View source for Republicanism in the United Kingdom

{{short description|Political movement to replace the United Kingdom's monarchy with a republic}}
{{row hover highlight}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2014}}

{{unbalanced|date=December 2023}}{{Republicanism sidebar}}
{{Politics of the United Kingdom}}
British [[Republicanism|republicans]] seek to replace the [[United Kingdom's monarchy]] with a [[republic]] led by an elected [[head of state]]. Monarchy has been the form of government used in the United Kingdom and its predecessor domains almost exclusively since the [[Middle Ages]], except for [[British Interregnum|a brief interruption]] from 1649–1660, during which [[The Protectorate|a nominally republican government]] did exist under the leadership of [[Oliver Cromwell]].

After Cromwell's Protectorate fell and the [[Stuart Restoration|monarchy was restored]], governing duties were increasingly handed to Parliament, especially as a result of the [[Glorious Revolution]] of 1688. The adoption of the [[constitutional monarchy]] system made the argument for full republicanism less urgent. It was once again a topic of discussion during the late 18th century with the [[American Revolution]], and grew more important with the [[French Revolution]], when the concern was how to deal with the French Republic on their doorstep. This led to a widespread anti-republican movement in Britain, and the issue was dormant for a time.

Dissatisfaction with British rule led to a longer period of agitation in the early 19th century, with failed republican revolutions in [[Rebellions of 1837–1838|Canada in the late 1830s]] and [[Young Ireland rebellion|Ireland in 1848]]. This led to the [[Treason Felony Act 1848|Treason Felony Act]] in 1848, which made it illegal to advocate for republicanism. Another "significant incarnation" of republicanism broke out in the late 19th century, when [[Queen Victoria]] went into mourning and largely disappeared from public view after the death of her husband, [[Albert, Prince Consort|Prince Albert]]. This led to questions about whether or not the institution should continue, with politicians speaking in support of abolition. This ended when Victoria returned to public duties later in the century, and regained significant public support.

More recently, in the early 21st century, [[British Social Attitudes Survey|increasing dissatisfaction]] with the [[House of Windsor]], especially after the [[Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II|death of Elizabeth II]] in 2022, has led to public support for the monarchy reaching historic lows.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-06-27 |title=Public support for the monarchy falls to record low |url=https://natcen.ac.uk/news/public-support-monarchy-falls-record-low |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=National Centre for Social Research |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Curtice |first=John |author-link=John Curtice |date=2022-09-16 |title=State of the Nation: Public support for the monarchy has fallen to a record low |url=https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2022/09/public-support-monarchy-popularity |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=[[New Statesman]] |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-01-08 |title=Support for the monarchy falls below 50 per cent for the first time, new poll says |url=https://www.thenational.scot/news/24035866.support-monarchy-falls-50-per-cent-first-time/ |access-date=2024-04-25 |website=[[The National (Scotland)|The National]] |language=en}}</ref>
[[File:Labour for a Republic.jpg|thumb|Labour for a Republic stall at Labour Party Conference 2025]]

==Context==

=== Definition ===
In [[Great Britain]], republican sentiment has largely focused on the abolition of the British monarchy, rather than the dissolution of the [[Unionism in the United Kingdom|British Union]] or independence for its [[Countries of the United Kingdom|constituent countries]]. In [[Northern Ireland]] however, the term "republican" is usually used in the sense of [[Irish republicanism]]. While also opposed to monarchy, Irish republicans reject the presence of the British state in any form on the [[Ireland|island of Ireland]] and advocate creating a [[united Ireland]], an all-island state comprising the whole of Ireland. Though the opposite stance of [[Unionism in Ireland|unionism]] is compatible with support for a UK republic in theory, in practice it correlates strongly with monarchism.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mitchell |first=David |date=2022-09-21 |title=From Queen Elizabeth to King Charles: how Northern Ireland's unionists feel about the monarchy |url=http://theconversation.com/from-queen-elizabeth-to-king-charles-how-northern-irelands-unionists-feel-about-the-monarchy-190997 |access-date=2025-08-20 |website=The Conversation |language=en-US}}</ref>

===Legal context===
Advocacy of the replacement of the monarchy with a republic has long been an imprisonable offence in law. The [[Treason Felony Act 1848]] prohibits the advocacy of a republic in print. The penalty for such advocacy, even if the republic is to be set up by peaceful means, is lifetime imprisonment. This Act remains in force in the United Kingdom.<ref name="Dyer">{{cite news |author=Clare Dyer |date=June 27, 2003 |title=Guardian vindicated in treason case |work=[[The Guardian]] |location=London |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk_news/story/0,3604,985915,00.html}}</ref> However, under the [[Human Rights Act 1998]], the [[Law Lords]] have held that although the Treason Felony Act remains on the statute books it must be interpreted so as to be compatible with the Human Rights Act, and therefore no longer prohibits peaceful republican activity.<ref>''R. (Rusbridger) v. Attorney General'' [2003] UKHL 38; [2004] AC 357; [2003] 3 All ER 784.</ref>

==History==
Since the 1650s, early modern English republicanism has been extensively studied by historians. [[James Harrington (author)|James Harrington]] (1611–1677) is generally considered to be the most representative republican writer of the era,<ref>{{Cite book |editor-last1=Wiemann |editor-first1=Dirk |editor-last2=Mahlberg |editor-first2=Gaby |date=2016 |title=Perspectives on English Revolutionary Republicanism |url={{GBurl|id=17YoDAAAQBAJ|p=1}} |location=Abingdon-on-Thames |publisher=Routledge |page=1 |isbn=978-1-317-08176-0 |access-date=22 June 2016}}</ref> though [[John Milton]] also wrote, among other things, a defence of the right of the people to execute an unjust ruler titled ''[[The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates]]''.

===Commonwealth of England===
{{More citations needed section|date=June 2017}}
{{Main|Commonwealth of England|The Protectorate|Interregnum (England)|Levellers}}
{{See also|Wars of the Three Kingdoms}}
[[File:Cromwell as a usurper.tiff|thumb|upright|A Dutch satirical view of Cromwell as a usurper of monarchical power<ref>{{Citation |title=The English Republic |work=A History of the English-Speaking Peoples |date=1956 |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781472582362.ch-019 |access-date=2024-11-15 |publisher=Cassell & Company Ltd |doi=10.5040/9781472582362.ch-019 |isbn=978-1-4725-8236-2|url-access=subscription }}</ref>]]

The [[divine right of kings]] to rule unchallenged was established as a political theory during the reign of [[James VI and I|James I]], and remained predominant until the reign of [[Charles I of England|Charles I]], whose poor rule and [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] leanings called his right to rule into question.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Origins & Causes of the English Civil War |url=https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Origins-of-the-English-Civil-War/ |access-date=2025-08-25 |website=Historic UK |language=en-GB}}</ref> These sentiments culminated in the [[English Civil War]], and after [[Execution of Charles I|the king's subsequent execution]] in 1649, Parliament was the only source of power in the newly-renamed [[Commonwealth of England]], though the form of this power changed somewhat in the following years.

During [[Pride's Purge]], many [[Member of Parliament (United Kingdom)|members of Parliament]] who disagreed with the [[New Model Army]] were barred from the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]], meaning the resulting [[Rump Parliament]] and [[English Council of State|Council of State]] (1649-1653) were solely made up of [[List of MPs not excluded from the English parliament in 1648|loyalist members]]. Accordingly, [[Oliver Cromwell]] did not have to contend with much opposition to his plans as [[Charles I of England|Charles I]] did, making the chamber mostly a rubber-stamping organisation. However, not all of his executive decisions were permitted, especially in the ending of the rule of the regional major generals he appointed.{{Citation needed|date=February 2021}}

In 1657, Parliament offered Cromwell [[the Crown]], which would mean reinstating the monarchy. After two months of deliberation, he rejected the offer and was instead ceremonially re-instated as [[Lord Protector]] of England, Scotland and Ireland (Wales was a part of England), with greater powers than he had previously held. [[The Protectorate]] was far more [[Autocracy|autocratic]] than the Rump Parliament and much like previous monarchical rule.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Protectorate {{!}} olivercromwell.org |url=https://www.olivercromwell.org/wordpress/the-founding-of-the-protectorate/ |access-date=2025-08-25 |language=en-GB}}</ref>

It is often suggested that offering Cromwell the crown was an effort to curb his power. As a king, he would be obliged to honour agreements such as [[Magna Carta]], but as Lord Protector he had no such restraints.{{Citation needed|date=September 2025}} The office of Lord Protector was not formally hereditary, although Cromwell was able to nominate his own son, [[Richard Cromwell|Richard]], as his successor.

The [[Levellers]] were an egalitarian movement which had contributed greatly{{citation needed|date=June 2012}} to Parliament's cause, but sought representation for ordinary citizens. Their point of view was strongly represented in the [[Putney Debates]], held between the various factions of the army in 1647. Cromwell and the grandees were not prepared to permit such a radical democracy and used the debates to play for time while the future of the King was being determined.{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}}

===Restoration of the monarchy===
In 1660, [[Charles II of England|Charles II]] was crowned king, ending the [[Interregnum (England)|interregnum]] and restoring the monarchy. Following the [[Glorious Revolution]] of 1688 and the later coronation of [[George I of Great Britain|George I]], power shifted to the monarch's ministers and [[Robert Walpole]]. The newly-joined United Kingdom became a [[constitutional monarchy]].<ref>{{Citation |title=Sir Robert Walpole |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/walpole_robert.shtml |access-date=14 October 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201230015417/http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/walpole_robert.shtml |archive-date=30 December 2020 |url-status=live |publisher=BBC}}</ref> There have been movements throughout the last few centuries whose aims were to remove the monarchy and establish a republican system. A notable period was the time in the late 18th century and early 19th century when many [[Classical radicalism|Radicals]] such as the minister [[Joseph Fawcett]] were openly republican.<ref>{{cite book |first=Daniel E. |last=White |date=2006 |title=Early Romanticism and Religious Dissent |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=93 |isbn=0-521-85895-X}}</ref>

===American and French Revolutions===
[[File:Portrait of Thomas Paine.jpg|thumb|[[Thomas Paine]] (1737–1809): "One of the strongest natural proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings is that nature disproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule, by giving mankind ''an ass for a lion''."<ref name="Foner" />]]
The [[American Revolution]] had a great impact on political thought in Ireland and Britain. According to [[Christopher Hitchens]], the British–American author, philosopher, politician and activist, [[Thomas Paine]] was the "moral author of the American Revolution", who posited in the soon widely read pamphlet ''[[Common Sense]]'' (January 1776) that the conflict of the [[Thirteen Colonies]] with the [[House of Hanover|Hanoverian monarchy]] in London was best resolved by setting up a separate [[democratic republic]].<ref name="NPR">{{cite web |url=https://www.npr.org/2007/10/23/15328527/hitchens-how-paines-rights-changed-the-world |title=Hitchens: How Paine's 'Rights' Changed the World |first=Christopher |last=Hitchens |work=NPR Books |publisher=[[NPR]] |date=23 October 2007 |access-date=23 May 2016}}</ref> To him, republicanism was more important than independence. However, the circumstances forced the American revolutionaries to give up any hope of reconciliation with Britain, and reforming its 'corrupt' monarchial government, that so often dragged the American colonies in its European wars, from within.<ref name="Foner">{{Cite book |last=Foner |first=Eric |date=2005 |title=Tom Paine and Revolutionary America |url={{GBurl|id=OyFF1M8_VDAC|p=73}} |location=Oxford |publisher=Oxford University Press |pages=73–82 |isbn=0-19-517486-0 |access-date=23 May 2016}}</ref> He and other British republican writers saw in the [[United States Declaration of Independence|Declaration of Independence]] (4 July 1776) a legitimate struggle against the Crown, that violated people's freedom and rights, and denied them [[Political representation|representation in politics]].<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Honohan |first1=Iseult |last2=Jennings |first2=Jeremy |date=2006 |title=Republicanism in Theory and Practice |url={{GBurl|id=YBiEiK3Ff4EC|p=44}} |publisher=Psychology Press |page=44 |isbn=0-415-35736-5 |access-date=3 May 2016}}</ref>

{{Main|Revolution Controversy}}

When the [[French Revolution]] broke out in 1789, debates started in the British Isles on how to respond. Soon a pro-Revolutionary republican and anti-Revolutionary monarchist camp had established themselves among the intelligentsia, who waged a pamphlet war until 1795. Prominent figures of the republican camp were [[Mary Wollstonecraft]], [[William Godwin]] and Paine.<ref>{{cite book |editor-first=Marilyn |editor-last=Butler |date=1984 |title=Burke, Paine, Godwin, and the Revolution Controversy |location=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=1 |isbn=0-521-28656-5}}</ref>

Paine would also play an important role inside the revolution in France as an elected member of the [[National Convention]] (1792–1793), where he lobbied for an invasion of Britain to establish a republic after the example of the United States, [[Proclamation of the abolition of the monarchy|France]] and its [[sister republic]]s, but also opposed the [[execution of Louis XVI]], which got him arrested.<ref name="NPR" /> The [[First French Republic]] would indeed stage an [[French expedition to Ireland (1796)|expedition to Ireland]] in December 1796 to help the [[Society of United Irishmen]] set up an Irish republic to destabilise the United Kingdom, but this ended in a failure. The subsequent [[Irish Rebellion of 1798]] was suppressed by forces of the [[The Crown|British Crown]]. [[Napoleon's planned invasion of the United Kingdom|Napoleon also planned an invasion of Britain]] since 1798 and more seriously since 1803, but in 1804 he relinquished republicanism by [[Coronation of Napoleon|crowning himself Emperor of the French]] and converting all Sister Republics into client kingdoms of the [[First French Empire|French Empire]], before calling off the invasion of Britain altogether in 1805.{{Citation needed|date=February 2021}}

===Revolutionary republicanism, 1800–1848===
[[File:Flag used by British Chartists.svg|thumb|The British republican flag, which originated in 1816, in use until at least 1935<ref name="Riot City">{{Cite book |last=Bloom |first=Clive |date=2012 |title=Riot City |url={{GBurl|id=fr59Hr4FDDcC|p=156}} |location=London, UK |publisher=[[Palgrave Macmillan]] |pages=156–158 |isbn=978-1-137-02937-9 |access-date=2 March 2016}}</ref>]]
[[File:English Republican Tricolour.svg|thumb|The English Republican Tricolour proposed by Hugh Williams and described in LJ "Spartacus" Linton's 1851 poem "Our Tricolour"]]
From the start of the French Revolution into the early 19th century, the revolutionary [[Flag of France|blue-white-red tricolour]] was used throughout England, Wales and Ireland in defiance of the royal establishment. During the 1816 [[Spa Fields riots]], a green, white and red horizontal flag appeared for the first time, soon followed by a red, white and green horizontal version allegedly in use during the 1817 [[Pentrich rising]] and the 1819 [[Peterloo massacre]]. The latter is now associated with [[Flag of Hungary|Hungary]], but then it became known as the British Republican Flag. It may have been inspired by the French revolutionary tricolour, but this is unclear. It was however often accompanied by [[Hendiatris|slogans consisting of three words]] such as "Fraternity – Liberty – Humanity" (a clear reference to ''[[Liberté, égalité, fraternité]]''), and adopted by the [[Chartism|Chartist movement]] in the 1830s.<ref name="Riot City" />

Besides these skirmishes in Great Britain itself, separatist republican revolutions against the British monarchy during the Canadian [[Rebellions of 1837–1838]] and the [[Young Ireland rebellion|Young Irelander Rebellion of 1848]] failed.

