Good news for those that support some of the RF

[DistinguishedSocialCommentator]

Too far for us and never been up that way. However, should we go there, we will take a peek

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/03/tours-of-parts-of-balmoral-used-by-royals-to-open-for-first-time-for-100

That's the whole point. We don't know about it, because it's all done in secret. The process is:
The government proposes legislation - presumably the 'red boxes' and weekly audiences involve the PM talking about the legislation they are proposing. We dont know exactly because its secret. It is at this stage, before the legislation even goes before Parliament that the Monarch is lobbying for changes- to benefit and enrich themselves in the vast majority of cases, taking tax money from the country- then the legislation goes through the usual Parliamentary processes, with the exemptions written into it, then it goes back to the Monarch for Royal Assent, which they have to give. But by that stage, they don't care, as they are approving legislation that has a built in opt out for them. Yes, Parliament should scrutinise this and publicly debate the exemptions, but they don't. They wave them through. Maybe we should be asking why. And maybe we should be asking why more people aren't aware of this. Anything to do with our ' free press' aldo being dazzled by the shiny baubles on offer from the Monarchy? Are you saying The Monarch does not have the exemptions reported ( and many others, including from the Equality Act)? It would be very easy to find out the truth of it if it was a false allegation by The Guardian. Except it was as a result of a Freedom of Information request to HM government. Is Parliament not a reputable enough source?

Flight status of pretties: - landed.

Why, are sources that present the queen and current king, who is at it also, on rent freezes, as using their status to exempt themselves from inconvenient laws a bit unpalatable?

You continually contradict yourself time and time again.

‘That’s the whole point. We don’t know about it, because it’s all done in secret’ and then you go on to describe an imaginary situation that you have created in your head because as you state ‘we don’t actually know’

If you actually created an argument whereby you suggest it would be beneficial to have more transparency so that it could avoid unnecessary speculation and potential criticism you might actually get some reasonable debate. But, by throwing sh*t around in the hope that some of it sticks demonstrates that you’re not really interested in debate at all and that’s why what you say can’t be taken seriously

I wish elected politicians had the morals to reject lobbying. But given the Tories aren't giving back the £15 million from Frank Hester, and have created a new 'Easter honours' list to reward their second largest donor etc I can't get especially worked up about lobbying from the RF.

We need to find a way to prevent the rich (Sunak is hardly on the breadline) and powerful making exceptions for each other.

I do agree that she didn't make the rule that she should be allowed to, but it's the very obsequiousness and overblown culture of defence ... that allowed her to get away with it

At least the obsequiousness and deference didn't kick in when she tried to apply to a deprivation fund to heat the palaces though - maybe that one was considered a step too far, though it's depressing that the emails disclosed under the FoI Act suggest that the real concern was how it would look, rather than that it was being attempted at all

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/queen-tried-to-use-state-poverty-fund-to-heat-buckingham-palace-2088179.html

Is Buck Palace owned personally or by the Crown? I'm not sure which are one or the other

Excellent. I do hope they spot your idea postcard - I’m loving it!

Excellent. I do hope they spot your idea postcard - I’m loving it!

Ha! So impressed I posted my response twice admittedly I was chuckling away at the time so I blame that haha!

😂 thanks for the double laughs. Makes up for those missing from DisgracefulRoyalFawner and others.

So its a lie???? Quote from you "done in secret"

Why post a load of BS re RF when this thread is clearly dedicated to the good work by our King.

Like my other RF threads, I feel as though I've been driven off them due to baseless comments that can't be verified as they are not true

Also, if you are CofE your vicar can apply for free tickets on your behalf (only found that out at Westminster Abbey too late). There is a small quota for active parishioners; others may do it too, it's not well publicised.

Other way to access St Paul's (or at least the crypt) is to hold an MBE, OBE or CBE as that's the Chapel of the Order (you and your offspring can marry there as well).

KC is, reportedly, very keen on opening up royal buildings and collections to the public. So I expect we'll seean ever-increasing amount of utter vulgarity, And good on him!

So its a lie???? Quote from you "done in secret"

It's done by 'secretive procedure' rather than behind closed doors

Royals vetted more than 1,000 laws via Queen’s consent | Queen Elizabeth II | The Guardian

but that's really beside the point when we're consistently told royals are mere figureheads with a purely ceremonial role.

The lack of voluntary transparency round royal political ducking and diving and finance is a disgrace. We shouldn't need to make FOI requests. Not that they comply with those if they don't feel like it as they've scored themselves exemption from those too.

Why post a load of BS re RF when this thread is clearly dedicated to the good work by our King.

Like my other RF threads, I feel as though I've been driven off them due to baseless comments that can't be verified as they are not true

Oh OP your tone is so OTT that your posts come accross as borderline sarcastic. I do find your comments cute and fascinating though.

Awww I’d love that but it’s a bit of a schlep from Yorkshire 🤣 but it’s because I love old buildings stately homes etc

UPDATE

https://news.sky.com/story/king-charles-could-attend-more-engagements-in-april-and-may-in-what-could-be-positive-cancer-treatment-signal-13111387

Good news!

Not a fan of the royals at all, but very glad that Charles appears to be getting fitter. Such good news for him, his family and close friends. Let’s hope that Kate has some good luck too.

Same sentiments here. I wish them well on a personal level, even though I think the institution is outdated and corrupt (eg tax).