Royalty the queen and her family.

Just come off another site where the same issue is being discussed ,there are maybe half a dozen in favour of the Queen and her "firm" the rest all think it needs to end when she dies...a fairly mixed age range from mid 20's to granny age I'd say .Inequality and power because of birth isn't popular .
I'm anti monarchy always have been but I know that on this site there are folk who practically worship them and others who think they are family ...starnge to think like that about folk who couldn't give a fig about you and have only ever had their own interest at heart .Hence they stash the cash and the country uses foodbanks !!

I’d consider myself more monarchist than not, however, I absolutely support the Sussexes in choosing their own path.

I certainly don’t see them as “celebrities”, just people with a more high profile life.

Casdon There were many posts on here, various view points that I found very interesting. I know the majority of people want to keep monarchy at the moment mainly because of queen that can change. Republic has reached more people they have a new website PodCasts YouTube Channel and social media. I think that with the secrecy of RF and wanting exemption from FOI Anything thats gets brought into the open reported people rightly wanting a say on it, apart from M&H good luck to them and as they are not funded by the public purse.

Many people earn a living from the Royal family directly through employment, or by selling, articles & photographed of them, it’s not a one way street.

I do not worship the Royal Family , I consider the fact that they had no more say in being born than any one else on this planet. They like many other folks around the world endeavour to be positive & involve themselves with fundraising etc etc .

Paddyann there is a generation of older folks who have memories of the war years & at that time there was a very patriotic bond between that age group & the Monarchy .
The younger Royals ( well some of them) continue with charitable causes, which is positive , like it or not it helps so many of these charities .,it is though unbelievable that charities should still be needed , But that’s another issue
I

paddyanne if you have always been anti monarchy why did you accept a commission to photograph them ? You made money from them

Bridgeit

Caroline Feinnes from Giving Evidence published a report in July 2020 showing there is no benefit to UK charities from having royal patrons.

giving-evidence.com/2020/07/16/royal-findings/

The RF only go to charities near where they live and only support those they have set up themselves Other charities don't get a look in or Visit from them. It's just a front for RF to give them credence The RF don't work hard

This link works.

giving-evidence.com/2020/07/16/royal-findings/

Gany you have posted an untruth , the royal family support
many charities they have not set up themselves and visit all
parts of the country, and charities do benefit from having a member of the family as patron.

Anniebach

paddyanne if you have always been anti monarchy why did you accept a commission to photograph them ? You made money from them

Personally I’d call that redistribution of undeserved wealth and getting done of my money back. Well done paddy

Annie look at the report on charities by Caroline Feinnes

Charities do not benefit from royal patronage

Have to disagree Grany I know charities benefit, if they didn’t why do charities apply for royal patronage?

Just read the link a report on royal patronage of charities Annie And this will explain it to you.

I don’t read your links now Grany sorry.

In short, we found that charities should not seek or retain Royal patronages expecting that they will help much.

74% of charities with Royal patrons did not get any public engagements with them last year. We could not find any evidence that Royal patrons increase a charity’s revenue (there were no other outcomes that we could analyse), nor that Royalty increases generosity more broadly. Giving Evidence takes no view on the value of the Royal family generally.

This is some of what's contained in this thoroughly researched report into Royal Patronage Annie Believe It or not.

Coronavirus struck last year

Anniebach

Coronavirus struck last year

Did it Annie? Sorry, I'd missed that.

The report was about 2019.

Don’t people support charities that mean something to them personally regardless of who the patrons are? Or perhaps there are individuals who only donate because Prince Edward, for example, is a patron.
I could see an advantage in royal patronage if it attracts large donations from business owners and wealthy families who want to curry favour with the Royal patron. Yet that infers that something from the patron would be expected in return.
Still, the Royals do need to employ their time and it gives them something to do so no harm in it really.

Strange as it may seem, just the fact that a member of the RF is a Patron of a charity highlights & encourages others to donate & or support said charity.
Now there’s another debate to be had about human behaviour, but if the end result helps others then that’s not too bad is it. ?

Money is also raised by selling tickets for events such as dinners when the patron attends the dinner.

The title of the research that Grany shared is literally Royal patronages of charities don’t seem to help charities much. It includes graphs and everything. Proper research by an organisation with no hidden agenda with respect to the RF or anything else.

Which says that having a Royal patron doesn't encourage others to donate to the charity, or raise their generated revenue in any other way.

What if we maintain the RF in this country because a majority actually quite like them along with their pomp and circumstance, their history and their heritage? If a large number of people get genuine pleasure out of the antics and existence of the RF then the RF have value.

In that light is it much different to paying TV licence fee to have to watch overpaid celebrities which not everyone loves? Hmmmm - should I start an abolish the BBC thread...or do we have enough controversy on here atm?

Apologies for the appalling grammar and syntax in that last post - must make me look even more unintelligent than my swearing...

Great post NellG. Very good points .