A suitcase with a million euros in cash given to Charles

[antelopevalley]

The real question is what the Prime Minister was expecting in return.

"The Prince of Wales accepted a suitcase containing a million euros in cash from a former Qatari prime minister, the Sunday Times has reported.
The paper says this was one of three cash donations from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim totalling three million euros.
Clarence House said donations from the sheikh were passed immediately to one of the prince's charities and all the correct processes were followed.
There is no suggestion the payments were illegal.
According to the Sunday Times, Prince Charles received the three cash donations in person from the former prime minister between 2011 and 2015.
It is claimed that on one occasion the money was handed over in a holdall at a meeting at Clarence House. On another, the paper reported the cash was contained in carrier bags from the department store Fortnum and Mason."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61941113

'On a journey to self determination'
How very magnanimous of you lol!

I mentioned the declining commonwealth as you seemed to think an Instagram photo etc represented an accurate picture of how the uk 'royals' are viewed.
I suspect many more commonwealth countries will remove the UK monarchy once Elizabeth goes.

www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/politics/article-majority-of-canadians-in-favour-of-abolishing-constitutional-monarchy/

www.nytimes.com/2022/06/03/world/australia/australia-new-zealand-monarchy.amp.html

On a journey to self determination'

How very magnanimous of you lol!

That is literally the international law term for the process, but do feel free to be snide about the phrase if it helps you.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination

i am very well aware that Australia, New Zealand and Canada will (should!) move towards appointing their own head of state - I said I expect them to do so in my post up there. So not sure why you’re posting links telling me what I already know. 🤷‍♀️

@Serenster , I know what self determination means.

I point I was trying to make was too subtle obviously ( hint :colonialism ).

Well we will both see how things turn out once Elizabeth goes won't we?
I expect the royals and their advisors have been working hard re PR in preparation.

But they won't be able to turn back the tide of history

But they won't be able to turn back the tide of history

I can’t imagine why you would think they want to? I would have thought that one of the most notable elements of Elizabeth’s long reign has been the peaceful transition of the majority of the former Empire to independent nations. This is not something that all the former colonial powers have achieved.

As Prince William recently said, the royal family has, and will continue to, stand by any country that wishes to part ways with the British monarchy.

I wasn't referring to the former 'colonies '
I was referring to the whole creaking institution !

If I were you I wouldn't mention William and the 'colonies 'is the same breath...
Of sure - lots of 'reflection' after the latest embarrassing tour .
Utterly out of touch

And I've no idea what you mean by William 'standing by' former colonies ?

Doing what exactly ?
How patronising .

Japan, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the UK, Australia, New Zealand Luxembourg and the Netherlands etc all regularly come out very highly in surveys of stable and prosperous states. So where’s the incentive to radically change our government?

Well argued. This is the crux of it. If a system delivers a relatively stable and prosperous quality of life to the majority of its citizens, why would they then undermine their own interests?

It's not going to happen, at least not in the foreseeable, particularly because William and Kate are doing so well as long as Charles doesn't ruin it first

If a system delivers a relatively stable and prosperous quality of life to the majority of its citizens, why would they then undermine their own interests?

Well... we did with Brexit didn't we... there won't be such a bad decision as that again ever. We're struggling with the prosperous quality of life somewhat at the moment, I would say. And I'm really not sure how W&K are 'doing so well'... with all that the country is going through at the moment. They just highlight the inequalities in this country as far as I'm concerned.

There is also a huge unquestioned assumption in the 'constitutional monarchies are more stable ' argument .

You cannot assume that the monarchy provides the stability .
You cannot prove that .

It is perfectly possible that a monarchy has survived because the society is stable

There are such things as economic cycles (40-year cycles, to be precise), and other peaks and troughs. If you look at the news from years ago (BBC does an archive, I think), the items are remarkably familiar - recession, NHS in crisis, morality in politics, strikes, rising inequality, climate change...Britain is back up to being the fifth largest economy again despite the recent seismic events. If politicians, some royals and other ministers stop being self-serving and start doing what is best for the country, we will get through.

William and Kate are doing well. They are generally liked, seem sensible, and don't appear to be demanding or grabby, at least not in public.

@MaulPerton You talk as if things are inevitable. We have global economic cycles and events. But the UK economy is structurally in terrible shape. For a start our country's wealth and economic output is concentrated in London. This is terrible for our country as a whole and very unlike other countries who usually have a number of cities that are also important wealth producers.
Our manufacturing industry is far too small and contributes to our low economic output.
The government's constant push to keep house prices high is good for well-off people but bad for our overall economy. Economies work best when workers can move around to respond to skill shortages, instead of being unable to afford to live in places that need workers.
Our public transport infrastructure is still very poor and contributes to the poor local economies in many towns and cities.

The UK economy is structurally in very poor shape and this government is doing nothing to tackle the issues.

@MaulPerton
You are easily pleased aren't you ?!

"( william and Kate) are generally liked, seem sensible, and don't appear to be demanding or grabby, at least not in public."

