Abolishing the Monarchy

[tigger2022]

A few people on different sides of the debate have expressed an interest in discussing/debating this, so I thought we could give it a go…

Abolishing the monarchy?

My personal view: I used to be a staunch republican but have since completely changed my view. I think the constitutional monarchy is a slightly odd system, but seems to do the job, and I can’t think of another country’s system which is actually preferable. I also find myself less & less convinced by republican arguments…

Thoughts?

The Irish president also has many, many degrees less influence and soft power than the British monarch

It's more than soft power when the monarch and senior royals have the right to veto clauses in proposed legislation that affect their interests and do so.

Blows the ceremonial figurehead nonsense right out of the water.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills

Sorry about that. I hope I wasn't rude before but I was in a rush. My husband was mithering because he likes to get to cricket in time to choose the best tea plate. 🙄

His is a simple existence. 😄

So I looked at these figures and I can see why you got it wrong.

The sovereign grant is just under £52m.
The uplift for BP is over £34m.
So that's the £86m.

You're looking at the figure of £102m and thinking that's his annual payment.

If you look at the top of the accounts you'll see it says the sovereign grant and the sovereign grant reserve.

In 2022, they carried on with the work of refurbishing the Palace. But it was the Platinum Jubilee and the Palace and the gardens were going to see quite a bit of use so they needed more than the £34m to get extra works done to achieve everything and make it safe. Their allotted amount of £34m is set so they can't/won't as for an advance against next year, so they took the money from reserves the palace holds for emergencies.

So
Sovereign grant 52
BP refurbishment 35
Extra from reserve. 15
102m

2022/23 it returned to 51.8 + 34.5 = 86.3m

The sovereign grant is £51.8m.
The rest is refurbishment costs.

No worries rushing off!

As far as I can establish 2022/2023 figures have not been released yet? I can only find 2021/22

You worked it out better than me but reading it on a mobile in the sun was not easy!

Last year it was published 30 June, maybe we’ll get it next week?

The Royal Family gets their money from the Sovereign Grant. That money comes from the money that is generated by the Crown Estates. All the profit of the Crown Estates goes to The Exchequer and the RF get a percentage back from that. A bit like paying all your salary to the government and getting a percentage back.

The royal family do now own the crown estates though.
A better comparison is the government gives you rent free a property business. You run it, give the profits to the government and get a large chunk given back to you.

How they own the Crown Estates is complicated and is not a cut and dry thing. I'm going to back out of this one as I don't know enough about the Crown Estates. What I will say is that I'm sick and tired of everything being about money. Culture matters, not money.

The ‘royals’ have nothing to do with culture.
Apart that is from the ‘gifted’ items that they stole

Culture, buildings, history all continue and in fact will be more accessible once Mrand Mrs Windsor have finally had their privilege removed .

PS the ‘royals’ do not own the crown estates. I can see why people think they do - the Windsors work hard to create that impression and hence further the lie that they are generously volunteering a bit of tax ( mostly dodged)

https://www.republic.org.uk/the_royal_finance_stitch-up

You’ll see that the link above is old .
it dTes from when the civil list system was changed to the sovereign grant ( Tories I think)
The civil lust seemed more transparent - probably why the royals wanted it gone

Civil list ! Sorry about typo lol

To be fair, I already knew the figures so its easier when you know what you're looking for.

The total amount of the Sovereign Grant payable is in the document you linked.

The Sovereign Grant for 2022-23 is unchanged at £86.3m (core £51.8m and Reservicing £34.5m.)

It's on page 2, half way down, just before the heading EXPENDITURE FUNDED FROM OTHER SERVICES.

But the summary of the accounts will take longer to prepare. It's an interesting breakdown that I've not seen before. So I'm glad you found it.

It is simply wrong to point to the Sovereign Grant and claim that is the full story re the cost of the monarchy .

Security costs are enormous - covering security for extended family and multiple palaces. Security costs are kept secret .

There is also the matter of unpaid taxes- as we know the ‘royals’ exclude themselves from many taxes that citizens are subject to . ‘Royal’ finances are also obfuscated. To call them
’murky’ is a polite way of putting it .

So there are two main issues - we know the ‘royals’ costs multiples of what they claim to cost and the lack of transparency which means we can only make an educated guess.

There is only one reason they will not divulge how much security for all of them and their very many estates, castles and properties costs

There would be an outcry.

^The largest landowner in the world currently is King Charles III of England. He and the British Royal Family own more than 6,600,000,000 acres of land around the world. They technically own many territories around the globe, amounting to 1/6 of the surface of the planet.
And 27 properties throughout the UK^

So what is the argument to get rid of the monarch? All I see in any argument against the monarchy is money and land, which can be boiled down to one thing; envy. This is one of many problems with society, someone does well in life or inherits a lot, it's bad. Just leave people alone. You won't get rid of the monarchy, at least not by complaining about how much money and properties they own. You only care about things through an economic lens. I care about culture, the pomp and circumstance and Englishness. By getting rid of the monarchy, you are erasing over 1000 years of history, which is all you care about. You want a fresh slate because you believe the the history on which the UK came to be is bad. Change the damn record.

Why on earth do you say 'envy'. ?

Inequality is a better word

History will always stand. How on earth is it 'erasing history'. The Tudors aren't around but it's taught in schools.

I won't be changing the 'damn record' any time soon

Could I recommend a book?

Norman Baker "And what do you do?"

Worth a read

You think people objecting to inherited positions is about envy? "leave people alone'? What kind of comment is that? They're in a position that they didn't;t work for, the monarch is the head of state and unelected, people will talk about it. Too bad if you don't like it. They haven't 'done well', they inherited the positions and take money from the tax payer, exempt themselves from land and tax laws and I think that makes it more than reasonable for people to discuss them and whether this is still appropriate in our current society. I do not think the royal family represents the culture of me and my community at all so that point falls flat for me. You do not need a royal family to have culture!

No, you don't need an RF to have culture, but the English culture is intertwined with the RF. The French culture is rooted in revolution, same as America. You can have culture without the RF, but the monarchy is part of English culture. It would be ripping out and removing part of our culture to erase or change it, which I am fully against.

There are people who are for and against it. I think it would be ripping out quite a horrible and medieval part of our culture and we would be better off without it.

Enjoy President Blair.

In intention, at any rate, the English intelligentsia are Europeanised. They take their cookery from Paris and their opinions from Moscow. In the general patriotism of the country they form a sort of island of dissident thought. England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during ‘God save the King’ than of stealing from a poor box. All through the critical years many left-wingers were chipping away at English morale, trying to spread an outlook that was sometimes squashily pacifist, sometimes violently pro-Russian, but always anti-British.

That is what ALWAYS is said on these threads. Or Johnson. Or Truss
Such a cop out

I’m the same as you OP. Didn’t see the point in the lot of them, thought they were on the take. Thought the public were too switched on to vote for a hardline President so republic U.K. wouldn’t be like the States. But then I realised we would’ve have President Johnson and changed my mind.

what are you on about?

Boris is a bit of a d**k and a liar etc but I do not think he has ever written to a judge in support of a pedophile after they've been accused, like our current head of state. I mean I do not like some of our elected leaders, but they're democratically elected and certainly no worse than the shit show we have for a royal family- we could have had Andrew as our King you know. How is he better than Truss, Blair or anyone else? eew.