In what way do the RF "serve their country " ,what actually is their duty ?

[peridito]

I can understand that their involvement on Remembrance Sunday honours people who have served their country in terms of military service but what else do they do to "fulfill their duty " ?

Support charities, support the military, represent the UK abroad, appear at national events, etc .

I can't really equate that with service and duty ,I suppose I reserve that for ppl in the armed forces .

I guess they do bring publicity to charities ( though I don't get why a charity needs Royal Patronage ? ) and also to the England and Wales .

As for supporting the military .. ? Sort of morale booster?
And I'm not sure about them representing the UK abroad ,what image do they give ? Do I want other nations to see us through the lens of the RF ?. How do nations view eachother these days I wonder,in terms of their political leaders ?

I've not thought much about the RF in the past but all the press about Prince Andrew ,Harry and Meghan has rather concentrated my mind . I get that they are a tourist draw ,but I'm not convinced by the duty and service .
Perhaps it just means that if you are a member of the RF you give up ( duty and service element ) to ....go along to events and on tours abroad .

Most of the RF men have actually served in the armed forces. Harry did two tours in Afghanistan, for example.

Absolutely I can see that ppl serving in armed forces is serving .As I said in my first post .

Surely it's an option for individuals in RF ,just as it is for most , not a requirement . So a choice ,not a duty, of being a Royal ?

And I'm not sure about them representing the UK abroad ,what image do they give ? Do I want other nations to see us through the lens of the RF ?. How do nations view eachother these days I wonder,in terms of their political leaders ?

I'm in Australia , and I'd say that the RF make very little impression on Aussies at all. When they do a tour ( usually very brief, a few days here and there, opening the Comm Games or something similar) , people turn out , smile and wave. A few republicans grumble, then we all forget about them. So no, I don't think that other countries would see the UK through the lens of the RF at all.

My guess is that most people view other countries through what they see / hear on the news, on documentaries, on social media. Unless people make a study of other countries, I'd say that most have only a passing interest in what is happening outside their own sphere.

I am not a republican but I see very little value in the RF. The monarchy itself has value, but the family doesn't add anything to our lives .

OP - Google is your friend.
www.royal.uk/queen-and-government

Right ,I've checked out that link ,thanks noteverything.

It seems the Queen has a ceremonial role
The Queen's duties include opening each new session of Parliament, granting Royal Assent to legislation, and approving Orders and Proclamations through the Privy Council and that she and other members of the RF provide vital publicity to charities and have links with military associations, professional bodies and public service organisations.

Members of the Royal Family support The Queen in her many State and national duties, as well as carrying out important work in the areas of public and charitable service, and helping to strengthen national unity and stability

An awful lot of putting on a show and supporting ( not quite clear what the support involves ) organisations .

It seems a bit circular to me ,people important through inherited wealth and birth go around lending their importance for publicity of good cause or country . Is that duty and service ?

And the "helping to strengthen national unity and stability" ?

Do ppl think they are doing that ?Are able to do that?

If anything I think the existence of the Monarchy has a divisive effect ,it displays great wealth and power which the majority cannot have .

Brexit caused/causes division and instabilty for business ,organisations dependent on non uk born staff but the Queen and RF can't intervene or help create political stability.

It all seems like a great facade.

I think your definition of duty is very narrow. I include pretty much all public sector workers. They all help run the country. All those charities that make life better for different groups are making a contribution to civil society, and some of those are headed by Royals. You cant deny that people turn up to see them, so yes they can publicise good causes.

And they form the basis for the crown which unites us all in great storytelling 😊

Good post red ,I think my definition was too narrow .

It's not a world I'm familiar or comfortable with ,reminds me of Victorian values ,the rich man in his castle/poor man at his gate and all that . So that colours my view - many people do indeed contribute to society .My poor neighbour who works 6 and a half days a week in a non medical role for the NHS is one !

The recent shenannigan over the HM debacle have brought home to me how ridiculous the RF is.

These people are shifting palace to palace throughot with over 1,000 servants but somehow the queen has a reputation for frugality! The years seems to be spent much as it was in Victorian times with the winter months being spent on an endless shooting party. The summer months will be one photo op after another with everyone dressing up for Ascot etc and ostentatiously bowing to each other in public to remind us how special they really are. Not content with a life of luxury here royal family members are constantly moving continent to continent to do very little elsewhere and preferably on somebody elses private jet.

And somehow the taxpayer continues to fund this farce and are grateful that they will show up to open a hospital or something once in a while. It is almost as if we believe that a hospital can't possibly function unless someone royal cuts a ribbon when the building is completed. Enough. Enough. Enough.

