Should the Royal Family be slimmed down

As a Christian, I know God allows for people in authority....to be there. The Cof E believes it is a calling, which I’m not sure about. The first King maybe, but now... they’re just born into it. Watching The Crown at the moment, I can see..so far, how miserable it all was/ is for them. I can see the Queen is a safety net for us, to protect against a government doing badly. It’s the ones on the periphery, I think, that need to go. The Monarch her/himself, maybe not. What would we have instead! Trump!!?. I’m not sure they should be costing so much, it is very unbalanced, when there is so much poverty. A difficult one I’ll admit.

Yes, I do believe it should be.

And off we go again ?

'Should the Royal Family be slimmed down?' Thought you meant compulsory dieting! Should we bother financing them at all?

How do you slim down a family? Enforced sterilisation? Culling?

I wonder how you would slim down a family, too - euthanase all but the heir and the heir to the heir?

The number of them supported by the taxpayer has already been sliimed down to a fraction of what it was fifty years ago.

Some of the rest are living in houses owned (and maintained) by the queen from her own income, and from what has emerged in the press in the last few days, she expects that in return for this they will take on a proportion of the appearances that she is constantly being asked to make - opening this, visiting that, sponsoring all kinds of things.

Just about every organisation and charity in the country would like a royal on their board or endorsing their work. She can't cover all of it herself, she couldn't even when she was younger, so the extended family fill those vacancies.

People would STILL want the cachet of a title in their prospectus, whatever the official position of the more distant members was.

What a daft question! I thought you were asking if the queen should go on a diet!
They marry and have children just as everyone else does. How many children they have is up to them, but they will all be part of the royal family, simply by being born into it.

Yes, slimmed down to just the direct heirs and the 'firm' are wealthy enough - with the DUCHY of CORNWALL income and Queen's wealth to be self funded now without tax payers' money, except maybe for protection.

There are 8 working members of the royal family, including the Queen. They do much for charities but don’t get recognition.

Some seem to think come Trouping The Colour which is the
Queens official birthday and all her family appear on the balcony they are all kept by the tax payer.

Do we get rid of Anne ? Edward and Sophie ?

I think Anne, Edward and Sophie’s work on behalf of the Queen, and support for the Queen is excellent. Also Prince Charles and William and Catherine work hard on behalf of the monarchy. Of course their hard work is nothing like the daily graft of most people, and they live an incredibly luxurious life, but having a royal family is probably preferable to having a president.
Norman Baker said this morning that Princess Alexandra has year round protection and performs a few public engagements each year. This is what I meant by slimmed down. Is it appropriate for the public to be paying out for protection for such minor royals as a Princess Alexandra.

When I first read it , I thought you meant should they all go on diets

Princess Alexandra is first cousin to HM Queen.
Though she is no longer in significant direct line to the succession, she is hardly a minor royal surely.
Would you consider your own cousins minor family members?

Princess Alexandra is 83, she was a very prominent, active
family member, did royal tours, many patronages, still carries out some engagements.

Should we say, your fired, your on your own, thanks for the work you did, don’t carry out anymore royal engagements

Wel, I always consider your approach to be eminently sensible Annie, and in truth I wasn’t aware that Princess Alexandra had done so much for the Queen. I did know she is the Queen’s cousin though. No, I don’t think we should say that that to Princess Alexandra.
I certainly didn’t mean to say the royal family should all go on diets as some have intimated
I’ve heard Prince Andrew’s security is going to be stepped down, the quote says ‘.....cannot write a blank cheque for someone who does not have a public role for the foreseeable future.’ That’s interesting, I wonder who made that decision.

I definitely think the royal family should be slimmed down, we shouldn’t be paying for protection or anything else in my opinion for cousins, aunts etc.
These times of hardship with homelessness, the failing NHS and countless other services that hardworking people need are being cut back or disappearing altogether.
Why should we be paying for Edward and his wife and children, just because he’s a failure at any sort of job he tries( marines, television etc) and as for security for Harry and Megan there is enough money in that family to pay for their own security.
It’s not as if the Queen can spend all her vast fortune in her lifetime.
I think some people forget that the reason they have so much is because we have given it to them.

I don't want the royal family to be slimmed down. I like them all and I like following their doings. I specially love to see pictures of the children. All the children.

Nature will be doing some slimming down soon.

Awww.... Don't say that.

Lesley We do not support Edward or Andrew. "She [the queen] has trimmed excess expense and excess royals, including her younger sons Prince Andrew and Prince Edward, who since the early 1990s haven’t received annual taxpayer grants. They remain, however, still largely under the royal wing and receive funding from the queen’s private income." Jan. 13, 2020 Wall Street Journal www.wsj.com/articles/prince-harrys-shift-puts-spotlight-on-royal-finances-11578942453

Nor do we pay for Edward's security. 29 May 2011 - The Earl and Countess of Wessex are to lose their team of six protection officers as part of moves to cut the £100 million cost of Royal security." Daily Mail

True, sparkii, the oldies can't have long left!

maddy those younger than me wouldn’t know of the early
years of the Queens reign. She became Queen at a young age,
only 7 years after the end of WW2.

Many countries in the commonwealth fought in WW2 and the only support the Queen had was her husband and sister.
She had to visit many countries as the new monarch .

Her cousins, the Gloucesters and Kents carried out many royal duties. I remember how popular Alexandra was . Anyone who has time to spare google Princess Alexandra and read of the charities she still supports.

Off that generation I so respected her sister in law Katherine
Kent, who untill she suffered a severe nervous breakdown following the loss of a baby did much charity work, she even
worked on the Samaritans help line, without publicity and use to deliver meals on wheels untill someone told the press.

The Queen isn’t going to cast her cousins aside, she owes them much,

They can't slim it down much more, surely?

Who's going to live in all those palatial pads?

Who’s going to support the many charities?

Harry won't stop supporting Invictus. Or mental health.