Parliament passed the [[Treason Felony Act 1848|Treason Felony Act]] in 1848. This act made advocacy of republicanism punishable by [[penal transportation|transportation]] to Australia, which was later amended to life imprisonment. The law is still on the statute books; however in a 2003 case, the [[Law Lords]] stated that "It is plain as a pike staff to the respondents and everyone else that no one who advocates the peaceful abolition of the monarchy and its replacement by a republican form of government is at any risk of prosecution", for the reason that the [[Human Rights Act 1998]] would require the 1848 Act to be interpreted in such a way as to render such conduct non-criminal.<ref name="LawLords">{{cite web |author=[[Law Lords]] |title=Regina v Her Majesty's Attorney General (Appellant) ex parte Rusbridger and another (Respondents) |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200203/ldjudgmt/jd030626/rus-2.htm |website=House of Lords |access-date=11 January 2015}}</ref>

===Late 19th century===
During the later years of [[Queen Victoria]]'s reign, there was considerable criticism of her decision to withdraw from public life following the death of her husband, [[Albert, Prince Consort|Prince Albert]]. This resulted in a "significant incarnation" of republicanism.<ref name="Olech190">{{cite book |url={{GBurl|id=WNI_cx0J5qIC|p=190}} |first=Andrzej |last=Olechnowicz |date=2007 |title=The Monarchy and the British Nation, 1780 to the Present |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=190 |isbn=978-0-521-84461-1}}</ref> During the 1870s, calls for Britain to become a republic on the American or French model were made by the politicians [[Sir Charles Dilke, 2nd Baronet|Charles Dilke]]<ref>{{cite book |first=Thomas M. |last=Costa |editor-first1=James S. |editor-last1=Olson |editor-first2=Robert |editor-last2=Shadle |date=1996 |chapter=Dilke, Charles Wentworth |title=Historical Dictionary of the British Empire |location=Westport, Connecticut |publisher=[[Greenwood Press]] |isbn=0-313-27917-9}}</ref> and [[Charles Bradlaugh]], as well as journalist [[George W. M. Reynolds]].<ref name="Olech190" /> This was also an era in which British republicans supported [[Irish republicanism|Irish republicans]] and in which the [[Irish Home Rule movement]] had advocates in England and Scotland within the context of [[loyal opposition]]. The British republican presence continued in debates and the Labour press, especially in the event of royal weddings, jubilees and births, until well into the [[Interwar period]].<ref name="Olech190" />

Some prominent members of the nascent [[labour movement]], such as [[Independent Labour Party]] leader [[Keir Hardie]] (1856–1915), also held republican views.<ref>{{cite book |first=Fred |last=Reid |date=1978 |title=Keir Hardie: The Making of a Socialist |location=London, UK |publisher=[[Croom Helm]] |page=96 |isbn=0-85664-624-5}}</ref>

===20th-century republicanism===
In 1923, at the annual [[Labour Party Conference]], two motions were proposed, supported by [[Ernest Thurtle]] and [[Emrys Hughes]]. The first was "that the Royal Family is no longer a necessary party of the British constitution", and the second was "that the hereditary principle in the British Constitution be abolished".<ref name="km">{{cite book |first=Kingsley |last=Martin |author-link=Kingsley Martin |date=1962 |title=The Crown and the Establishment |location=London, UK |publisher=Hutchinson |pages=53–54}}</ref> [[George Lansbury]] responded that, although he too was a republican, he regarded the issue of the monarchy as a "distraction" from more important issues. Lansbury added that he believed the "social revolution" would eventually remove the monarchy peacefully in the future. Both of the motions were overwhelmingly defeated.<ref name="km" /><ref>{{cite book |first=Martin |last=Pugh |author-link=Martin Pugh (historian) |date=2011 |title=[[Speak for Britain!: A New History of the Labour Party]] |location=London, UK |publisher=Vintage Books |page=170 |isbn=978-0-09-952078-8}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Jeremy |last=Paxman |author-link=Jeremy Paxman |date=2008 |title=On Royalty : A Very Polite Inquiry Into Some Strangely Related Families |location=New York City |publisher=[[PublicAffairs]] |pages=206–207 |isbn=978-1-58648-491-0}}</ref> Following this event, most of the Labour Party moved away from advocating republican views.<ref name="km" />

Following the [[abdication of Edward VIII]] in 1936, MP [[James Maxton]] proposed a "republican amendment" to the Abdication Bill, which would have established a Republic in Britain. Maxton argued that while the monarchy had benefited Britain in the past, it had now "outlived its usefulness". Five MPs voted to support the bill, including [[Alfred Salter]]. However, the bill was defeated by 403 votes.<ref>{{cite book |first=Denis |last=Judd |date=2012 |title=George VI |location=London, UK |publisher=IB Tauris |page=157 |isbn=978-1-78076-071-1}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Fenner |last=Brockway |author-link=Fenner Brockway |date=1949 |title=Bermondsey Story: The Life of Alfred Salter |location=London, UK |publisher=Allen & Unwin |page=201}}</ref> It was not until 1937 that the first British polling company was established, but questions about retaining the monarchy do not appear to have been asked by any such organisation until some years later.<ref name=":1" />

{{Quote box
| quote = The monarchy's survival has been, and will be, ultimately dependent on the public's respect and belief that there is a value in its existence. In fact, the public seem to have consistently supported it, often greatly valued and cherished it, and the monarchy has not merely survived but flourished.
<br><br>
Yet until a very recent period, this has amounted to no more than a generally held belief: direct measurements of opinion have been rare. Britain has had no referendum on the monarchy, nor a general election in which it was an issue between the major parties; nor, until the 1990s, did it have even semi-regular opinion polls to test whether the people wished to retain the monarchy or would prefer a republic. The reason is perhaps understandable: the broad majority of support was so obvious that there was felt to be little value in measuring it. The opposing minority perhaps saw nothing to be gained by testing their strength. But the result is a frustrating paucity of solid evidence about what ordinary Britons thought about the institution and the royal family until a comparatively recent date.
| author = Roger Mortimore
| title = 
| source = "Measuring British Public Opinion on the Monarchy and the Royal Family" in ''The Windsor Dynasty 1910 to the Present''<ref name=":1"/>
}}

As noted by Roger Mortimore, "the oldest continuing trend series on the straight-choice, monarchy-or-republic, question began only in 1993." He adds, "it seems not to have been until 1966 that any client took the plunge by commissioning a poll directly measuring support for the monarchy." According to Mortimore, this "was commissioned for a [[Panorama (British TV programme)|''Panorama'']] programme to mark [[Charles III|Prince Charles]]'s eighteenth birthday, and the poll found that 'about a sixth of the British people think they would like to see the monarchy abolished'. Three [[Gallup, Inc.|Gallup]] polls in the early and mid-1970s showed support for the status quo significantly higher than this, although they may have tilted the balance in the monarchy's favour by stating the alternative as 'a President, as they have in America and some European countries' at a period when the public standing of the American presidency in Britain cannot have been at its highest."<ref name=":1" />

[[Willie Hamilton]], a republican Scottish Labour MP who served from 1950 to 1987, was known for his outspoken anti-royal views. He discussed these at length in his 1975 book ''My Queen and I''.<ref>Willie Hamilton, ''My Queen and I''. London, Quartet Books, 1975.</ref> However, all available evidence suggests that his view remained one shared by a small minority of Britons for most of his time in Parliament. In ''Crown and People'' (1978), royal historian [[Philip Ziegler]] summarised public opinion on the monarchy in the quarter-century between [[Elizabeth II]]'s accession to the throne and her [[Silver Jubilee of Elizabeth II|Silver Jubilee]] in 1977: "In the years after 1953 Britain entered the age of the psephologist. More and more often allegedly representative cross-sections of the British people found themselves interrogated about their views on abortion, religion, washing-machines, national politics or pornographic films." He notes that on thirteen occasions between 1953 and 1976, via varying questions, the public were asked whether they would prefer Britain to continue with a monarchical form of government or for the country to become a republic. Ziegler lists the proportions favouring a republic as 9% in 1953; 10% in 1956 (in a [[Mass observation surveys|Mass Observation Survey]]); 14% in 1958 (Mass Observation Survey); 10% in 1960 (Mass Observation Survey); 16% in 1964 (Mass Observation Survey); 10% in July 1969 ([[GfK|National Opinion Polls]]); 16% in October 1969 (NOP); 10% in October 1970; 19% in June 1971 (NOP); 12% in January 1972 ([[Gallup, Inc.|Gallup]]); 11% in May 1973 (Gallup); 8% in February 1976 (Gallup); 10% in May 1976 (Gallup). The television film [[Royal Family (film)|''Royal Family'']] was first shown in 1969 and watched by a large audience, which may account for the increased interest in the period following its broadcast.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ziegler |first=Philip |url=https://archive.org/details/crownpeople0000zieg_b5n8/ |title=Crown and people |date=1978 |publisher=[[William Collins, Sons|Collins]] |isbn=0-00-211373-2 |location=London |pages=127–128, 214 |oclc=4787962 |access-date=27 March 2023 |url-access=registration |via=[[Internet Archive]]}}</ref>

Various questions have been asked by opinion polling companies: in the July 1969 survey by NOP, respondents were asked "In your opinion is the Monarchy a good thing or a bad thing for Britain?" 88% approved, with only 5% disapproving.<ref>{{Cite web |date=July 1969 |title=NOP Bulletin 1969 July |url=https://amsr.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/NOP_Reports/id/2129/rec/4 |access-date=2023-03-27 |website=Archive of Market and Social Research (AMSR) |language=en}}</ref> In October that year, the question NOP asked was "Do you think that Britain needs the Queen or not?" 84% answered "Yes", and 16% said "No". Over one in five of those aged 34 and under felt that Britain did not need the Queen (Elizabeth II).<ref>{{Cite web |date=1969 |title=NOP Political Bulletin Special Supplement II: The Monarchy 1969 October |url=https://amsr.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/NOP_Reports/id/2569/rec/1 |access-date=2023-03-27 |website=Archive of Market and Social Research (AMSR) |language=en}}</ref> The same question was asked by NOP in June 1971.<ref>{{Cite web |date=1971 |title=NOP Political Bulletin 1971 June |url=https://amsr.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/NOP_Reports/id/2547/rec/5 |access-date=2023-03-27 |website=Archive of Market and Social Research (AMSR) |language=en}}</ref> In May 1986, NOP stated that "Nine out of ten people think the monarchy should continue in Britain and only 7% believe it should be abolished."<ref>{{Cite web |date=1986 |title=NOP Political, Social, Economic Review Issue no.59 1986 May |url=https://amsr.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/NOP_Reports/id/1057/rec/8 |access-date=2023-03-27 |website=Archive of Market and Social Research (AMSR) |language=en}}</ref>
[[File:Tony Benn2.jpg|thumb|[[Tony Benn]] in 2007]]

The pressure group [[Republic (political organisation)|Republic]], which campaigns for a republic in the United Kingdom, was formed in 1983.<ref>{{cite web |last=Wallis |first=Holly |date=27 May 2012 |title=Diamond Jubilee v Republican Britain |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18161083 |access-date=13 May 2013 |website=BBC News}}</ref> In 1991, Labour MP [[Tony Benn]] introduced the [[Commonwealth of Britain Bill]], which called for the transformation of the United Kingdom into a "democratic, federal and secular Commonwealth of Britain", with an elected president.<ref name="EDM1075">{{cite web |url=http://www.parliament.uk/edm/1995-96/1075 |title=Early day motion 1075: Commonwealth of Britain Bill |date=1 July 1996 |work=UK Parliament}}</ref> The monarchy would be abolished and replaced by a republic with a written constitution. It was read in Parliament a number of times until his retirement at the [[2001 United Kingdom general election|2001 election]], but never achieved a [[Reading (legislature)|second reading]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/bills/commonwealth-of-britain-bill |title=Commonwealth of Britain Bill |work=[[Hansard|Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)]] |publisher=House of Commons |access-date=3 May 2010}}</ref> Benn presented an account of his proposal in ''[[Common Sense (Benn and Hood book)|Common Sense: A New Constitution for Britain]]''.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Benn |first1=Tony |last2=Hood |first2=Andrew |title=Common Sense: New Constitution for Britain |editor=Hood, Andrew |publisher=Hutchinson |location=London |date=17 June 1993 |isbn=0-09-177308-3}}</ref>

In January 1997, [[ITV1|ITV]] broadcast a live television debate ''Monarchy: The Nation Decides'', in which 2.5 million viewers voted on the question "Do you want a monarch?" by telephone. Speaking for the republican view were Professor [[Stephen Haseler]], (chairman of Republic), [[agony aunt]] [[Claire Rayner]], [[Paul Flynn (British politician)|Paul Flynn]], Labour MP for [[Newport West (UK Parliament constituency)|Newport West]] and [[Andrew Neil]], then the former editor of ''[[The Sunday Times]]''. Those in favour of the monarchy included author [[Frederick Forsyth]], [[Bernie Grant]], Labour MP for Tottenham, and [[Jeffrey Archer]], former deputy chairman of the Conservative Party. Conservative MP [[Steven Norris]] was scheduled to appear in a discussion towards the end of the programme, but officials from [[Carlton Television]] said he had left without explanation. The debate was conducted in front of an audience of 3,000 at the [[National Exhibition Centre]] in Birmingham, with the telephone poll result being that 66% of voters wanted a monarch, and 34% did not.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/66-yes-vote-to-monarchy-in-tv-phone-poll-contradicts-previous-result-1.19905 |title=66% 'yes' vote to monarchy in TV 'phone poll contradicts previous result |newspaper=[[The Irish Times]] |last=Borrill |first=Rachel |date=8 January 1997 |access-date=17 February 2019}}</ref>

At the annual [[State Opening of Parliament]], MPs are summoned to the [[House of Lords]] for the [[Speech from the throne|Queen's Speech]]. From the 1990s until the 2010s, republican MP [[Dennis Skinner]] regularly made a retort to [[Black Rod]], the official who commands the [[House of Commons]] to attend the speech.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/06/queen-s-speech-dennis-skinner-s-top-heckles |title=Queen's Speech: Dennis Skinner's top heckles|website=New Statesman|date=21 June 2017|accessdate=12 February 2019}}</ref> Skinner had previously remained in the Commons for the speech.<ref>{{cite news|url= https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/30/dennis-skinner-never-done-cross-party-stuff-nature-of-the-beast-documentary|title= Dennis Skinner: 'I've never done any cross-party stuff. I can't even contemplate it'|work=The Guardian|last=Adams|first=Tim|date=30 July 2017|accessdate=12 February 2019}}</ref>

Polling results suggest that a large majority of Britons were in favour of the monarchy during the 1990s and 2000s, with support mostly ranging from 70% to 74%, and never falling below 65%.

