THERE is no significant republican movement in this country, and no desire to see the monarchy disappear.

The Jubilee celebrations and the emotion over Queen Mother's death last year demonstrate the high regard most people have for the sovereign.

There is less certainty, however, over the depth of affection for the wider Royal Family and the monarchy as an institution.

The Queen herself has called for a continual evolution of the monarchy.

And it is in that spirit of reform that she should carefully consider the recommendations from the Fabian Society's report on the Royal Family.

In essence, the report makes a lot of sense. Many of its proposed reforms are long overdue.

The Royal Family is governed by statutes dating back three centuries or more.

A constitutional monarchy in the 21st century ought to be guided by values which have moved on from a code of conduct created in the 18th century.

At a time when Britain prides itself on being a multi-cultural multi-faith nation of tolerance, is it right that non-Anglicans or anyone who marries a Catholic are barred from the throne? In such a society is it right that the sovereign is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England?

In an age of equality is it right that male heirs are given priority in the line of succession?

And in an age of supposed equal opportunity for all is it right for public funds to go towards the support of so many members of the Royal Family?

There will be traditionalists who will oppose any talk of reform.

But discussion on change must not be resisted.

The Paul Burrell trial clearly demonstrated the vulnerability of the Royal Family as it is presently constituted.

If it is to survive, the monarchy will have to reflect the continual changes in our society and our culture.

Unless it evolves and embraces reform, the monarchy will risk losing the public support it relies on for its very survival, and increase the voice of the republicans.