremonial, as opposed to exercising their right to influence legislation, then accountability should come through the elected Government. It is their role to ensure that any money paid out is done so in the best interests of the nation.
Andrew Heeps, UK

The only remaining benefits of the monarchy are tourism and fund-raising. It is otherwise a defunct vestige of privilege. I find considerable irony in this latest attempt by the richest woman in the world to obtain a new job description from the masses.
Ashton M. Thorogood, USA

No. In the Westminster model, the monarch is the focal point of the accountability of others, symbolising "the people".
Bill Zielinski, USA

The Queen's position as head of state is unique in that her position is entirely independent of political party politics. By having an independent person as head of state (with a reasonably independent second house, The Lords), the worst excesses of party politics can be mitigated against.
Without her as a truly independent judge of legislation, a situation such as the rise of Hitler etc. might well possibly arise in this country.
Chris Wilson, Great Britain

If society is going to progress towards an egalitarian ideal, then privilige must be restricted and eventually phased out. It is not morally correct that one person can be born into a life of untold riches, when another is born into a life of poverty. The monarchy must go.
Jon Howard, UK

Our monarch should be accountable to her subjects to avoid any misbehaviour on anybody's part.
Robert Watts, Her Majesties Sacred Isle

It's a silly question. For the Queen to be accountable, she would have to actually perform some useful function, rather than simply appearing at ceremonies and leeching off the taxpayer.
I mean, what's the point of making her accountable, when we could all get on quite happily if she and the rest of the royal family simply ceased to exist?
Comments about her being "above the fray of public and political debate" just demonstrate how supremely irrelevant she is to people's everyday lives.
Mathew, USA (UK citizen)

The Royal Family is already accountable in the way that the elected Parliament at Westminster could cut off the money that is provided to the Royal Family.
The suggestion made by a couple of the respondents that the Royal Family "leech" off the Government is incorrect. Any public money given to the Monarchy must be cleared by elected MP's who have total control over the Public Purse. If the Monarchy was to become deeply unpopular then it would be hard to imagine any MP voting to continue the payments or the Monarchy.
The Queen plays a vital role as Head of State, she has certain powers which could be invoked in the most extreme circumstances. In the hands of the Queen it is certain they will not be used for Party Political advantage.
Yet the electorate have always had the final say. This occurred in 1832 and 1910 when the Monarch ensured the Lords could not block measures that the electorate had specifically voted for in a General Election. The Monarchy also helps boost tourism and plays a key role in the Commonwealth. It is highly unlikely that a British Politician would be so readily accepted as the Head of the Commonwealth. As a Monarchist I hope that for the sake of fashion we will not get rid of an institution that continues to serve us well.
Kevin Foster, UK

The Queen should not be accountable. If we hold the Queen accountable, she be come a boneless politican who is lead by opinion polls i.e. Tony Blair and Bill Clinton.
Britain and the Commonwealth have the best Royal Family in the world, do not change anything just to please today's so-called public opinion.
God save the Queen.
George Hartman, Guyana

My answer is no, unless you want to give her power to rule, no one can be responsible for things out of their control.
A. Noronha, Brazil

It is a good idea for the Queen to find out how she is perceived by the people who pay her wages. I'm not so sure how one would go about making her "accountable" but I'm sure she could be more Public Friendly.
Elaine Woobey, Scotland

The Monarchy is the great tie that binds the United Kingdom.
Michael E. Long, USA

Of course the Queen should remain unaccountable, how else could we preserve the monarchy from the ebb and flow of public opinion. The Queen is and should remain above the fray of public and political debate.
John Welch, UK

Back to top | BBC News Home | BBC Homepage	©