===21st-century republicanism===
[[File:Keep calm and scrap the monarchy.jpg|thumb|Protest for republicanism and against the monarchy in London in 2012]]
[[Ipsos MORI|MORI]] polls in the opening years of the 21st century showed that over 70% of the public supported retaining the monarchy, but in 2005, at the time of the [[wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles]], support for the monarchy dipped, with one poll showing that 65% of people would support keeping the monarchy if there were a referendum on the issue, and 22% saying they favoured a republic.<ref name="ipsos-mori.com">{{cite web |url=https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/122/MonarchyRoyal-Family-Trends-Monarchy-v-Republic-19932013.aspx?view=wide |title=Monarchy/Royal Family Trends – Monarchy v Republic 1993–2013 |date=19 July 2013 |work=[[Ipsos MORI]] |access-date=28 November 2015}}</ref> In a 2006 feature marking the Queen's 80th birthday, [[Time (magazine)|''Time'']] magazine quoted MORI founder [[Robert Worcester]] on this issue, who called it "the most stable measure in British polling".<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=McAllister |first=J. F. O. |date=2006-04-09 |title=A Woman's Work is Never Done |language=en-US |magazine=[[Time (magazine)|Time]] |url=https://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,1181586,00.html |access-date=2023-03-31 |issn=0040-781X}}</ref>

In 2009, an [[ICM Research|ICM]] poll, commissioned by the [[BBC]], found that 76% of those asked wanted the monarchy to continue after the reign of the Queen, while 18% of people said they would favour Britain becoming a republic, and 6% said they did not know.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7967142.stm |title=PM and Palace 'discussed reform' |date=29 March 2009 |publisher=BBC News |access-date=29 March 2009}}</ref>

Support for the monarchy appeared to strengthen in the early to mid-2010s, when the Queen celebrated her [[Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II|Diamond Jubilee]], and her grandson, who was second in line to the throne, got married in a ceremony broadcast on live television; both events were marked by public [[bank holiday]]s. Most polls during this period suggesting that between 75% and 80% (and all suggesting at least 69%) of the public were in favour of the monarchy. In February 2011, a [[YouGov]] poll put support for ending the monarchy after the Queen's death at 13%, if Prince Charles became king.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Positively princely |work=YouGov |date=25 March 2011 |access-date=3 April 2011 |url=http://today.yougov.co.uk/life/positively-princely |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110327084326/http://today.yougov.co.uk/life/positively-princely |archive-date=27 March 2011 |df=dmy-all}}</ref>

However, an ICM poll shortly before the [[Wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton|wedding]] of [[William, Prince of Wales|Prince William]] and [[Catherine, Princess of Wales|Kate Middleton]] on 29 April 2011 suggested that 26% thought Britain would be better off without the monarchy, with only 37% "genuinely interested and excited" by the wedding.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Poll shows support for Royal Family |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=25 April 2011 |access-date=30 April 2011 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/feedarticle/9612583 |location=London, UK}}</ref> The same month, an Ipsos MORI poll of 1,000 British adults found that 75% of the public would like Britain to remain a monarchy, with 18% in favour of Britain becoming a republic.<ref name="ipsos-mori.com" />

In May 2012, in the lead up to the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, an Ipsos MORI poll of 1,006 British adults found that 80% were in favour of the monarchy, with 13% in favour of the United Kingdom becoming a republic. This was thought to be a record-high figure in recent years in favour of the monarchy.<ref name="ipsos-mori.com" />

[[Jeremy Corbyn]], a [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour]] MP with republican views, won [[2015 Labour Party leadership election (UK)|his party's leadership election]] in September 2015, thus becoming [[Leader of the Opposition (United Kingdom)|Leader of the Opposition]] and [[Leader of the Labour Party (UK)|Leader of the Labour Party]]. In 1991, Corbyn had seconded the [[Commonwealth of Britain Bill]].<ref name="EDM1075" /> However, Corbyn stated during his [[2015 Jeremy Corbyn Labour Party leadership campaign|2015 campaign for the leadership]] that republicanism was "not a battle that I am fighting".<ref name="Proctor">{{cite news |url=http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-mps-switch-andy-burnham-9433599 |title=Labour MPs switch from Andy Burnham to left-winger Jeremy Corbyn in leadership race |first=Kate |last=Proctor |date=13 June 2015 |work=[[Newcastle Evening Chronicle]] |access-date=20 June 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150618164047/http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-mps-switch-andy-burnham-9433599 |archive-date=18 June 2015}}</ref><ref name="jeremyrepublicanism">{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33624145 |title=Who is Jeremy Corbyn? Labour leadership contender guide |date=30 July 2015 |work=BBC News |access-date=3 September 2015}}</ref>

At the swearing of oaths in the Commons following the [[2017 United Kingdom general election|2017 general election]], Republic reported that several MPs had prefixed their [[Oath of Allegiance (United Kingdom)#Parliamentarians|parliamentary oath of allegiance]] with broadly republican sentiments, such as a statement referring to their constituents, rather than the Queen. If an MP does not take the oath or the affirmation to the monarch, they will not be able to take part in parliamentary proceedings or paid any salary and allowances until they have done so. Such MPs included [[Richard Burgon]], [[Laura Pidcock]], [[Dennis Skinner]], [[Chris Williamson (politician)|Chris Williamson]], [[Paul Flynn (British politician)|Paul Flynn]], [[Jeff Smith (British politician)|Jeff Smith]], and [[Emma Dent Coad]]. [[Roger Godsiff]] and [[Alex Sobel]] also expressed sympathy for an oath to their constituents.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.republic.org.uk/what-we-do/news-and-updates/mps-break-convention-swear-allegiance-people|title=MPs break convention to swear allegiance to the people|publisher=Republic|date=15 June 2017|accessdate=12 February 2019|archive-date=12 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190212190330/https://www.republic.org.uk/what-we-do/news-and-updates/mps-break-convention-swear-allegiance-people|url-status=dead}}</ref>

{{See also|Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor#Allegations of sexual abuse{{!}}Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor § Allegations of sexual abuse}}

The level of support for the monarchy has declined since the 2010s. {{As of|2024}}, the last published poll in which over 70% favoured the monarchy was in 2019. The proportion favouring a republic has slightly increased at the same time, but has consistently remained a less popular position than maintaining the monarchy. Support for republicanism in Britain has ranged from 13% to 34% since the 1990s, with the figure generally remaining above 20% in the early 2020s. The monarchy is somewhat less popular among [[Black British]] groups, [[British Asians]], and younger Britons (those under 35); these demographic groups are generally more in favour of a republic.

In May 2021, a YouGov poll showed reduced support for the monarchy, with 61% in favour and 24% against among all over-18s; there was a particularly high rise in republican views and an overall plurality for its replacement with an elected head of state in the 18–24 age group (41%–31%).<ref>{{cite news |last=Nolsoe |first=Eir |date=21 May 2021 |title=Young Britons are turning their backs on the monarchy |publisher=YouGov |url=https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/05/21/young-britons-are-turning-their-backs-monarchy |access-date=25 May 2021}}</ref> The poll also suggested significant reductions in support for the monarchy in 25–49-year olds, and a slight fall in support among over 65s.

In May 2022, ahead of the Queen's [[Platinum Jubilee of Elizabeth II|Platinum Jubilee]], another YouGov poll showed that only 31% of 18–24-year olds were in favour of the monarchy, compared to 66% of the population as a whole.<ref>{{cite news |last=Nolsoe |first=Eir |date=1 June 2022 |title=Platinum Jubilee: where does public opinion stand on the monarchy? |publisher=YouGov |url=https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society/articles-reports/2022/06/01/platinum-jubilee-where-does-public-opinion-stand-m |accessdate=18 September 2022}}</ref> Four months later, in the wake of [[Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II|the Queen's death]], this figure stood firm at 67%.<ref>{{cite news |last=Smith |first=Matthew |date=18 September 2022 |title=The monarchy sees a minor improvement in public opinion |publisher=YouGov |url=https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/09/18/monarchy-sees-minor-improvement-public-opinion |accessdate=18 September 2022}}</ref> However, it has not reached this level since then, and two [[Savanta]] polls since [[Charles III|King Charles III]] succeeded his mother have shown support for a republic at over 30%. Aside from a 2022 ''[[Byline Times]]'' poll (which did not include "Don't know" as an option), these are the first opinion poll results to give figures of over 30% in favour of a republic.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-01-07 |title=Royals Poll – Sunday Express – 7 January 2023 |url=https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/royals-poll-sunday-express-7-january-2023/ |access-date=2023-04-03 |website=[[Savanta]] |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-12-15 |title=Sussexes Poll – Savanta – 15 December 2022 |url=https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/sussexes-poll-savanta-15-december-2022/ |access-date=2023-04-03 |website=[[Savanta]] |language=en-GB}}</ref>

In April 2023, YouGov polling found that less than one third of 18 to 24-year-olds were in favour of the monarchy, compared to 78% of over-65s.<ref>{{cite news |date=24 April 2023 |title=How popular are the Royal Family really? A new (awkward) poll has revealed all |url=https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports/a43682164/royal-popularity-poll-2023/ |last=Savin |first=Jennifer |access-date=24 April 2023 |website=Cosmopolitan UK |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=With King Charles' coronation just days away, poll finds 70% of young Brits "not interested" in royal family |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/king-charles-coronation-poll-finds-young-brits-not-interested-in-royals/ |last=Ott |first=Haley |date=24 April 2023 |publisher=CBS News |access-date=24 April 2023 |language=en-US}}</ref> The anti-monarchy campaign group Republic reported a doubling of its membership since the [[Coronation of King Charles III]] that May, whilst its income had substantially increased. Commenting in November that year, chief executive [[Graham Smith (activist)|Graham Smith]] said, "In 2020, our income was £106,000. It was £172,000 the next year; last year it was £286,000. On the death of the queen, we had £70,000 in donations that month. This year, income is hitting £560,000."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Williams |first=Zoe |date=2023-11-28 |title='The monarchy looks vulnerable': will Britain's republicans bring down the king? |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/28/the-monarchy-looks-vulnerable-will-britains-republicans-bring-down-the-king |access-date=2024-01-22 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> Support for British the monarchy has for decades been lower among younger people, while older people are more likely to feel that the monarchy is important.<ref>{{cite news |last=Curtice |first=John |date=2022-11-15 |title=Public support for the monarchy is lowest among young Britons, but that's nothing new |url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/public-support-for-the-monarchy-is-lowest-among-young-britons-but-thats-nothing-new |work=PBS News}}</ref>

In a January 2024 poll conducted by [[Savanta]], support for the monarchy stood at 48%, when respondents were asked "What would you prefer for the UK, a monarchy or an elected head of state?". This was the first time the figure preferring a monarchy had been below 50% since published opinion polling on the topic had begun.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Monarchy support falls below 50% for first time: NEW POLL |url=https://www.republic.org.uk/monarchy_support_falls_below_50_for_first_time_new_poll |access-date=9 January 2024 |website=Republic}}</ref>

=== Protests ===
{{multiple image|perrow = 2|total_width=300
| image1 = Christians for a Republic. Reminding us of the Radical Egalitarian Message of the Gospels (52880641470).jpg
| image2 = Abolish The Monarchy (52880409644).jpg
| image3 = Another Coronation View the MSM didn't show us (52880278926).jpg
| image4 = Not My King Protest (52880718233).jpg
| footer = Demonstrations and protests against the coronation of Charles III and Camilla in 2023
}}
Protests against King Charles III have included [[Blank piece of paper|blank pieces of paper]], heckling during royal processions involving [[Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor]], and [[egging]] attempts.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-09-13 |title=Police demand details of man who held up blank piece of paper amid protest arrests |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/king-charles-protests-arrest-signs-b2165602.html |access-date=2023-04-02 |website=[[The Independent]] |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Man arrested after heckling Prince Andrew as he walked behind Queen's coffin in Edinburgh |url=https://news.sky.com/story/man-arrested-after-heckling-prince-andrew-during-royal-procession-12695924 |access-date=2023-04-02 |website=[[Sky News]] |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Man Arrested After Heckling Prince Andrew During Queen Elizabeth's Funeral Procession |url=https://www.forbes.com/video/6312226282112/man-arrested-after-heckling-prince-andrew-during-queen-elizabeths-funeral-procession/ |access-date=2023-04-02 |website=[[Forbes]] |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2022-12-06 |title=King Charles Dodges Second Supposed Egging Incident In Less Than A Month |url=https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/king-charles-iii-dodge-second-egging-incident_uk_638f4b7ee4b09eeedba0e626 |access-date=2023-04-02 |website=[[HuffPost UK]] |language=en}}</ref>

A major protest was planned by Republic for the Coronation of King Charles III in May 2023. However, on the day of the event, Republic CEO [[Graham Smith (activist)|Graham Smith]] and five others were arrested by police. They were held for over 15 hours, before being released.<ref>{{Cite magazine |date=2023-05-06 |title=Anti-Monarchy Protesters Arrested at King Charles' Coronation |url=https://time.com/6277591/anti-monarchy-protesters-arrested-king-charles-coronation/ |access-date=2024-01-21 |magazine=TIME |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-05-09 |title=Met chief Mark Rowley defends officers over Coronation arrests |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65537069 |access-date=2024-01-22 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref> The [[Metropolitan Police]] later confirmed that no further action would be taken and issued apologies to the protestors, though Smith did not accept his and demanded a full [[public inquiry]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-05-08 |title=Coronation: Met expresses 'regret' over arresting six anti-monarchy protesters |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65527007 |access-date=2024-01-22 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref> The arrests were made in spite of months of previous discussion about the protests between Republic and the police.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-05-08 |title=Coronation: Met Police had every intention of arresting protesters - Republic leader |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65523439 |access-date=2024-01-22 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref> [[Human Rights Watch]] UK director Yasmine Ahmed said, "This is something you would expect to see in [[Moscow]], not London." Hundreds of protesters assembled in central London that day; it was also reported that 300 people had gathered in [[Cardiff]] to protest.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2023-05-06 |title=Dozens of protesters arrested during Coronation |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65507435 |access-date=2024-01-22 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref>

A subsequent ceremony in [[Edinburgh]] marking the coronation was targeted by republican protesters, led by [[Patrick Harvie]], the co-leader of [[Scottish Greens]] and a [[Scottish Government]] minister.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Carrell |first1=Severin |last2=Brooks |first2=Libby |date=2023-07-05 |title=Scottish minister leads protest at King Charles coronation event |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/05/scottish-minister-leads-protest-at-king-charles-coronation-event |access-date=2024-01-21 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> Chants of "not my king" could be heard inside the venue for the event, which took place in July 2023.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-07-06 |title='Not my King' chants 'clearly audible' inside Charles's Scottish coronation celebration |url=https://uk.news.yahoo.com/not-king-chants-clearly-audible-122719205.html |access-date=2024-01-22 |website=Yahoo News |language=en-GB}}</ref>

In September 2023, republican activists staged what was called the "first-ever" protest inside [[Buckingham Palace]]. In a photo released by Republic, protestors wore T-shirts spelling out "Not My King." In a statement, Republic said "The protest is the latest in a series of actions aimed at pushing forward the debate about the future of the monarchy". They said that six of the activists had been briefly detained by security, before being escorted out of the front gate.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Pokharel |first1=Sugam |last2=Foster |first2=Max |date=2023-09-23 |title=Anti-monarchy campaigners stage protest inside Buckingham Palace |url=https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/23/europe/buckingham-palace-protest-intl-gbr/index.html |access-date=2024-01-22 |website=CNN |language=en}}</ref>

The [[State Opening of Parliament]] in November 2023, the first by a king in over 70 years, was also met with protests by republicans, who booed King Charles as he arrived. It was later reported that Charles had waved to them from his carriage.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Somerville |first=Ewan |date=2023-11-07 |title=Watch: King Charles waves at booing anti-monarchy protesters |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/11/07/king-charles-booed-anti-monarchy-protesters-parliament/ |access-date=2024-01-22 |work=The Telegraph |language=en-GB |issn=0307-1235}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=King's Speech: Charles booed by protesters after setting out Rishi Sunak's political agenda |url=https://news.sky.com/story/kings-speech-tougher-sentences-for-serious-offenders-announced-as-crime-takes-centre-stage-13002485 |access-date=2024-01-22 |website=Sky News |language=en}}</ref>

==Supporters==
{{Further|List of British republicans}}

A number of prominent individuals in the United Kingdom advocate republicanism.