Don't •appear• to be grabby...

Are you an uncover republican?

William seems angry and cold in my opinion .
In any case , you'll have a wait . It's bags of cash Charles up next .

I'm not invested in any position. If a system delivers, does it matter if it's a monarchy, a republic or anything else? Royals or politicians aren't usually our favourites so there is no real obligation to 'like' Boris, William or Kate. As long as people have a reasonable standard of living, and our 'leaders' promote rather than hinder it, that's about all we can expect (it could be much, much worse). So, yes, perhaps I am easily pleased😀

I agree about Charles - he does not seem to have the best instincts.

But a large swathe of the population don't have 'a reasonable standard of living' do they?
Foodbanks have distributed more than 2.1million food parcels in the last year. Up by 81% compared to five years ago. Nearly half of those were households who had two parents in work. How can that be 'reasonable'? The biggest fall in living standards since records began. That's official. People are in desperate situations. Is that 'reasonable'?

The 'system' is not delivering, hindered by the 'leaders'.

Yet little pushback on Sovereign Grant increasing to £102million this last year. That just happens. For what? Why?

Where's this slimmed down Monarchy I've been hearing about for at least 20 years.

What I took away was his foundation was paying half a million quid to a guy in the US & he actually has a foundation set up there
I wonder how much money's been raised over the years and exactly what they used it for.

This is a very good point especially in light of the mostly substantially lesser amounts paid to charity CEO's even now.

I think we're also entitled to wonder why Charles is accepting charitable donations to maintain Granny's old gaff his holiday home.

I'm actually quite sick of the 'but charity...' excuses trotted out.

From Charles's never ending whoopsies to Andrew's skeevy Pitch@Palace doings and the transfer of donated funds originating in the Royal Foundation to a private company offering no transparency on their final destination, it all stinks.

And that's before we get on to to the no-show patronages.

'I'm not invested in any position. If a system delivers, does it matter if it's a monarchy, a republic or anything else? Royals or politicians aren't usually our favourites so there is no real obligation to 'like' Boris, William or Kate.'

@MaulPerton - I strongly disagree with the points you skate over here.

1. If the system delivers - what a big IF. And I'd argue it doesn't . Look at the poverty and inequality in the UK

1. Does it matter if it's a republic or a monarchy ? Yes it bloody does matter . It's the principle . Unearned deference , power and influence or elected representatives ( who can be removed , don't forget)

1. I agree liking doesn't matter re politicians as once they fall out of favour THEY ARE VOTED OUT.

Don't lump politicians in with 'royals' . I can see the confusion mind you - the 'royals ' are keen on leaning on the elected representatives in order to have their wishes carried out - regardless of any one's else's wishes or the laws which apply to rest of us . So much for that ' apolitical 'bullshit .

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/27/queen-secret-influence-laws-revealed-scottish-government-memo

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/jun/28/prince-charles-pressured-ministers-change-law-queen-consent

Does it matter if it's a republic or a monarchy ? Yes it bloody does matter . It's the principle . Unearned deference , power and influence or elected representatives ( who can be removed , don't forget)

Elected representatives fill their pockets just as much as unelected ones, or do we not consider the wealth transfers that regularly take place from taxpayer to said elected representatives via wars and health crises to be so? Royals use different means - charity, as CathyorClaire has mentioned above - but it's still the same outcome. In fact, is it not more disappointing when people you’ve elected turn out to be equally self-serving? At least we are not surprised when royals do it because that’s what monarchs do

@MaulPerton

I think you have missed the point - not sure if deliberately or not .

You cannot stand over such a statement re MPs - they do not all 'fill their boots ' . And if they act illegally they face the law .

The same cannot be said about the 'royals' ... £12 million pay out ...
More seriously , the royals are not subject to the same laws as the rest of us never mind taxes and 'royals' keeping their wills secret(why on earth do you think their wills are secret? )
Goodness , you are claiming that the 'royals' use charities to 'fill their boots' . You are doing my Republican job for me !

You haven't addressed unearned power ( but for a year or two and we'd have King Andrew next and not a thing you could do about it )
and riches ) and influence .
You haven't addressed millions upon millions shovelled to the royals - with a guarantee that their payments can never go down .

Next you'll be telling me that they 'work' for the money !

@MaulPerton
". In fact, is it not more disappointing when people you’ve elected turn out to be equally self-serving? At least we are not surprised when royals do it because that’s what monarchs do"

And here you have summed up the whole rotten core of monarchy.
Self serving . That's what they do.
You can see it , yet you accept it .

You've been brain washed .

Novella

All our leaders are self-serving (barring one or two very rare exceptions...maybe)

who cares - not me

You haven't defined 'self serving '
.
There is a s a difference between fiddling your expenses ( not that every official does that ) and being above the law and having millions and millions shovelled your way each year with the promise that the amount will never go down .

And even if you believe that every MP is self serving ( I do not ) that is no reason not to put an end to a monarchy which as you say yourself , is self serving