Every aspect of their lives is duty in a way. Because unlike all the rest of us, they have virtually no choice in what they do with their lives, absolutely no anonymity, and constant public scrutiny. They can't even pop into Tescos because their minders wouldn't allow it, and they have to be constantly on duty. It's not as though any aspect of their private life is ever kept private, thanks to 'friends' and photographers, so they have to think constantly about keeping up appearances.

I think being born into the RF would be a curse

I dont mind paying 62p a year for them.

My DHs company designs flood alleviation schemes. He gets paid. Not as much as the Queen. It’s a service though! Can he have s gong? Of course not. No one should get anything for doing their job! Lots of people serve others in some capacity or another.

All duty means is that it’s a requirement to “serve” but the recompense is huge. Wealth, no redundancy (but can resign), great clothes, expensive weddings, jewellery to die for and free board and lodging! Never mind front row tickets for everything and being able to indulge in all your hobbies and interests.

Harry was never on the front line in the military. He was cross at the time that he wasn’t! Yes he went but was backroom.

They have loads of choice. Everyone else does mundane boring jobs. Everyone else gets on with it. The recompense for service is immense and not earned.

All of them apart from Edward have been in the Military. Princess Anne was in the navy, I get pissed off with Edward rocking up I. rememberance day in a uniform he didn’t earn. He gets an honourably thing that lets him wear it.

I read they are kept away from frontline conflict because they would be in serious danger. To kill a royal or take one hostage to some groups (taliban, ISIS) would be a massive thing.

I like Princess Anne she is patron of a charity that supports local careers in our area. They can go and do courses it just have a cup of tea and a chat. They will help people work out what benefits and help they should be applying for. My mu was on her knees one day in tears ready to hold a pillow over my dads face as he was being aggressive due to his illness. She walked out and went to the carers centre and broke down. Two women who had been there gave her a hug made her a tea and held her hand whilst she let it all out. Bloody invaluable charity.

*supports carers

Princess Anne was in the navy

No she wasn’t.

princess Anne was in the Navy

Nope , never. She has never had a job besides " being Royal". She holds an honorary role as a Rear Admiral in the Navy, that's all.

They hand over all the income from the Crown Estates to the Government and accept a small percentage back, which the public then moans about being too much. They live in buildings that are their homes, but they don't own most of them. They turn up in all weathers and pretty much all states of good or bad health to support charities etc and also do what the government wants. They put up with the constant scrutiny from the media and public and rarely comment on how intrusive it is or how hurt they are by the unnecessarily vitriolic comments.

Would you fancy being a member of the Royal family? Would the money and fame be enough recompense for having all that in your life 23/7/365?

Well the RF represent their country in the same way that Presidents represent their countries in presidential parliamentary democracies. A President in such a system of government is an honorary title, given to someone who has broad appeal and who henceforth remains outside of political debates. The remit of the president is to represent the country abroad and at home, so for example at non-political diplomatic gatherings (state funerals, inaugurations, etc), national days, ceremonial constitutional roles like the opening of parliament etc. and to boost morale and national unity, e.g. leading charities, opening schools/hospitals/etc, visiting victims of natural disasters and similar.

Presidents in parliamentary democracies play the same role as the RF, only they are appointed/elected rather than having a hereditary role.

In our tv news and press this past week we had Princess Anne at the 40 year remembrance service for the Fraserburgh lifeboat disaster and she was meeting volunteers for the Citizens Advice Scotland for their 80th anniversary.

(I'm not pro hereditary titles however I'm ok with the status quo.)

There is also the Commonwealth. That's one of the largest international alliances there is, based on shared values (not oommerce, not war)

I think the international aspect is not often mentioned, so is routinely undervalued

I think that if you offered a local hospital a visit from a royal to cut a ribbon, or £345 million, they'd probably not choose the royal. Especially if each year a different hospital got an extra £345 million, for the rest of the foreseeable future. www.republic.org.uk/what-we-want/royal-finances

Oh and countries without royals seem to tick along very well, having other slebs support charities and open new hospital wards. This is very much a non-essential job.

I think their 'duty' is only a duty in order to justify their own very privileged position. The Crown and the survival of the Crown is the be all and end all, and if they have to go and shake the hands of some hospital staff and make small talk now and again, so be it. If we didnt have them doing this, we'd have plenty of celebs to publicise charities. There are plenty of actors for example who are ambassadors for charities. If they decided to pack it all in after The Queen died and live the life of quiet country landowners, we'd tick along fine as a country, just with less gossip. If we decided to ditch them though, they would lose the power and status that comes with being born into the RF for them and their children.