===Political parties===
{{As of|2024}}, the [[Green Party of England and Wales]], with four MPs in Parliament since 2024, has an official policy of republicanism.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.republic.org.uk/blog/?p=1188 |title=Could we have the first republican party MPs after this election? |first=Graham |last=Smith |date=16 April 2010 |website=[[Republic (political organisation)|Republic]] |access-date=17 August 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130801025252/http://www.republic.org.uk/blog/?p=1188 |archive-date=1 August 2013}}</ref> The Irish republican party [[Sinn Féin]] has seven MPs, but they [[Abstentionism|do not take their UK parliamentary seats]] as a rejection of UK authority in Northern Ireland.<ref name="belfasttele">{{cite news |url=http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/conservative-politician-urges-sinn-fein-mps-to-take-seats-in-house-of-commons-29694892.html |title=Conservative politician urges Sinn Fein MPs to take seats in House of Commons |newspaper=Belfast Telegraph |date=23 October 2013 |access-date=30 October 2013}}</ref> Though the official policy of the [[Scottish National Party]] (SNP) is that the British monarch would remain head of state of an [[Scottish nationalism|independent Scotland]] unless the people of Scotland decided otherwise,<ref name="Salmond">{{cite news |last=Salmond |first=Alex |date=24 January 2012 |title=Scotland's place in the world |url=http://www.snp.org/speech/2012/jan/scotlands-place-world |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130801021331/http://www.snp.org/speech/2012/jan/scotlands-place-world |archive-date=1 August 2013 |website=Scottish National Party}}</ref> there are individual members who support a republic.{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}} [[Plaid Cymru]] have a similar view for [[Wales]], although its youth wing, [[Plaid Ifanc]], has an official policy advocating a Welsh republic.<ref>{{cite web |title=Plaid Cymru Youth |url=https://www.plaidifanc.org/amdanom_ni-about_us |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220220204635/https://www.plaidifanc.org/amdanom_ni-about_us |archive-date=20 February 2022 |access-date=14 September 2022}}</ref> The [[Scottish Socialist Party]] and the [[Scottish Greens]] both support an independent Scottish republic.<ref>{{cite news |date=7 June 2014 |title=For a Modern Democratic Republic |url=https://scottishsocialistparty.org/modern-democratic-republic/ |accessdate=18 September 2022 |publisher=Scottish Socialist Party}}</ref><ref name="sgreensindy">{{cite web |title=Scottish Independence |url=http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Scottish-Greens-Independence-Briefing-Nov-12.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140328083816/http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Scottish-Greens-Independence-Briefing-Nov-12.pdf |archive-date=28 March 2014 |access-date=16 February 2014 |website=Scottish Greens |df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Carrell |first=Severin |date=2 June 2022 |title=Scottish Greens walk out of Holyrood debate on Queen's jubilee |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jun/02/scottish-greens-walk-out-of-holyrood-debate-on-queens-jubilee |accessdate=18 September 2022 |work=[[The Guardian]]}}</ref>

The [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]], the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]], and the [[Liberal Democrats (UK)|Liberal Democrats]] do not have an official policy of republicanism. The [[Scottish National Party]], which supports [[Scottish independence]], also does not have an official policy of republicanism, and instead favours making a decision on the head of state of an independent Scotland only after independence is attained in itself.

[[File:No Exceptions. Labour For A Republic (52880412299) (cropped).jpg|thumb|right|A Labour for a Republic sign at a demonstration against the [[coronation of Charles III and Camilla]] on 6 May 2023]]
Labour for a Republic is a republican [[pressure group]] of Labour Party members and supporters,<ref name="lfr">{{cite web|url=https://labourforarepublic.org.uk/about/|title=About|website=Labour for a Republic|accessdate=12 February 2019|date=18 June 2017|archive-date=12 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190212074450/https://labourforarepublic.org.uk/about/|url-status=dead}}</ref> founded by Labour activist [[Ken Ritchie]] in May 2011. It held its first meeting in 2012.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://labourforarepublic.org.uk/|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120614190436/http://www.labourforarepublic.org.uk/|title=Building support within the Labour Party|website= Labour for a Republic| archive-date= 14 June 2012|access-date=12 February 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="bbcnews">{{cite web|url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29343859|title= The secret life of Labour's republicans|website=BBC News|last=Wheeler|first=Brian|date=24 September 2014|accessdate=20 February 2019}} Ken Ritchie is misspelt as Ken Richey but is the same person.</ref> It has since held meetings, other informal meetings, and appeared in the media on a few occasions. As of September 2022, its chairman is Nick Wall.<ref name="Labour for a Republic, Sep 2022">{{cite news |last= Nevett |first= Joshua |date= 25 September 2022 |title= Labour republicans say national anthem doesn't marry with party values |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63024360 |work= BBC News |access-date= 26 September 2022}}</ref> The organisation held an event at the Labour Party's annual conference on 25 September 2022, which attracted large crowds, and included ''[[The Guardian]]''{{'}}s columnist [[Polly Toynbee]], author Paul Richards, and expert in constitutional law Dr Adam Tucker as panellists.<ref name="Labour for a Republic, Sep 2022"/>

In response to the Labour Party's decision to sing "[[God Save the King]]" at the conference, panellists and those who attended the event said they did not want to see it booed or heckled. It was reported that the singing was not disrupted, and that the minute of silence for the recent death of Elizabeth II was observed without failure.<ref name="Labour for a Republic, Sep 2022" /> In 2023, the Labour Party added pro-republic campaign group [[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]] to a list of organisations which local party branches were no longer able to affiliate with.<ref>{{Cite news |last= |first= |last2= |first2= |date=2023-05-04 |title=Labour MPs attack party rule changes curbing links with anti-monarchy group |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/04/labour-mps-attack-party-rule-changes-curbing-links-with-anti-monarchy-group-republic |access-date=2023-06-07 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

It is rare for a high-profile British politician to identify with republicanism, even among those who campaigned for a republic earlier in their careers. Former UK prime minister [[Liz Truss]] was an advocate of republicanism prior to becoming a Conservative MP.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/liz-truss-monarchy-republicanism-abolish-b2128076.html|title=Liz Truss calls for monarchy to be abolished during Republican past in resurfaced clip|accessdate=27 September 2022|date=13 September 2022|work=[[The Independent]]}}</ref> Labour Party leader Sir [[Keir Starmer]] was, at an earlier time in his career, also on record as a republican, but no longer identifies as one.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://unherd.com/thepost/i-hate-to-admit-it-but-keir-starmer-is-good-at-politics/|last=Bastani|first=Aaron|authorlink=Aaron Bastani|title=I hate to admit it, but Keir Starmer is good at politics|work=UnHerd|date=26 September 2022|accessdate=27 September 2022}}</ref> His predecessor as Labour leader, [[Jeremy Corbyn]], although an avowed republican, also stressed that his personal support for republicanism would not influence his policy agenda.<ref name="Wheeler 2017">{{cite web | author=Wheeler, Richard | title=Leadership debate: Abolishing the monarchy is not on my agenda, Jeremy Corbyn says | website=The Independent | date=29 May 2017 | url=https://www.independent.co.uk/leadership-debate-latest-jeremy-corbyn-jeremy-paxman-monarchy-not-on-my-agenda-a7762281.html | access-date=29 May 2017 | quote=The Labour leader, known for his republican beliefs... | url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170624214559/http://www.independent.co.uk/leadership-debate-latest-jeremy-corbyn-jeremy-paxman-monarchy-not-on-my-agenda-a7762281.html | archive-date=24 June 2017}}</ref> The former [[First Minister of Scotland]] and [[leader of the Scottish National Party]] from March 2023 to May 2024, [[Humza Yousaf]], is a republican.<ref name=":0">{{Cite news |date=2023-03-08 |last=Sim |first=Philip |title=The night the SNP leadership contest turned personal |language=en-GB |work=[[BBC News]] |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64887664 |access-date=2023-03-08}}</ref>

===Republic===
{{Main|Republic (pressure group)}}

The largest{{citation needed|date=March 2022}} lobby group in favour of republicanism in the United Kingdom is the [[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]] campaign group, founded in 1983.<!--That they are in the media supported by these two citations. "Main organisation" not supported in the sources (quite the contrary: "We're really getting our message out, considering our size,", "We have one-and-a-half paid employees so we're definitely punching above our weight"). How frequently in "much of the media" occasional/frequently is not mentioned in the sources.--> The group has benefited from occasional negative publicity about the Royal Family, and Republic reported a large rise in membership following the wedding of then-Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles. Republic has lobbied on changes to the parliamentary oath of allegiance, royal finances and changes to the [[Freedom of Information Act 2000|Freedom of Information Act]] relating to the monarchy, none of which have produced any change. However, Republic has been invited to Parliament to talk as witnesses on certain issues related to the monarchy, such as conduct of the [[honours system in the United Kingdom]].{{citation needed|date=November 2021}}

In 2009, Republic made news by reporting Prince Charles's architecture charity to the [[Charity Commission for England and Wales|Charity Commission]], claiming that the Prince was effectively using the organisation as a private lobbying firm (the Commission declined to take the matter further).<ref>{{cite news |last=Booth |first=Robert |date=20 August 2009 |title=Prince Charles's architecture foundation could face investigation |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/aug/20/prince-charles-architecture-foundation-charity-commission |access-date=28 November 2015 |newspaper=The Guardian}}</ref> Republic has previously broken stories about royals using the Freedom of Information Act.{{citation needed|date=March 2022}}

===Media===
Newspapers and magazines such as ''[[The Guardian]]'', ''[[The Observer]]'', ''[[The Economist]]'' and ''[[The Independent]]'' have all advocated the abolition of the monarchy.<ref name="NewStat">{{cite magazine |last=Katawala |first=Sunder |title=The monarchy is more secure than ever |url=http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2012/02/monarchy-jubilee-media-public |access-date=9 June 2013 |magazine=[[New Statesman]] |date=7 February 2012}}</ref><ref name="Economist article">{{cite news |url=https://www.economist.com/leaders/1997/09/11/the-peoples-monarchy |title=The people's monarchy |access-date=1 June 2022 |newspaper=The Economist |date=11 September 1997}}</ref> In the wake of the [[United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal|2009 MPs' expenses scandal]], a poll of readers of ''The Guardian'' and ''The Observer'' placed support for abolition of the monarchy at 54%, although only 3% saw it as a top priority.<ref name="GuardianPoll">{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/jun/03/guardian-observer-political-reform-survey |newspaper=The Guardian |title=Readers give their verdict: first fix the electoral system |date=3 June 2009 |location=London |access-date=22 May 2010}}</ref> The online magazine ''[[Spiked (magazine)|Spiked]]'' also supports republicanism.<ref>{{cite web |last=Slater |first=Tom |date=4 June 2022 |title=With republicans like these, who needs monarchists? |url=https://www.spiked-online.com/2022/06/04/with-republicans-like-these-who-needs-monarchists/ |access-date=2022-06-06 |website=spiked |language=en-GB}}</ref>

==Opinion polling==
{{See also|Scottish republicanism|Welsh republicanism}}

===British Social Attitudes survey===
The [[National Centre for Social Research]] (NatCen) has collected survey data on public attitudes towards the UK's Monarchy since 1983, when the [[British Social Attitudes Survey]] first asked about this, with the question "How important or unimportant do you think it is for Britain to continue to have a monarchy: very important, quite important, not very important, not at all important, or, do you think the monarchy should be abolished?" Results for the latter answer between 1983 and 2012 ranged from 3% to 11%.<ref name=":1">{{Citation |last=Mortimore |first=Roger |title=Measuring British Public Opinion on the Monarchy and the Royal Family |date=2016 |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1057/978-1-137-56455-9_6 |work=The Windsor Dynasty 1910 to the Present |pages=135–156 |editor-last=Glencross |editor-first=Matthew |access-date=2023-03-31 |place=London |publisher=[[Palgrave Macmillan|Palgrave Macmillan UK]] |language=en |doi=10.1057/978-1-137-56455-9_6 |isbn=978-1-137-56454-2 |editor2-last=Rowbotham |editor2-first=Judith |editor3-last=Kandiah |editor3-first=Michael D.|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Since then, the results suggest a long-term decline in support for the institution, with 2023 survey data showing the number of people who said the monarchy was "very important" falling to 29%, an all-time low. 26% said it was "quite important", making a combined total of 55% believing it was important.<ref>{{cite web |title=British public support for monarchy at historic low, poll reveals |date=2023-04-28 |website=[[The Guardian]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230720133914/https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/28/public-support-monarchy-historic-low-poll-reveals |archive-date=2023-07-20 |url-status=live |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/apr/28/public-support-monarchy-historic-low-poll-reveals}}</ref> This total stood at 54% in the data released a year later, in April 2024. Gillian Prior, deputy chief executive at the National Centre for Social Research, said: "NatCen has been collecting data on the public's attitudes towards the monarchy for over 40 years, and it is clear we are observing a downward trend in support for the monarchy."<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-04-28 |title=British Social Attitudes: Support for monarchy falls to new low |url=https://natcen.ac.uk/news/british-social-attitudes-support-monarchy-falls-new-low |access-date=2024-07-02 |website=National Centre for Social Research |language=en}}</ref>

===Graphical summary===
The chart below shows opinion polls conducted about whether the United Kingdom should become a republic. The trend lines are [[local regression]]s (LOESS).

[[File:Opinion polling on whether the United Kingdom should become a republic.svg|800px|center]]

===Poll results===
The following table includes all known published polls in which the general public in the UK or Great Britain are asked for their preference on the future of the monarchy. Generally, the question revolves around whether they support the continuation of the monarchy or its abolition (regardless of a republic being specified). The question has been framed in different ways: some polling companies have asked whether respondents prefer a monarchy or an elected head of state.

