‘The institution really needs a critical reappraisal. It is still rooted in feudalism’

• YOU rightly call for “a mature conversation” about the future of the monarchy, (A missed moment for a mature discussion on the future of the monarchy, May 4).

The institution really needs a critical reappraisal. It is still rooted in feudalism.

First there is the hereditary principle. This is particularly at odds with democracy in that bills completed in parliament require royal assent; the monarch even has the power in theory to veto them and personally to break any law.

The monarch is head of the Established (Anglican) Church, so there is religious discrimination; 26 Anglican bishops have a seat in the House of Lords by law.

In 15 overseas territories the monarch is also head of state. Six Commonwealth countries, however, would now prefer an elected head of state.

Besides enjoying vast wealth and privileges, the monarch is free to award titles (and residences) to any family members.

Camilla, not even related by blood, was awarded the title of Queen Consort by Elizabeth II.

As one of the last honours awarded by the late Elizabeth II, Tony Blair received the highest order of knighthood. This shows how badly the honours system needs reform too.

Abolishing the monarchy would not be easy but some significant changes should certainly be made in this (relatively) democratic country.

Growing republicanism among younger people might offer some hope.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED, NW6