On the charity work:
.
Even the palace itself claims credit for charity work in an attempt to justify the enormous cost of the monarchy to the taxpayer. It is used as a smokescreen to deflect attention from the real issues. It works well because few people are willing to question another person's charity 'work'. It is, however, little more than a cynical PR exercise.
Two obvious points can first be raised to rebut this monarchist defence:
* The royals can continue to do charity work in a republic. They do not need official 'royal' statue to raise money for charity.
* Their value to charities is their celebrity status, which they will retain even after the monarchy is gone.
If you are unconvinced by these simple points it is worth considering some pertinent questions:
* What charity work do they actually do?
* How do other countries manage without the Windsors?
* What charities are they mainly involved with? (many are their own creations)
The following points are also worth considering:
* This is a cynical use of charities to bolster their own reputations and stave off criticism about their lifestyles and extravagances
* There is a big difference between simply turning up at engagements, (what the royals do) and being an engaged patron (something many other celebrity patrons do)