{| class="wikitable sortable mw-datatable" style="text-align:center;font-size:90%;line-height:14px;"
! rowspan="2"|Dates<br />conducted
! rowspan="2"|Pollster
! rowspan="2"|Client
! rowspan="2" data-sort-type="number"|Sample<br />size
! class="unsortable" style="width:70px;"|Monarchy
! class="unsortable" style="width:70px;"|Republic
! class="unsortable" style="width:70px;"|Undecided{{efn|Including don't know, would not vote, refused to answer}}
! rowspan="2" |Lead
|-
! data-sort-type="number" style="background:#993311;"|
! data-sort-type="number" style="background:#0F9988;"|
! data-sort-type="number" style="background:silver;"|
|-

|26–27 Oct 2025
|[https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/53286-royal-family-favourability-trackers-october-2025 YouGov]
|N/A
|2,161
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|25%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|37%
|-
|23 Oct 2025
|[https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/press-and-polls/prince-andrew-poll-republic-24-october-2025/ Savanta]
|[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]
|1,057
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''48%'''
|32%{{efn|name=MoHS}}
|18%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|16%
|-
|5–6 Aug 2025
|[https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/52737-royal-family-favourability-trackers-august-2025 YouGov]
|N/A
|2,292
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''65%'''
|23%
|12%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|42%
|-
|14–15 Aug 2024
|[https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50427-how-do-britons-feel-about-the-royals-after-two-years-of-king-charles YouGov]
|N/A
|2,021
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''65%'''
|25%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|40%
|-
|{{opdrts|26|29|Apr|2024|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/public-perceptions-of-royal-family-improve-prince-and-princess-of-wales-remain-most-popular-royals Ipsos]
|''[[The Mail on Sunday]]''
|2,166
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''60%'''
|28%
|8%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|32%
|-
|{{opdrts|1|4|Mar|2024|year}}
|[https://assets.nationbuilder.com/republic/pages/772/attachments/original/1709905706/comparison_nov_to_mar_savanta.pdf?1709905706 Savanta]
|[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]
|2,256
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''53%'''
|33%{{efn|name=MoHS}}
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|20%
|-
|{{opdrts|15|16|Jan|2024|year}}
|[https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/Republic_Monarchy_240116_W.pdf YouGov]
|[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]
|2,089
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''45%'''
|31%{{efn|name=MoHS}}
|24%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|14%
|-
|{{opdrts|5|8|Jan|2024|year}}
|[https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/monarchy-poll-republic-8-january-2024/ Savanta]
|[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]
|2,281
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''48%'''
|32%{{efn|name=MoHS}}
|20%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|16%
|-
|rowspan=2 {{opdrts|24|26|Nov|2023|year}}
|rowspan=2|[https://savanta.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Omni_W186_Republic_Tables_20231127_Private.xlsx Savanta]
|rowspan=2|[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]
|rowspan=2|2,283
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''60%'''
|29%
|12%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|31%
|-
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''52%'''
|34%{{efn|name=MoHS|Question asked whether respondents prefer a monarchy or an elected head of state for the UK.}}
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|18%
|-
|{{opdrts|6|12|Sep|2023|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2023-10/Ipsos%20Sep%202023%20Political%20Monitor%20Charts_Royals_PUBLIC.pdf Ipsos]
|N/A
|1,006
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''66%'''
|25%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|41%
|-
|{{opdrts|26|28|Aug|2023|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/5nhnwyt4ui/Internal_RoyalFavourability_230831_W.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|2,020
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|26%
|11%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|36%
|-
|{{opdrts|10|16|May|2023|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2023-05/Ipsos%20May%202023%20Political%20Monitor%20Charts_Royals_190523_PUBLIC.pdf Ipsos]
|N/A
|1,006
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|28%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|34%
|-
|{{opdrts|10|12|May|2023|year}}
|[https://www.opinium.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/VI-2023-05-10-Observer-Tables-with-Monarchy.xlsx Opinium]
|''[[The Observer]]''
|2,050
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''60%'''
|25%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|35%
|-
|{{opdrts|6|8|May|2023|year}}
| colspan="7" |[[Coronation of Charles III and Camilla|Coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla]] and [[bank holiday]] weekend
|-
|{{opdrts|3|4|May|2023|year}}
|[https://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/10-05-2023-The-i-published-tables-April-2023.xlsx BMG]
|[[i (British newspaper)|''i'' (British newspaper)]]
|1,534
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''52%'''
|23%
|25%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|29%
|-
|{{opdrts|28|2|May|2023|year}}
|[https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/monarchy-poll-republic-5-may-2023/ Savanta]
|[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]
|2,274
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''57%'''
|30%{{efn|name=MoHS|Question asked whether respondents prefer a monarchy or an elected head of state for the UK.}}
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|27%
|-
|{{opdrts|28|30|Apr|2023|year}}
|[https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/royals-poll-yahoo-news-3-may-2023/ Savanta]
|[[Yahoo! News]]
|2,274
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''57%'''
|29%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|28%
|-
|{{opdrts|26|27|Apr|2023|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/n4dvrwraii/TheTimes_RoyalFamily_230427.pdf YouGov]
|''[[The Times]]''
|2,111
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''60%'''
|26%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|34%
|-
|{{opdrts|25|26|Apr|2023|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/72bpekq9nm/Internal_RoyalTrackers_230426_W.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|2,030
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|25%
|12%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|37%
|-
|{{opdrts|24|25|Apr|2023|year}}
|[https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/DataTables_Monarchy_Apr2023.xlsx Find Out Now]
|[[Electoral Calculus]]
|2,211
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''54%'''
|20%
|26%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|34%
|-
|{{opdrts|21|23|Apr|2023|year}}
|[https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/monarchy-poll-itv-news-2-may-2023/ Savanta]
|[[ITV News]]
|2,181
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''53%'''
|19%
|28%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|34%
|-
|{{opdrts|14|17|Apr|2023|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/mcn5c6fr93/BBCPanorama_RoyalFamily_230417_w.pdf YouGov]
|[[Panorama (British TV programme)|''Panorama'' (BBC)]]
|4,592
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''58%'''
|26%
|16%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|32%
|-
|{{opdrts|22|29|Mar|2023|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/monarchyroyal-family-trends-monarchy-v-republic-1993-2023 Ipsos]
|N/A
|1,004
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''65%'''
|25%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|40%
|-
|6 Feb – 23 Mar 2023
|[http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Monarchy-poll-tables-Great-Britain.xlsx Lord Ashcroft Polls]
|N/A
|10,294{{efn|The survey also allowed respondents to choose "I would not vote"; 9% of the base selected this option, and 13% chose "Don't know".}}
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''56%'''
|23%
|22%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|33%
|-
|{{opdrts|18|20|Mar|2023|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/k9jso1g41l/Internal_RoyalTrackers_230320.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,983
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''61%'''
|24%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|37%
|-
|{{opdrts|25|15|Feb|2023|year}}
|[https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/DataTables_Het_20230226.xlsx Find Out Now / Electoral Calculus]
|''Property Chronicle''
|1,030
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''55%'''{{efn|Respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the statements "Do you agree or disagree that the British Monarchy should be abolished?" and "Do you agree or disagree that the British Monarchy should be kept?"; the results of the two questions were then averaged.}}
|23%
|22%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|32%
|-
|{{opdrts|18|25|Jan|2023|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2023-01/ipsos-king-charles-coronation-poll-tables.pdf Ipsos]
|N/A
|1,001
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''64%'''
|22%
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|42%
|-
|{{opdrts|12|16|Jan|2023|year}}
|[https://deltapoll.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Deltapoll-Royals230116-PDF.pdf Deltapoll]
|N/A
|1,059
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''63%'''
|23%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|40%
|-
|{{opdrts|10|11|Jan|2023|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/2ac4xx18vf/Internal_RoyalFavourability_230106.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,691
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''64%'''
|23%
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|41%
|-
|{{Opdrts|5|6|Jan|2023|year}}
|[https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/royals-poll-sunday-express-7-january-2023/ Savanta]
|''[[Sunday Express]]''
|2,124
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''55%'''
|33%
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|22%
|-
|{{opdrts|14|15|Dec|2022|year}}
|[https://assets.nationbuilder.com/republic/pages/510/attachments/original/1671452453/yougovpolldec22x.pdf?1671452453 YouGov]
|[[Republic (political organisation)|Republic]]
|1,690
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''60%'''
|25%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|35%
|-
|{{opdrts|9|11|Dec|2022|year}}
|[https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/published-polls/sussexes-poll-savanta-15-december-2022/ Savanta]
|N/A
|2,250
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''55%'''
|31%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|24%
|-
|{{opdrts|21|22|Sep|2022|year}}
|[https://jlpartners.com/s/Royal-Family-tables.xlsx JL Partners]
|''[[The Sun on Sunday]]''
|2,010
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''66%'''
|25%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|41%
|-
|{{opdrts|13|14|Sep|2022|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/zibv4k3off/Internal_RoyalTracking_220914.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,710
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''67%'''
|20%
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|47%
|-
|{{opdrts||13|Sep|2022|year}}
|[https://peoplepolling.org/tables/202209_GBN_W37_full.pdf People Polling]
|[[GB News]]
|1,245
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''63%'''
|19%
|19%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|44%
|-
|{{opdrts|11|12|Sep|2022|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/c2lzp15u60/TheTimes_RoyalFamily_Results_220912.pdf YouGov]
|''[[The Times]]''
|1,727
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''64%'''
|21%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|43%
|-
|{{opdrts||8|Sep|2022|year}}
|colspan="7"|[[Charles III]] accedes to the throne following the [[Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II|death of his mother]]<ref>{{Cite web |last=Torrance |first=David |date=29 September 2022 |title=The Accession of King Charles III |url=https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9621 |url-status=live |access-date=13 October 2022 |archive-date=23 Sep 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220923145929/https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9621/|website=House of Commons Library |quote=His Majesty King Charles III immediately succeeded to the Throne upon the death of his mother, Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, on the afternoon of Thursday 8 September.}}</ref>
|-
|{{opdrts|14|15|Jun|2022|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/j0irfjrzfc/Republic_Monarchy_220615_W.pdf YouGov]
|[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]
|1,678
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''61%'''
|24%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|37%
|-
|{{opdrts|2|5|Jun|2022|year}}
| colspan="7" |Bank holiday weekend celebrating the [[Platinum Jubilee of Elizabeth II]]
|-
|{{opdrts|30|31|May|2022|year}}
|[https://www.omnisis.co.uk/poll-results/jubilee/ Omnisis]
|''[[Byline Times]]''
|1,026
| style="background:#FADBD1" |'''66%'''
|34%
|–
| style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;" |32%
|-
|{{opdrts|27|29|May|2022|year}}
|[https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/platinum-jubilee-queen-half-britons-wont-celebrate-royal-family-out-of-touch-poll-1665587 Savanta ComRes]
|N/A
|2,177
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''57%'''
|29%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|28%
|-
|{{opdrts||27|May|2022|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2022-05/ipsos-attitudes-to-royal-family-poll-may-2022-tables.pdf Ipsos]
|N/A
|1,013
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''68%'''
|22%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|46%
|-
|{{opdrts|16|17|May|2022|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/tzluoaf4hh/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20-%20Views%20of%20the%20Monarchy%20Survey%20Results.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,669
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|22%
|16%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|40%
|-
|{{opdrts|30|2|May|2022|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/zzfjr9fmfc/Attitudes%20to%20monarchy%202021.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,754
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''60%'''
|27%
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|33%
|-
|{{opdrts|29|30|Mar|2022|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''59%'''
|24%
|17%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|35%
|-
|{{opdrts|28|7|Mar|2022|year}}
|[https://www.focaldata.com/blog/focaldata-british-future-poll-jubilee-britain Focaldata]
|''[[British Future]]''
|2,006
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''58%'''
|25%
|17%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|33%
|-
|{{opdrts|16|17|Feb|2022|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''61%'''
|24%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|37%
|-
|{{opdrts|19|24|Nov|2021|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/three-five-favour-britain-remaining-monarchy-although-support-falls-2012-peak-more-become-0 Ipsos MORI]
|N/A
|1,005
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''60%'''
|21%
|19%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|39%
|-
|{{opdrts||29|Jul|2021|year}}
|[https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2021/08/exclusive-polling-how-do-british-voters-feel-about-monarchy-after-recent Redfield & Wilton Strategies]
|''[[New Statesman]]''
|1,500
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''53%'''
|18%
|23%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|35%
|-
|{{opdrts|6|7|May|2021|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|23%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|39%
|-
|{{opdrts|21|22|Apr|2021|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/op5ota7eih/The%20Times%20Royal%20Favourability.pdf YouGov]
|''[[The Times]]''
|1,730
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''63%'''
|20%
|16%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|43%
|-
|{{opdrts||9|4|2021|year}}
| colspan="7" |[[Death of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh]]
|-
|{{opdrts|19|30|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://audience.findoutnow.co.uk/files/reports/Find%20Out%20Now%20-%20Referendum%20proposal%20polls.pdf Find Out Now]
|[[Electoral Calculus]]
|2,500
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''56%'''
|20%
|24%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|36%
|-
|{{opdrts|15|16|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''61%'''
|24%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|37%
|-
|{{opdrts|12|15|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''61%'''
|25%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|36%
|-
|{{opdrts|11|12|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://www.opinium.com/resource-center/uk-voting-intention-11th-february-2021-2-2/ Opinium]
|''[[The Observer]]''
|2,001
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''55%'''
|29%
|17%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|26%
|-
|{{opdrts|11|12|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|22%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|40%
|-
|{{opdrts|9|10|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://www.survation.com/s-21-000419-survation-sunday-mirror-politics-and-royal-family-poll-09-march-2021-2-2/ Survation]
|''[[Sunday Mirror]]''
|958
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''55%'''
|29%
|16%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|26%
|-
|{{opdrts||9|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://www.jlpartners.co.uk/s/JL-Partners-The-Daily-Mail-Harry-and-Meghan-poll.xlsx JL Partners]
|''[[Daily Mail]]''
|1,056
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''50%'''
|29%
|21%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|21%
|-
|{{opdrts|8|9|Mar|2021|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/rwltuoo339/Attitudes%20to%20monarchy.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,672
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''63%'''
|25%
|12%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|38%
|-
|{{opdrts||8|3|2021|year}}
| colspan="7" |UK broadcast of television interview programme ''[[Oprah with Meghan and Harry]]''
|-
|{{opdrts|2|4|Oct|2020|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/tnt8vkmjp1/YouGov%20-%20Future%20of%20Royal%20Family%20Results.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,626
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''67%'''
|21%
|12%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|46%
|-
|{{opdrts|5|6|Mar|2020|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''63%'''
|23%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|40%
|-
|{{opdrts||18|Feb|2020|year}}
|[https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2020/02/18/8b405/1 YouGov]
|N/A
|3,142
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''62%'''
|22%
|16%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|40%
|-
|{{opdrts|9|11|Jan|2020|year}}
|[https://deltapoll.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Deltapoll-MoS200111.pdf Deltapoll]
|''[[The Mail on Sunday]]''
|1,055
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''59%'''
|20%
|21%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|39%
|-
|{{opdrts|21|22|Nov|2019|year}}
|[https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/0r7hd5gxhg/TheSundayTimes_VI_Results_191122_w.pdf YouGov]
|''[[The Sunday Times]]''
|1,677
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''63%'''
|19%
|17%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|44%
|-
|{{opdrts|19|20|Nov|2019|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''63%'''
|22%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|41%
|-
|{{opdrts|2|3|Oct|2019|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''70%'''
|18%
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|52%
|-
|{{opdrts|24|25|Apr|2019|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''64%'''
|21%
|15%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|43%
|-
|{{opdrts||19|05|2018|year}}
| colspan="7" |[[Wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle]]
|-
|{{opdrts|8|9|May|2018|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|–
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''66%'''
|18%
|16%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|48%
|-
|{{opdrts|13|16|Feb|2016|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Polls/monarchy-kings-polling-club-2016-topline.pdf Ipsos MORI]
|[[King's College London]]
|1,000
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''76%'''
|17%
|7%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|59%
|-
|{{opdrts|3|4|Sep|2015|year}}
|[https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/7cnsndq71a/InternalResults_150904_Monarchy.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,579
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''71%'''
|18%
|11%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|53%
|-
|{{opdrts|8|9|Apr|2015|year}}
|[https://savanta.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/DailyMail_Monarchy-Poll_April-2015.pdf ComRes]
|''[[Daily Mail]]''
|2,020
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''70%'''
|19%
|11%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{opdrts|25|26|Jul|2013|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''75%'''
|17%
|8%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|58%
|-
|{{opdrts|13|15|Jul|2013|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Polls/RoyalBaby_July2013_Topline.PDF Ipsos MORI]
|N/A
|1,000
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''77%'''
|17%
|6%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|60%
|-
|{{opdrts|10|13|Nov|2012|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Polls/monarchy-ipsos-mori-kings-college-topline.pdf Ipsos MORI]
|[[King's College London]]
|1,014
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''79%'''
|16%
|5%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|63%
|-
|{{opdrts|9|11|Jun|2012|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/DiamonJubilee_June2012.PDF Ipsos MORI]
|N/A
|1,016
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''77%'''
|15%
|8%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|62%
|-
|{{opdrts|7|8|Jun|2012|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/4dpudidv4s/YG-Archives-Pol-ST-results-08-100612.pdf YouGov]
|''[[The Sunday Times]]''
|1,667
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''75%'''
|15%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|60%
|-
|{{opdrts|2|5|6|2012|year}}
| colspan="7" |Bank holiday weekend commemorating the [[Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II]]
|-
|{{opdrts|31|1|June|2012|year}}
|[https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/gv41ilgxav/YouGov%20-%20Jubilee%20Tracker.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''73%'''
|18%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|55%
|-
|{{opdrts|27|28|May|2012|year}}
|[https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/ir6eqjwsex/YG-Archives-Life-RoyalFamily-YouGovQs-300512.pdf YouGov]
|N/A
|1,743
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''73%'''
|16%
|11%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|57%
|-
|{{opdrts|25|28|May|2012|year}}
|[https://yonderconsulting.com/poll-archive/monarchy-survey-may-2012.pdf Populus]
|N/A
|2,056
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''82%'''
|18%
|–
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|64%
|-
|{{opdrts|17|18|May|2012|year}}
|[http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Monarchy-For-Site1.xls Survation]
|''[[Daily Star Sunday]]''
|1,003
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''71%'''
|21%
|8%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|50%
|-
|{{opdrts|12|14|May|2012|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Polls/ipsos-mori-diamond-jubilee-poll-may-2012-tables.pdf Ipsos MORI]
|''[[Evening Standard]]''
|1,006
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''80%'''
|13%
|6%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|67%
|-
|{{opdrts|15|17|May|2011|year}}
|[https://amsr.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p21050coll1/id/526/rec/3 MORI]
|[[Reuters]]
|1,000
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''75%'''
|18%
|7%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|57%
|-
|{{opdrts||29|04|2011|year}}
| colspan="7" |[[Wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton]]
|-
|{{opdrts|26|27|Apr|2011|year}}
|[https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/today_uk_import/yg-archives-cam-royal-wedding-dossier-280411.pdf YouGov]
|[[University of Cambridge|Cambridge University]]
|?
| style="background:#FADBD1" |'''69%'''
|20%
|11%
| style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;" |49%
|-
|{{opdrts|15|17|Apr|2011|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Polls/Apr11Royalpolltopline.PDF Ipsos MORI]
|[[Reuters]]
|1,000
| style="background:#FADBD1" |'''75%'''
|18%
|7%
| style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;" |57%
|-
|{{opdrts|1|3|Apr|2011|year}}
|[https://yonderconsulting.com/poll-archive/monarchy-survey-april-2011.pdf Populus]
|N/A
|1,002
| style="background:#FADBD1" |'''77%'''
|23%
|–
| style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;" |54%
|-
|{{opdrts|20|23|Aug|2010|year}}
|[https://yonderconsulting.com/poll-archive/monarchy-survey-august-2010.pdf Populus]
|N/A
|1,037
| style="background:#FADBD1" |'''77%'''
|23%
|–
| style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;" |54%
|-
|{{opdrts|6|8|Feb|2009|year}}
|[https://amsr.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p21050coll1/id/531/rec/3 ICM Research]
|''[[Politics Show]]'' ([[BBC]])
|1,017
| style="background:#FADBD1" |'''69%'''
|24%
|8%
| style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;" |45%
|-
|{{opdrts|14|16|Dec|2007|year}}
|[https://yonderconsulting.com/poll-archive/monarchy-survey.pdf Populus]
|[[Discovery Channel (British and Irish TV channel)|Discovery Channel]]<ref>{{Cite web |date=2012 |title=Polls on the Royal Family/ Monarchy, 2007–2012 |url=https://amsr.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p21050coll1/id/533/rec/3 |access-date=2023-03-31 |website=Archive of Market and Social Research (AMSR) |language=en}}</ref>
|1,004
| style="background:#FADBD1" |'''76%'''
|16%
|8%
| style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;" |60%
|-
|{{opdrts|20|22|Apr|2006|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/monarchy-poll-april-2006 Ipsos MORI]
|''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]''
|1,006
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''72%'''
|18%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|54%
|-
|{{opdrts|7|9|Apr|2005|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/observer-election-research-poll-1 MORI]
|''[[The Observer]]''/''[[Sunday Mirror]]''
|1,004
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''65%'''
|22%
|13%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|43%
|-
|rowspan=2 {{opdrts|7|11|Jan|2005|year}}
|rowspan=2|[https://yonderconsulting.com/poll-archive/the-royal-family.pdf Populus]
|rowspan=2|''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]''
|rowspan=2|1,503
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''82%'''
|18%
|–
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|64%
|-
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''83%'''
|17%{{efn|Respondents were also asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement "The Royal Family should be replaced by an elected President".}}
|–
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|66%
|-
|{{opdrts|23|25|Apr|2004|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/future-monarchy-0 MORI]
|N/A
|c. 1000{{efn|name="r16"|GB residents aged 16 and over}}
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''71%'''
|20%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{opdrts|1|4|Jun|2002|year}}
| colspan="7" |Golden Jubilee Weekend to mark the [[Golden Jubilee of Elizabeth II]]
|-
|{{opdrts|24|26|May|2002|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/britains-views-monarchy-2002 MORI]
|''[[Tonight with Trevor McDonald]]''
|1,002{{efn|name="r16"}}
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''74%'''
|19%
|7%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|55%
|-
|{{opdrts|1|3|Feb|2002|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/monarchyroyal-family-trends-monarchy-v-republic-1993-2016 MORI]
|N/A
|?{{efn|name="r16"}}
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''71%'''
|19%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|52%
|-
|{{opdrts|14|16|Dec|2001|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/public-recognition-attitudes-towards-monarchy MORI]
|N/A
|1,000{{efn|name="r16"}}
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''70%'''
|21%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|49%
|-
|{{opdrts|10|12|Apr|2001|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll MORI]
|''[[Daily Mail]]''
|1,003
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''70%'''
|19%
|11%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{opdrts|5|6|Apr|2001|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll-3 MORI]
|''[[The Mail on Sunday]]''
|814
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''71%'''
|20%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{opdrts||29|Dec|2000|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll-0 MORI]
|''[[The Mail on Sunday]]''
|504
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''73%'''
|15%
|12%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|58%
|-
|{{opdrts|13|15|Dec|2000|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll-june-2000 MORI]
|''[[News of the World]]''
|621
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''72%'''
|21%
|7%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{opdrts|8|9|Jun|2000|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll-june-2000 MORI]
|''[[Sunday Telegraph]]''
|621
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''70%'''
|19%
|11%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|2000|Jun}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''87%'''
|11%
|3%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|76%
|-
|{{opdrts|8|10|Nov|1999|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll-november-1999 MORI]
|''[[Daily Mail]]''
|1,019
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''74%'''
|16%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|58%
|-
|{{opdrts|15|16|Jun|1999|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/attitudes-towards-camilla-parker-bowles-0 MORI]
|''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]''
|806
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''74%'''
|16%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|58%
|-
|{{opdrts|5|6|Nov|1998|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/prince-charles-50 MORI]
|''[[Daily Mail]]''/''[[GMTV]]''
|1,019
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''73%'''
|18%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|55%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1998|Nov}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''87%'''
|12%
|0%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|75%
|-
|{{opdrts|23|24|Oct|1998|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll-1 MORI]
|''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]''
|600
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''74%'''
|16%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|58%
|- 
|{{opdrts|18|20|Aug|1998|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-poll-2 MORI]
|''[[The Mail on Sunday]]''
|804
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''75%'''
|16%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|59%
|-
|{{opdrts|17|18|Aug|1998|year}}
|{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20060926073652/http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/1998/mirror-royal-poll-aug-1998.htm ICM Research]}}
|N/A
|500
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''74%'''
|17%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|57%
|-
|{{opdrts|5|8|Mar|1998|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/diana-royal-family-poll-march-1998 MORI]
|''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]''
|1,000
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''74%'''
|19%
|7%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|55%
|-
|{{opdrts|6|7|Sep|1997|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/royal-family-monarchy-poll MORI]
|''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]''
|602
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''73%'''
|18%
|9%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|55%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1997|Sep}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''87%'''
|11%
|2%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|76%
|-
|{{opdrts||31|08|1997|year}}
| colspan="7" |[[Death of Diana, Princess of Wales]]
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1996|Nov}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''81%'''
|16%
|3%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|65%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1996|Mar}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''79%'''
|17%
|4%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|62%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1995|Nov}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''80%'''
|15%
|5%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|65%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1995|Oct}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''82%'''
|13%
|6%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|69%
|-
|{{opdrts|28|29|Dec|1994|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/monarchyroyal-family-trends-monarchy-v-republic-1993-2016 MORI]
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''73%'''
|17%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|56%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1994|Sep}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''85%'''
|12%
|3%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|73%
|-
|{{opdrts|7|12|Jan|1994|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/monarchyroyal-family-trends-monarchy-v-republic-1993-2016 MORI]
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''71%'''
|20%
|10%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1993|Nov}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''86%'''
|10%
|4%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|76%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1993|Jun}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''85%'''
|11%
|4%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|74%
|-
|{{opdrts|22|26|Apr|1993|year}}
|[https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/monarchyroyal-family-trends-monarchy-v-republic-1993-2016 MORI]<ref>{{Cite news |date=1993-05-02 |title=Show of support for monarchy |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/sunday-telegraph-show-of-support-for-mon/144707957/ |access-date=2024-04-03 |work=Sunday Telegraph |pages=7}}</ref>
|''[[The Sunday Age]]'' (Australia)
|1,029
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''69%'''
|18%
|14%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|51%
|-
|{{opdrts|28|2|Feb|1993|year}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]<ref name=":2">{{Cite book |author-link=Anthony King (political scientist) |url=https://www.worldcat.org/title/ocm45647877 |title=British political opinion, 1937-2000: the Gallup polls |date=2001 |publisher=[[Politico's]] |isbn=978-1-902301-88-4 |editor-last=King |editor-first=Anthony Stephen |editor-link=Anthony King (political scientist) |location=London |oclc=ocm45647877 |editor-last2=Wybrow |editor-first2=Robert J.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=1993-02-08 |title=Monarchy 'has lost touch with the people' |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-daily-telegraph-monarchy-has-lost-t/144645733/ |access-date=2024-04-02 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |pages=1}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=1993-02-08 |title=Queen's coach on uncertain journey |url=https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-daily-telegraph-queens-coach-on-unc/144646253/ |access-date=2024-04-02 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |pages=4}}</ref>
|''[[The Daily Telegraph]]''
|989
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''89%'''{{efn|name=Gallup|Q: "Which of these statements comes closest to your own view?"<br>"The Monarchy and the Royal Family should stay pretty much as they are now"<br>"The Monarchy and the Royal Family should continue to exist but should become more democratic and approachable, rather like the Monarchy and Royal Family in the Netherlands"<br>"The Monarchy should be abolished and replaced by a non-executive figurehead president like the ones they have in some continental countries"}}
|9%
|2%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|80%
|-
|{{opdrts||11|Dec|1992|year}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]
|''[[The Sunday Telegraph]]''
|620
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''59%'''
|24%
|17%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|35%
|-
|{{Date table sorting|1992|Dec}}
|[[Gallup International Association|Gallup]]{{efn|name=Gallup}}<ref name=":2" />
|?
|?
|style="background:#FADBD1"|'''85%'''
|13%
|2%
|style="background:#993311;color:#FFFFFF;"|72%
|}

