To concentrate on the important question rather than the hyperbole coming from some contributors to this thread, here's one for those defending the monarchy.

The reigning monarch has a weekly private meeting with the PM at Buck House, a tradition that has been in place for many years. Nobody knows what's discussed, but presumably the content of the meeting is inocuous enough (I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and doubt very much that Brenda - as Private Eye call the Queen - uses it as an opportunity to try to influence government policy).

The question is this: in a democracy, why does an unelected head of state have this weekly private access to the PM? Is this good for democracy, or bad, and is the fact that nobody - apart from the Queen and the PM - knows what is discussed in these meetings a good or bad thing? Would democracy be better served by either ending these meetings, or by making the content of the discussions public and accountable, or by continuing as is?

-- Ian