AS the current chapter of the Royal Chronicles draws to a close, there is inevitably anticipation, discussion and concern over what is to come when Queen Elizabeth II is no more.

Whatever magic, mystery and myth may have surrounded the royal family in the past, the sunlight of the tabloid press, gossip columns — and mainstream media — has well and truly exposed it. The fairy tale has hit the buffers.

Some members of the family may at times be gracious, funny, kind, selfless and caring, but some can also be venal, greedy, possibly racist and allegedly involved in criminal activity. They are human, with human faults, but lots of money.

Billionaire Jeffrey Epstein ended his days in a prison; Andy Windsor — reportedly worth a measly £65 million — may be able to depend on the public purse for any future compensation claim against him, while he hides in one of the family castles, claiming diplomatic immunity.

Yes, the eighth in line to the throne is facing civil proceedings for alleged sexual abuse of a minor.

Being a royal is of course a tough gig — and it is interesting that in a royal family that seems to marry for charm and beauty, it is the gruff, honest, horsey and hardworking Princess Anne, who has gained the long-term respect of a majority.

So maybe we should save the next generation from the utter misery of a life of “luxury servitude” to a myth encompassing impossible standards and that is becoming more and more irrelevant in the modern world.

This myth that is so pervasive that any traits of human vulnerability mean that some members must be excised from “the firm” and protect their mental health by moving to more tolerant California.

Maybe we should then save Charles Windsor from the torture of pretending to be “neutral” on matters he is passionate about (however bonkers they may seem), when he is helicoptering about trying to save the planet or protecting nature while shooting and deerstalking? Surely an everyday millionaire could afford a few little hypocrisies?

There are numerous questions being asked that undermine the supposed political neutrality of the monarchy: the royal prerogatives; the power of veto; backdoor lobbying; preferential tax arrangements; the unaccountability of the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster — all working against the democracy we hold so dear.

The Queen is unaccountable for her action in excluding herself from environmental protections on her massive Scottish landholdings. In a climate emergency, how can this possibly be justified?

The irony of a fabulously wealthy family that does not pay tax on its income (only a meagre sum from net income on rented properties) dedicating itself to charitable works is not lost on many.

Grand fundraising galas hosting tiara-wearing royals are echoes of a past we should be happy to leave to the history books.

In a world of foodbanks, Gurkha veterans on hunger strike for fair pensions, wounded Afghanistan veterans fighting for compensation, homelessness and growing health inequalities, such displays of wealth are frankly tasteless.

How can the royal family command the respect of younger people, who are so much more aware than older generations of the source of royal wealth from generations of slavery?

The hoarding of treasures from countries stricken with poverty are a painful reminder of colonialism that in today’s terms is a national shame.

How can we rebuild our reputation as a global power, or any kind of post-Brexit modern state, when we are hanging on to vestiges of a discredited system funded by slaveowner wealth?

Despite their protestations and fantastic PR, the royal family has never modernised. Their brief embrace of a strong-minded and independently wealthy black woman into the family didn’t last.

She was supposed to be an ornament; instead, she remained unashamedly herself. And it nearly broke her.

You will have gathered my deepfelt and personal objection to the prevailing monarchical system and my impatience for change and to the need for an elected head of state — not a president with executive powers. No president Blair, thank you!

I recognise that many are quite comfortable with the current situation, but this will change. Charles will not earn the respect and adulation that his mother has earned.

The younger generation will be impatient with his hypocrisy on environmental issues and his apparent ill temper and disappointment towards the life choices of his younger son.

There is a major shift in opinion under way and what is needed now is intelligent and informed debate, carried out respectfully and not at the mercy of the gutter press.

So surely it is time to review the royal pantomime, defund and dismantle this anachronistic, hierarchical — and as we have seen, sometimes personally destructive — system and build a modern representative state.

Patriotism is not dependent on the institution of the monarchy, as the people of Wales and Scotland know very well. British values of free speech, tolerance and respect for others is being undermined by the existence of an anachronistic monarchical system.  

It will take time and long and detailed debate and maybe heartbreak for some, but negotiating a healthier relationship with the monarchy as an institution and with the royal family as individuals would be a good start, along with a gradual dismantling of their unaccountable power, wealth and political influence.

Let us open this conversation and not be afraid of the debate. Time to get off our knees and reflect.

Emma Dent Coad is a former MP for Kensington, a current councillor and patron of Labour for a Republic which will be publishing an extended statement on this issue in time for Labour conference next month (www.labourforarepublic.org.uk).