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

=== By age ===
{| class="wikitable"
|+March 2024 poll<ref>{{Cite web |title=comparison_nov_to_mar_savanta |url=https://assets.nationbuilder.com/republic/pages/772/attachments/original/1709905706/comparison_nov_to_mar_savanta.pdf?1709905706 |website=Savanta}}</ref>
!Age group
!18–24
!25–34
!35–44
!45–54
!55–64
!65+
|-
|'''Elected Head of State'''
|'''46%'''
|'''44%'''
|38%
|29%
|31%
|18%
|-
|'''Monarchy'''
|31%
|38%
|'''45%'''
|'''58%'''
|'''58%'''
|'''77%'''
|-
|'''Don't know'''
|22%
|19%
|17%
|12%
|11%
|4%
|}

== Current monarchy ==

=== Powers ===
Although [[royal assent]] is needed for a parliamentary bill in the United Kingdom to become law and the monarch can theoretically act unilaterally without [[Parliament of the United Kingdom|parliament's]] permission, in practice the principle of the [[King-in-Parliament]] (and [[Parliamentary sovereignty in the United Kingdom|parliamentary sovereignty]]) limits this power. The monarchy functions within the principles of [[Parliamentary sovereignty|parliamentarianism]] and [[constitutionalism]], where power is indirectly held by the people. During the [[Victorian era]], it was said that the UK was already essentially a republic, and the phrase "crowned republic" has been used to refer it accordingly.<ref>{{cite web |date=16 June 2021 |title=The British Monarchy: FAQs: Why doesn't the UK become a republic? |url=https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/research-areas/monarchy-church-and-state/british-monarchy-faqs#Why%20doesn't%20the%20UK%20become%20a%20republic? |access-date=25 December 2023 |website=University College London |publisher=UCL Constitution Unit}}</ref>

The monarch conventionally exercises their authority in accordance with the will of [[Parliament of the United Kingdom|parliament]] (in the case of [[royal assent]] or the [[Order in Council|Orders in Council]])<ref name="Note03" group="Note" /><ref>{{cite web |date=30 March 2021 |title=Privy council |url=https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/privy-council |access-date=24 December 2023 |website=[[Institute for Government]]}}</ref> or the will of the [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom|prime minister]] (in the case of the [[Royal prerogative in the United Kingdom|royal prerogative]], which enables the monarch to declare war or deploy the armed forces without parliamentary scrutiny).<ref name="Note02" group="Note" />{{Citation needed|date=August 2025|reason=former long-time orphaned named ref, never had parent}} No monarch has vetoed a law since the [[Scottish Militia Bill]] of 1708.

