Public funding of the royal family should be optional

[FuckinghamPalace]

Not sure if this has been duscussed before but…

What if the tax payer could opt out of funding the royal family? And opt in if they want to contribute?

It should be optional

Why not?

It's interesting that the only part of my comment you thought you could refute confidently was regarding their enormous wealth.

@Katypp
Not Hyperbole...............
"roughly 9,000 people who die in cold homes in England and Wales every year" (source ageing-better.org.uk)
"90,000 people die in poverty in the UK each year" (Source Loughborough University - the research was reported in 2022 - that figure has probably risen since then)
"2022/23 - 4.2m children in relative poverty after housing costs
2023/24 stats:

• 4.3 million children in relative poverty after housing costs (30% of all children in the UK), 100,000 more than last year

• 826,000 children live in households that have used foodbanks in the last year

• 34% children in poverty live in lone parent households

• 43% of children in poverty live in a household where someone has a disability

• 35% of children in poverty live in a household headed by someone from an ethnic minority (defined as non White British)

• 50% of children in poverty live in a household with 3 or more children – affected by the sibling tax (two child limit)

• Absolute poverty has also risen. There are now 3.6 million children in absolute poverty compared to 3.3 last year.

(SOURCE: Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), released 21 March 2024, GOV.UK website, statistical release, Households below average income: for financial years ending 1995 to 2023.")

what about the return on investment partly via tourist's in the economy etc due to the royal family ?

Between tax and indirect revenue like tourism they add and estimated 1.77 billion to the economy even if it was 1/2 that I’m still happy to pay the £1.29 they cost me

I presume you would like to opt out from benefiting from that

even if we got rid of them there’d be heads of states which would cost but not bring indirect revenue in

thats the thing with the public quick to presume the costs ££ and not the return on investment etc

Can we be selective in what we pay for? There are quite a few things I would like to opt out from!

It is the point though.

If people were able to opt out of contributing towards the cost of the RF, you would also have to find a way to ensure the same people don't benefit from the revenue the RF brings.

How would you even start doing that?

Making payments towards the royals optional starts a slippery slope of what else people should be able to opt out of.
For example why should everyone pay for HS2? If my kids have left education then can I opt out of money going to schools ? Why would someone in say Wales care about the state of the roads in Scotland or a museum in London ?

If we only paid for what we wanted to pay for then the losers would be groups like the arts, disabled and elderly because people will only pay for what affects them directly.

Good point. At least the RF creates revenue. I can think of a few things I would opt out of that only cost the nation money.

From what I understand the assertion that the royal family attract immeasurable tourist income - is not a demonstrable fact - just simply an economic opinion.

I may be wrong but at a brief glance Versailles (no living royal family) = 10/15 million visitors per annum.
Buckinghsm palace - 550,000 visitors.
Hmmm

either way its still ££ and numbers are not an equal measure if eg 15 people spend eg £1 each vs 5 that spend £3 each

Here is a link to the Sovereign Grant Act. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sovereign-grant-act-2011-guidance/sovereign-grant-act-2011-guidance

Please read it and educate yourself. Over the last 10 years the monarchy has paid more than 3 billion to the Exchequer. That money is used for public spending.

This argument always boils down the people knowing of everything and the value of nothing. It’s nothing to do with the figures or ‘tourism’ - it’s to do with heritage, prestige and global soft power.

I’m amazed people are so keen for a joyless little grey republic. The corrupt self-serving little shits in parliament feathering their own nests tells you all you need to know about how a presidential style system would go. At least the RF add a bit of pizzazz and have given generations of duty!

I agree we should have a healthy disrespect for any of these sanctified privileged people but be careful what you wish for.

do you think that every country in the world have a RF because they are essential services? Sure you don’t.

Every country has a head of state. I'm not convinced our RF costs more than the HoS and associated costs of other major nations.

And neither you or any other posters ever answered my question that I posted earlier:

@FuckinghamPalace - can you support your implied assertion that a non-royal head of state would be both cheaper and more beneficial to the UK and its standing abroad?

Educate your own self. How many more billions have they stashed away over the decades that nobody will ever find.

It's not their money in the first place. They are nobody, do nothing, serve no purpose, fight no wars, they have no right to ANY of it. They just create traditions, twist laws, documents, rules and regs to convince us they do.

Screaminabdabz

We don't know the costs because the RF have used the state to hide their private wealth. Given that they are given public money - this is a clear breach of transparency.

The Crown Estate pay off is entirely notional as the Crown Estate doesn't belong to the Sovereign in any real way. It clearly belongs to the state. The income isn't his to share with us in any actual sense. It's a symbolic ownership which provides a fig leaf for how we prop them up while they avoid paying taxes like real people.

The Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster don't pay corporation tax - why not?

"The corrupt self-serving little shits in parliament feathering their own nests"

It might be argued that this expression could apply equally to Andrew Windsor (formerly known as "Prince") who has been paid something like £13 million pounds from the public in his life.

Was that money colourfully spent enough for you?

Been done to death on mumsnet, this one. Irish president costs 330,000 euros, speaks sense and does a very good job, by all accounts.

😂😂💭😂😂

Good one

I'm with you. I am fervently anti monarchy and don't believe for a single moment that us plebs all benefit from the tourism they bring. Another thing we've been conditioned to defend. The idea that someone superior cares about us and is looking after us is something every human being wants. That delusion is why people cry and fawn over them like they're angels sent from heaven 🤮

I don't think an opt in or out system is feasible. The administration of it could be a nightmare and costly in itself.

Will we ever get the chance to vote the buggers out? Who makes that decision? Who is above the monarchy. I don't know the answers to all this. After watching the whole Prince Andrew situation unfold I feel physically sick at the mention of their name 🤮🤣

"don't believe for a single moment that us plebs all benefit from the tourism they bring." just because you don't believe it doesn't mean its not true

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/14/the-sovereigns-wealth-uk-royal-familys-finances-explained

https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2021/03/11/where-does-britains-royal-family-get-its-money-from

@OperationSquid that's quite interesting. I've just read one link regards the tax paid on assets which is quite substantial actually. I will read the other links as it's always good to have more information.

Again, one needs facts and evidence and I don't know if we will ever truly have all the facts. It seems very much that the cost will be greater than the benefit to the man on the street.

I joined the organisation ' Republic ' some time ago and read many anti monarchy statistics that further supported my view that they have to go.

www.duchyoflancaster.co.uk/about-the-duchy/history/

Keir, listen. Introduce a retrospective inheritance tax for British families who've been exempted for centuries without good reason. Backdate the levy to 1399 and bingo, you can fund a brand new healthcare system for the next 300 years!

I can’t really give much credence to posters who punctuate their posts with emojis.