And a republic. That said - what would happen to all the stuff owned by the crown?
I'm not sure if the postal service still is, and the prisons could probably be let go - but I think there's a lot of land, especially in the south owned by the crown.
Property owned by the Crown is not the property of Elizabeth, as a person. If QE II were to abdicate, for example, she would not get to keep all of it. It's the property of the Crown, the office of the head of state. It belongs to the state, in practice. If she's advised to abdicate, she would, and she's advised to transfer all Crown property to a republic, she would.
The royal family does have many billions in personal holdings as well, of course.
> Property owned by the Crown is not the property of Elizabeth, as a person.
The Crown and Queen Elizabeth II are different persons. Queen Elizabeth II is a natural person. The Crown is a legal person, a corporation sole – a corporation with only one member, who right now is Queen Elizabeth II. Actually the Crown is not a single corporation, but a number of legally distinct corporations which all have identical membership. There is "the Crown in Right of the United Kingdom", "the Crown in Right of Canada", "the Crown in Right of the Commonwealth of Australia", "the Crown in Right of New Zealand", etc. All up, there are 16 nations with Queen Elizabeth II as monarch, and each of those nations is a distinct corporation "the Crown in Right of X". But, also there exist distinct "the Crown in Right of X" corporations for each Australian state (6) and each Canadian province (10), and also each of the three British crown dependencies (Isle of Mann, Jersey and Guernsey). So there are 35 legal persons (corporations sole) "the Crown in Right of X", and one natural person who is presently the sole common member of all of them. Each of those 35 corporations has distinct assets, which in turn are distinct from the personal assets of the natural person called Elizabeth. If any of those 35 entities became a republic, the assets of the "Crown in Right of X" corporation would pass to its republican successor.
AIUI he was effectively disowned by the rest of them, for placing his marriage above the stability of the institution. It could well have led to a British republic. And the next king did pay him an allowance anyway, apparently.
Abolishing the monarchy would also obsolete the Sovereign Grant, so all the surplus income from the Crown Estate would go to the state without the royal family leeching their cut.
That said, there are some Duchies that are privately owned. In my opinion, these should be seized by the state during the establishment of a republic - if we're going to abolish the monarchy, we need to go the whole way and strip each member of all their inherited wealth too.
It's the very least they deserve, and would provide a much needed clean slate for New Britain.
I'm not sure if the postal service still is, and the prisons could probably be let go - but I think there's a lot of land, especially in the south owned by the crown.