The lack of limitations on the monarch's ''[[de jure]]'' power has led proponents such as [[Graham Smith (activist)|Graham Smith]] (CEO of [[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]) to criticise the position of monarch as being "unaccountable" and against the notion of [[popular sovereignty]], while the ''[[de facto]]'' lack of power has been criticised by the same as making the monarch "a fig leaf for prime ministerial powers".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hames |first1=Tim |title=Modernising the Monarchy |last2=Leonard |first2=Mark |date=1998 |publisher=[[Demos (UK think tank)|Demos]] |isbn=1-898309-74-4 |location=London, UK |page=22}}</ref><ref name="case">{{cite web |title=The case for a republic |url=http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/The%20Case%20for%20a%20Republic/index.php |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110517123405/http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/The%20Case%20for%20a%20Republic/index.php |archive-date=17 May 2011 |access-date=1 May 2011 |website=[[Republic (political organisation)|Republic]] |df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Queen's political role is why we need a republic, say campaigners |url=https://www.republic.org.uk/queen_s_political_role_is_why_we_need_a_republic_say_campaigners |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201202164002/https://www.republic.org.uk/queen_s_political_role_is_why_we_need_a_republic_say_campaigners |archive-date=2020-12-02 |access-date=2025-08-04 |website=Republic |language=en}}</ref>

=== Influence and partiality ===
The monarch's role has traditionally included the "right to be consulted, the right to encourage, and the right to warn".<ref>See also {{cite book |last=Bagehot |first=Walter |url=https://archive.org/details/englishconstitut00bageuoft |title=The English Constitution |publisher=[[Routledge|Kegan, Paul, Trench & Co.]] |year=1888 |edition=Fifth |place=London |via=[[Internet Archive]]}}</ref> To this end, the [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom|Prime Minister]] has a weekly private [[Audience (meeting)#United Kingdom|audience]] with the monarch that usually takes place every Wednesday.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Queen's working day: Evening |url=http://www.royal.gov.uk/HMTheQueen/DayInTheLife/TheQueensworkingday/Evening.aspx |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130307195445/https://www.royal.gov.uk/HMTheQueen/DayInTheLife/TheQueensworkingday/Evening.aspx |archive-date=7 March 2013 |access-date=11 March 2013}}</ref> They are under no obligation to follow the monarch's advice,<ref>Leyland (2007) p. 74</ref> but advocacy groups have expressed concern over the secrecy of these meetings, citing instances when the monarch has not been apolitical.{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}} In 1973, Queen Elizabeth II succeeded in lobbying the government to make an exception in a bill concerning transparency of shareholdings, citing that "disclosure would be embarrassing".<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Pegg |first1=David |last2=Evans |first2=Rob |date=2021-02-07 |title=Revealed: Queen lobbied for change in law to hide her private wealth |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth |access-date=2025-08-04 |work=[[The Guardian]] |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

The monarch is meant to be impartial. However, republicans argue that the royal family are not, and that there are no real checks on their impartiality.<ref name=":3" /> They argue that [[Charles III]] spoke and acted in ways that were widely interpreted as taking a political stance, citing his refusal to attend a state dinner hosted by Queen Elizabeth II for the Chinese head of state in protest of China's dealings with [[Tibet]];<ref name="charles-tibet">{{cite web |date=26 September 2002 |title=Charles furore grows with Tibet missive |url=http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2002/9/26_5.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060928002250/http://www.tibet.ca/en/wtnarchive/2002/9/26_5.html |archive-date=28 September 2006 |access-date=1 September 2006 |website=[[World Tibet News|World Tibet Network News]]}}</ref> his previous strong stances on topics ranging from GM food to political correctness;<ref>{{cite web |last=Assinder |first=Nick |date=9 February 2000 |title=Royals dragged into Haider row |url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/636529.stm |website=[[BBC News]]}}</ref><ref name=":4">{{cite web |date=25 September 2002 |title=Palace defends prince's letters |url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2280564.stm |website=[[BBC News]]}}</ref> and the contents of the [[black spider memos]] regarding how people achieve their positions, which were released following freedom of information litigation.<ref name=":4" />

=== Legal exemptions ===
Several laws make exemptions for the monarch and the royal family. The UK monarch benefits from [[sovereign immunity]] and cannot be arrested. {{As of|2022}}, there were more than 160 laws granting express immunity to the monarch or their property in some respects.<ref>Carrell, Severin, Rob Evans, David Pegg, and Mario Savarese (14 July 2022). [https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/14/queen-immunity-british-laws-private-property Revealed: Queen's sweeping immunity from more than 160 laws] ''[[The Guardian]]''. Retrieved 25 December 2023.</ref> For instance, employees of the monarchy cannot pursue anti-discrimination complaints such as those under the [[Equality Act 2010]]. The monarchy is exempt from numerous other workers' rights, health and safety, or pensions laws.<ref name="theguardian.com">{{cite news |last1=Carrell |first1=Severin |last2=Evans |first2=Rob |last3=Pegg |first3=David |last4=Savarese |first4=Mario |date=14 July 2022 |title=Revealed: Queen's sweeping immunity from more than 160 laws |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jul/14/queen-immunity-british-laws-private-property |newspaper=[[The Guardian]]}}</ref> Republicans also argue that the [[Finances of the British royal family|Royal finances]], which are exempt from the [[Freedom of Information Act]], are shrouded in secrecy and should be subject to greater scrutiny.<ref name="Republic">{{cite web |title=Royal Finances |url=http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/Royal%20finances/index.php |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110704074840/http://www.republic.org.uk/What%20we%20want/In%20depth/Royal%20finances/index.php |archive-date=4 July 2011 |access-date=1 May 2011 |website=[[Republic (political organisation)|Republic]] |df=dmy-all}}</ref> The monarch is exempt from numerous taxes, including [[inheritance tax]], although Queen Elizabeth II did pay some taxes voluntarily.<ref name="theguardian.com" /> 

=== Cost ===
The government allocated £132.1m to the [[Sovereign Grant Act 2011|Sovereign Grant]] for the financial year 2025-26.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Sovereign Grant Act 2011: Report of the Royal Trustees on the Sovereign Grant 2025-26 (Accessible) |url=https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/report-of-the-royal-trustees-on-the-sovereign-grant-review-2025-26/sovereign-grant-act-2011-report-of-the-royal-trustees-on-the-sovereign-grant-2025-26-accessible |access-date=2025-08-19 |website=GOV.UK |language=en}}</ref> In 2024, [[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]] claimed that the monarchy actually cost the government £510m a year (compared to £86.3m in the 2024-25 Sovereign Grant). This number includes the revenue from the [[Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall (Accounts) Act 1838|duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall]] (£99m), the surplus from the [[Royal Collection|Royal collection]] (11.8m), an estimation of security costs (£150m), an estimation of potential revenue from using [[List of British royal residences|royal residences]] for commercial purposes (£96m), spending on royal visits by local authorities (£31.9m) and other sources,<ref>{{cite web |title=Royals really cost £510m, anti-monarchists say |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxr2pk997no |access-date=24 September 2024 |website=[[BBC News]] |date=23 September 2024 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2024 |title=The half a billion pound royals. |url=https://assets.nationbuilder.com/republic/pages/407/attachments/original/1727082261/Royal_Finances_Report_2024_FINAL_for_publication.pdf?1727082261 |website=[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]]}}</ref> though their estimates have been criticised in the past for including speculation on potential lost revenue.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2023-05-06 |title=Claims about cost of royal family are Unsupported |url=https://theferret.scot/claims-about-cost-of-royal-family-unsupported/ | website=[[The Ferret (website)|The Ferret]] |access-date=2025-08-05 |language=en-GB}}</ref> Republic assert that the [[Crown Estate]], from which the "hereditary revenues" are derived, is national and State property, so their figures do not take the amount generated for the treasury into account (£190.8m from 2007-2008).<ref name="Republic" />

In 2011, Republic calculated the UK's monarchy to be the most expensive in Europe, 112 times more expensive than the [[President of Ireland|presidency of the Republic of Ireland]].<ref name="Republic" /> However, some monarchists argue that under a republic, the costs incurred in regards to the duties of the head of state would remain more or less the same, or even increase. They argue that the government would still have to fund the upkeep and conservation of the royal palaces and buildings, as well as the head of state's salary and security. Since ceremonial duties would still go ahead, this would also include the cost of state visits and banquets.<ref name="auto1">{{Cite web |last=Dave |date=2000-10-03 |title=Republic or Monarchy? |url=https://debatewise.org/2526-republic-or-monarchy/ |access-date=2025-08-04 |website=DebateWise |language=en-US}}</ref>

Large royal events can also involve substantial taxpayer support. In 2022, the [[Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II|funeral of Queen Elizabeth II]] was estimated to have cost £192m, whilst media estimates for the [[Coronation of Charles III and Camilla|Coronation ceremony for King Charles III]] in 2023 have ranged from £50m to over £100m.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://news.sky.com/story/queen-elizabeth-iis-funeral-and-period-of-national-mourning-cost-162m-new-figures-show-12883679|title=Cost of Queen Elizabeth II's funeral and lying in state revealed|website=[[Sky News]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=2 May 2023 |title='It's not a good look.' as cost of living crisis bites, some Brits are questioning spending money on glitzy coronation |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/02/business/cost-of-living-doncaster-coronation-gbr-cmd-intl/index.html |website=[[CNN Business]]}}</ref>

=== Tourism ===
In 2010, [[VisitBritain]] published a report showing that sites related to the royal family brought in over £500m a year in tourism.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2010-07-28 |title=Royal historical sites attract millions of visitors |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-10794577 |access-date=2025-08-05 |work=[[BBC News]] |language=en-GB}}</ref> This was widely reported as being caused by the continued existence of the royal family,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mirror.co.uk |date=2010-07-28 |title=Monarchy's £500m for UK tourism |url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/monarchys-500m-for-uk-tourism-238499 |access-date=2025-08-05 |website=[[Daily Mirror|The Mirror]] |language=en}}</ref> though republicans claim that it is the buildings and the history that are truly responsible for that figure, since tourism companies tend not to use the monarchy in advertising.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Tourism |url=https://www.republic.org.uk/tourism |access-date=2025-08-05 |website=[[Republic (pressure group)|Republic]] |language=en}}</ref>

Brand Finance estimates that the monarchy brings £2.5 billion to the UK economy a year.<ref name="auto">{{Cite web |date=2023-05-06 |title=How much money does the royal family bring in tourism? |url=https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/royal-family/royal-family-cost-money-tourism-b2333999.html |access-date=2025-08-05 |website=[[The Independent]] |language=en}}</ref> [[Forbes]] instead calculated a figure of £19 billion a year.<ref>{{Cite web |title=How much does Royal Family cost taxpayers - and how much do they bring in tourism? |url=https://news.sky.com/story/how-much-does-royal-family-cost-taxpayers-and-how-much-do-they-bring-in-tourism-12645688 |access-date=2025-08-05 |website=[[Sky News]] |language=en}}</ref><ref name="auto"/>

=== Hierarchy ===
Since the UK monarchy is [[Hereditary monarchy|hereditary]], the monarch's status and power stems from their birth, a fact that has been criticised by republicans as being elitist and outdated.<ref>{{cite news |last=Toynbee |first=Polly |date=31 May 2012 |title=Queen's diamond jubilee: a vapid family and a mirage of nationhood. What's to celebrate? |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/may/31/queen-diamond-jublilee-why-celebrate |access-date=14 September 2022 |work=[[The Guardian]]}}</ref> The members and [[Lord-lieutenant|representatives]] of the royal family are given titles, and are traditionally greeted in the first instance as "Your Majesty" or "Your Royal Highness", then "Sir" or "Ma'am".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Greeting a Member of The Royal Family |url=https://www.royal.uk/greeting-member-royal-family |access-date=2025-08-04 |website=www.royal.uk |language=en}}</ref> Such deference has been called an attempt to keep subjects "in their place".<ref>{{cite book |last=Bertram |first=Christopher |title=Rousseau and The Social Contract |date=2004 |publisher=[[Routledge]] |isbn=0-415-20198-5 |series=Routledge Philosophy GuideBook |location=London, UK |page=160}}</ref> Many republicans further argue that the monarchy is too archaic and reminiscent of medieval feudalism for a modern nation.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Blain |first1=Neil |title=Media, Monarchy and Power |last2=O'Donnell |first2=Hugh |publisher=[[Intellect Books]] |year=2003 |isbn=1-84150-043-7 |page=40}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=Long |first1=Phil |title=Royal Tourism: Excursions Around Monarchy |last2=Palmer |first2=Nicola J. |publisher=[[Channel View Publications]] |year=2007 |isbn=978-1-84541-080-3 |pages=3–4}}</ref>

=== Honorary military positions ===
Many members of the royal family have honorary military positions, despite not having meaningfully served in the armed forces. In the UK alone, [[List of titles and honours of Elizabeth II#Honorary military positions|Elizabeth II held dozens of honorary positions]] as colonel-in-chief, despite her lack of military experience. Some republicans, such as [[Norman Baker]], argue that such liberal distribution of unearned honours undermines them for those who did earn them.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Baker |first=Norman |date=2024-04-24 |title=King Charles looked for heroes to honour – and picked William, Kate and Camilla. Laugh? Cry? You choose |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/24/royals-william-kate-camilla-honours-monarchy-archaic |access-date=2025-08-04 |work=[[The Guardian]] |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

Though some royals have been sent into conflict zones, many doubt that they have served on the front line on the same basis as other members of the Armed Forces, viewing it as more of a PR exercise than military service.<ref>{{cite news |date=28 March 2017 |title=Prince Charles awarded highest rank in all three armed forces |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/9335960/Prince-Charles-awarded-highest-rank-in-all-three-armed-forces.html |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/9335960/Prince-Charles-awarded-highest-rank-in-all-three-armed-forces.html |archive-date=12 January 2022 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]}}{{cbignore}}</ref> The then [[Prince Andrew]]'s presence during the [[Falklands War]] was later criticised by the commander of the British Naval Force who stated that "special measures" had to be taken to ensure that the prince did not lose his life.<ref>{{cite news |last=Moreton |first=Cole |date=17 March 2012 |title=Falkland Islands: Britain 'would lose' if Argentina decides to invade now |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9150339/Falkland-Islands-Britain-would-lose-if-Argentina-decides-to-invade-now.html |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9150339/Falkland-Islands-Britain-would-lose-if-Argentina-decides-to-invade-now.html |archive-date=12 January 2022 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |location=London, UK}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

=== Wealth ===
The monarchy is in possession of vast wealth and assets. [[Charles III]] has numerous [[List of British royal residences|royal residences]], including [[palace]]s, castles and [[Estate (land)|estate]]s.<ref>{{cite news |last=Kelly |first=Jon |date=17 September 2022 |title=Which of his many homes will King Charles live in? |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62918836 |access-date=19 September 2022 |work=[[BBC News]]}}</ref> Republicans claim that this means the monarch is not in touch with the lives of everyday people, such as those suffering from the [[United Kingdom cost of living crisis|cost of living crisis]].<ref>{{cite news |last=Halls |first=Laura |date=10 September 2022 |title=The Monarchy Will Not Outlast King Charles III |url=https://medium.com/counterarts/the-monarchy-will-not-outlast-king-charles-iii-f290233784b3 |access-date=14 September 2022 |work=[[Medium (website)|Medium]] |archive-date=14 September 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220914193413/https://medium.com/counterarts/the-monarchy-will-not-outlast-king-charles-iii-f290233784b3 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=8 September 2022 |title=The Guardian view on the death of Queen Elizabeth II: the end of an era |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/08/the-guardian-view-on-the-death-of-queen-elizabeth-ii-the-end-of-an-era |access-date=14 September 2022 |work=[[The Guardian]]}}</ref>

=== Race ===
Since a non-white person is unable to become head of state for the foreseeable future, some critics, such as [[Peter Tatchell]], have argued that the monarchy of the United Kingdom is incompatible with the multiracial and [[multicultural]] British society of the 21st century, and therefore unintentionally a racist institution.<ref>{{cite news |last=Tatchell |first=Peter |author-link=Peter Tatchell |date=19 January 2009 |title=Our system of monarchy is racist |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jan/19/constitution-monarchy |access-date=14 September 2022 |work=[[The Guardian]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=13 March 2021 |title=Oh, You Only Just Noticed That Monarchy Was Racist? |url=https://medium.com/lucid-nightmare/oh-you-only-just-noticed-that-monarchy-was-racist-29d7b532b6bd |access-date=14 September 2022 |work=[[Medium (website)|Medium]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=9 March 2021 |title=The royal family can't keep ignoring its colonialist past and racist present |url=https://theconversation.com/the-royal-family-cant-keep-ignoring-its-colonialist-past-and-racist-present-156749 |access-date=16 August 2021 |publisher=Benjamin T. Jones}}</ref>

The British monarchy is intimately linked to the history of [[slavery]] and [[colonialism]], from funding slave voyages to being the face of [[imperialism]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=24 March 2022 |title=Five ways the monarchy has benefited from colonialism and slavery |website=[[The Conversation (website)|The Conversation]] |url=https://theconversation.com/five-ways-the-monarchy-has-benefited-from-colonialism-and-slavery-179911}}</ref> This has prompted some commentators, such as [[Kehinde Andrews]], to argue that the British monarchy is irreparably racist, being "one of the most powerful symbols of [[Whiteness studies|Whiteness]] and colonial nostalgia". He considers the popularity of the monarchy to be a barrier to white Brits confronting their imperialist past.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Andrews |first1=Kehinde |date=2021 |title=The post-racial princess: Delusions of racial progress and intersectional failures |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277539520308116 |journal=[[Women's Studies International Forum]] |volume=84 |issue=January–February |doi=10.1016/j.wsif.2020.102432 |s2cid=230551251 |url-access=subscription |access-date=16 September 2022 |article-number=102432}}</ref>

[[Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex|Prince Harry]] described an "[[Implicit stereotype|unconscious [racial] bias]]" among family members concerning [[Oprah with Meghan and Harry#Alleged comments about Archie's skin color|the skin colour of his unborn son]], though he distinguished this from outright racism.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Payne |first=Josh |date=January 8, 2023 |title=Harry denies royal family is racist in ITV interview |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/harry-meghan-racism-royal-family-b2258323.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230108230448/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/royal-family/harry-meghan-racism-royal-family-b2258323.html |archive-date=January 8, 2023 |access-date=January 8, 2023 |website=[[The Independent]]}}</ref>

=== Effect on royals ===
Members of the royal family are brought up under a very strict code of behaviour. Some republicans, such as the anarchist [[William Godwin]] and the author [[Johann Hari]] (in his book ''God Save the Queen?''), argue that the hereditary system condemns every heir to an abnormal childhood, and every royal to psychological damage respectively.<ref>{{cite book |last=Hari |first=Johann |title=God Save the Queen? |publisher=Icon Books |year=2002 |isbn=1-84046-401-1 |location=Cambridge, UK |chapter=Chapter One |chapter-url=http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=603 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060317043938/http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=603 |archive-date=17 March 2006 |url-status=dead |via=JohannHari.com}}</ref>

==Criticism==
{{Expand section|date=August 2025}}

=== National unity ===

Monarchists argue that a [[Constitutional monarchy|constitutional monarch]] with limited powers and a non-partisan nature can provide a focus for national unity, national awards and honours, national institutions, patriotism, and allegiance, as opposed to a president affiliated to a political party.<ref>{{cite book |chapter=Chapter 11 |first=Vernon |last=Bogdanor |author-link=Vernon Bogdanor |date=1997 |title=The Monarchy and the Constitution |location=Oxford, UK |publisher=Clarendon Press |isbn=0-19-829334-8}}</ref> British political scientist [[Vernon Bogdanor]] suggests that monarchies can play a helpful unifying role in a [[multinational state]], noting that "In Belgium, it is sometimes said that the king is the only Belgian, everyone else being either [[Flemish people|Fleming]] or [[Walloons|Walloon]]" and that the [[British sovereign]] can belong to all of the UK's [[Countries of the United Kingdom|constituent countries]] (England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland), without belonging to any particular one of them.<ref name="Bogdanor" /> 

=== Neutrality of the head of state ===

Opinion ratings for elected politicians have consistently been far lower than those of the monarch,{{Citation needed|date=August 2025}} so some monarchists argue that it's unlikely that a head of state would be as popular as the royals are.<ref name="auto1"/> Bognador justifies monarchy on the grounds that it provides for a nonpartisan [[head of state]], separate from the [[head of government]], and thus ensures that the highest representative of the country, at home and internationally, does not represent a particular political party, but all people.<ref name="Bogdanor">{{cite web |title=The Guardian has got it wrong |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/dec/06/monarchy.comment8 |first=Vernon |last=Bogdanor |website=The Guardian |date=6 December 2000}}</ref> 

=== Extreme politics ===
British-American [[libertarian]] writer Matthew Feeney argues that European constitutional monarchies "have managed for the most part to avoid extreme politics" – specifically [[fascism]], [[communism]], and [[military dictatorship]] – "in part because monarchies provide a check on the wills of [[Populism|populist]] politicians" by representing entrenched customs and traditions.<ref name="Feeney">{{cite web |title=The Benefits of Monarchy |url=http://reason.com/archives/2013/07/25/the-benefits-of-monarchy |first=Matthew |last=Feeney |website=Reason magazine |date=July 25, 2013}}</ref> Feeny notes that, "European monarchies – such as the Danish, Belgian, Swedish, Dutch, Norwegian, and British – have ruled over countries that are among the most stable, prosperous, and free in the world."<ref name="Feeney" /> Earlier, in 1956, [[Iain Moncreiffe]] and [[Don Pottinger]] made a similar argument, writing that, "Such countries achieve a national stability of special value in times of extremist party strife – because the monarch has never been elected. Nobody has ever had to take sides to vote for or against him, and so the constitutional monarch provides a symbol of unity above and outside politics."<ref>{{cite book|author1=Moncreiffe, Iain|author2=Pottinger, Don|title=Blood Royal|date=1956|publisher=Thomas Nelson and Sons|location=London|page=37}}</ref>

Thomas Britton writes that elections are always divisive and adding another layer of competition would make a hypothetical presidential election very closely fought, with the results never clear cut. An elected president, as such, would barely represent half of the population, if not then even less. The monarchy, in contrast, is much more popular with the rest of the country.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://theoxfordblue.co.uk/not-just-acceptable-but-beneficial-a-modern-case-for-the-monarchy/ |title=Not just acceptable, but beneficial: a modern case for the monarchy|newspaper=The Oxford Blue |date= 4 June 2023}}</ref>

=== Previous failure ===
A republican government under the [[Commonwealth of England]] and then the [[Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland]] has already been tried when [[Oliver Cromwell]] installed it on 30 January 1649.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/glossary/rump-parliament.htm |title=The Rump Parliament |first=David |last=Plant |date=17 September 2008 |website=British Civil Wars and Commonwealth |access-date=6 July 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081202025619/http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/glossary/rump-parliament.htm |archive-date=2008-12-02}}</ref> Yet by February 1657 some people argued that Cromwell should assume [[the Crown]] as it would stabilise the constitution, limit his powers and restore [[precedent]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/biog/oliver-cromwell.htm |title=Biography of Oliver Cromwell |first=David |last=Plant |date=18 May 2007 |website=British Civil Wars and Commonwealth |access-date=6 July 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090205052651/http://british-civil-wars.co.uk/biog/oliver-cromwell.htm |archive-date=2009-02-05}}</ref> He declined and within three years of his death the Commonwealth had lost support and the monarchy was restored. During the later [[Glorious Revolution]] of 1688, which was itself partially caused by disillusionment with the absolutist rule of [[James II and VII]], it was argued by Parliament and others such as [[John Locke]] that James had broken "the original contract" with the state.<ref>{{cite web |last=Powell |first=Jim |date=August 1996 |title=John Locke: Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property |url=http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/john-locke-natural-rights-to-life-liberty-and-property/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120307200514/http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/john-locke-natural-rights-to-life-liberty-and-property/ |archive-date=7 March 2012 |access-date=6 July 2011 |website=The Freeman Online |volume=46 |issue=8}}</ref> Far from pressing for a republic, which had been experienced within living memory, they instead argued that the best form of government was a [[constitutional monarchy]] with explicitly circumscribed powers, which is the UK's current system of government.

==See also==
{{div col|colwidth=30em}}
* [[Abolition of monarchy]]
* [[Constitutional reform in the United Kingdom]]
* [[Criticism of monarchy]]
* [[Irish republicanism]]
* [[List of British republicans]]
* [[Movement Against the Monarchy]]
* [[Republic (pressure group)]]
* [[Republicanism in Antigua and Barbuda]]
* [[Republicanism in Australia]]
* [[Republicanism in Canada]]
* [[Republicanism in Jamaica]]
* [[Republicanism in New Zealand]]
* [[Republicanism in Northern Ireland]]
* [[Republicanism in the Bahamas]]
* [[Republics in the Commonwealth of Nations]]
* [[Scottish republicanism]]
* [[Secular state]]
* [[Welsh republicanism]]
* [[R (Jackson) v Attorney General]]{{div col end}}

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=Note|refs=
<ref name=Note02>Cases such as ''R (Jackson) v Attorney General'' [2005] UKHL 56 dispute that the sovereignty of Parliament is, in-fact, limitless.</ref>
<ref name=Note03>The primary concerns around the Privy Council arises from the [[Order in Council|Orders in Council]], which is passed by the Queen at a meeting of the Privy Council. Orders in Council are often used for significant actions done by the government, where a statutory instrument laid by an individual minister may not be appropriate. Orders in Council may be prerogative, meaning they exercise a prerogative power of the Monarch (These are powers which have not been explicitly taken away by Parliament). Prerogative orders are treated as primary legislation. Orders in Council may also be statutory, meaning they are exercising powers granted by an Act of Parliament. These orders are treated as secondary legislation and follow the procedure required by the Statutory Instruments Act 1946. ''Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service'' [1984] UKHL 9 established that prerogative orders in Council are subject to judicial review, given some conditions. Statutory orders are subject to judicial review in the same way as statutory instruments laid before parliament.</ref>
}}

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
{{refbegin}}
*{{cite book |first=Clive |last=Bloom |date=2010 |title=Restless Revolutionaries : A History of Britain's Fight for a Republic |location=Stroud, UK |publisher=[[The History Press]] |isbn=978-0-75245-856-4}}
*{{cite book |first=Christopher |last=Hitchens |author-link=Christopher Hitchens |date=1990 |title=The Monarchy: A Critique of Britain's Favourite Fetish |location=London, UK |publisher=Chatto & Windus |isbn=1-4481-5535-5}}
*{{cite book |first1=Gaby |last1=Mahlberg |first2=Dirk |last2=Wiemann |date=2013 |title=European Contexts for English Republicanism |location=Farnham |publisher=[[Ashgate Publishing]] |isbn=978-1-4094-5556-1}}
*{{cite book |first=Tom |last=Nairn |date=2011 |title=The Enchanted Glass: Britain and its Monarchy |location=London, UK |publisher=Verso Books |isbn=978-1-84467-775-7}}
*{{cite book |first=Jonathan |last=Scott |date=2004 |title=Commonwealth Principles: Republican Writing of the English Revolution |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0-521-84375-8}}
*{{cite book |first=Anthony |last=Taylor |date=1999 |title="Down with The Crown" : British anti-monarchism and debates about royalty since 1790 |location=London, UK |publisher=Reaktion Books |isbn=1-86189-049-4}}
*{{cite book |first1=Anthony |last1=Taylor |first2=David |last2=Nash |date=2000 |title=Republicanism in Victorian Society |location=Stroud |publisher=Sutton |isbn=0-7509-1856-X}}
*{{cite book |url={{GBurl|id=17YoDAAAQBAJ}} |editor-first1=Dirk |editor-last1=Wiemann |editor-first2=Gaby |editor-last2=Mahlberg |date=2016 |title=Perspectives on English Revolutionary Republicanism |location=Abingdon-on-Thames |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-08176-0}}
* [https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/02/tony-benns-plan-to-democratise-britain-and-abolish-the-monarchy/ Tony Benn’s Plan to Democratise Britain – and Abolish the Monarchy]. An article in [[Tribune (magazine)|''Tribune'' magazine]] written by Martyn Rush. Published 26 February 2021.
{{refend}}

==External links==
{{Commons category}}
*[https://labourforarepublic.org.uk/ Labour for a Republic website]
*[http://www.republic.org.uk Republic website]
*{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20110927140032/http://makepeace.ca/respublica/uk.html Res Publica: Britain]}} international anti-monarchy web directory
*[http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/ The Electoral Commission]
*[http://throneout.com/ Throneout website]

{{Nationalism in the United Kingdom}}
{{Opinion polling for United Kingdom elections}}
{{Republicanism}}
{{Europe topic |Republicanism in}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Republicanism In The United Kingdom}}
[[Category:Republicanism by country|United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Republicanism in the Commonwealth realms|United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Republicanism in the United Kingdom| ]]