On borrowed time - the royals

NellG Your comments will be so far off the mark for many many people. “Envy, dislike and fabrication”: we have the BBC and the press all working hard as PRs for the RF to present them in the best possible way without ever questioning any of their business dealings or behind the scenes meddling. I don’t dislike any of them. How could I, I don’t know them personally. I do believe in democracy though and if you can’t imagine a worse life why do you want to keep them trapped in it?

Prince Charles stopped tenants on his estates buying their homes. He is reported to have his shoelaces ironed, his toothpaste squeezed by his valet, takes his own toilet seat on trips, and is a stickler for protocol. Not exactly going to modernise the monarchy is he?

GranyRose15 We the people would get the person we vote for, just as we do in a general election. PC and William could put themselves up for it if they wanted to.

Some thoughts ShelaghALLEN

1) If the UK's hegemonic power is dependent on our image as a feudal state that is not power that we should be relying on for the future. Our power has been much more affected by other political moves than replacing the monarchy ever could.

2) I could write you a book . In summary, a modern one.

3) I guess that would be up to you in Canada. You could keep the Monarch as HoS if you wanted, they just wouldn't be HoS in the UK. Or, if the Commonwealth still wanted a "union" (my word) with the UK then the Governor General could become the Commonwealth's representative, instead of the Queen's.

Just my thoughts....

Lucca

“ She has been doing this since 1952 and knows more than any of them.” ?? About what? Everything ?

About all those laws described in detail in the ipiles of bumff in the red boxes she reads. successive Prime Ministers have been impressed by the detail of her knowledge of the background reports on proposed legislation and the depth of her comments on them.

So she "secretly" vetted 1,000 laws before they were passed? Untrue - she openly vets ALL laws and discusses them with the PM. That is her job. That and being polite and welcoming to hordes of foreign heads of state and diplomats and charming them, even when she is feeling 94 and worried sick about her husband's health and the wellbeing (and antics) of her children and grandchildren.

vegansrock All that is reported Much of that reporting has been denunked. Sorry, I can't give you chapter and verse off the top of my head for the debunking, but I daresay you can't give chapter and verse for the (original and proven) source of the information?

Has it been reported who holds a handkerchief for him to blow his nose !

jacqrose There were three other words that preceded the ones you quoted that gave balance to the possible views that people might hold. It's not the BBC's job to hold the RF to account, neither is the the press's - they are not the RF Ombudsman. They do however frequently ask questions and print stories regarding the RFs dealings, otherwise 'we' wouldn't know we needed to be concerned, or not. as the case might be. Like you, I don't know them personally so have zero proof of whether they feel trapped, and feel it's the worst job in the world, they might well love it so I have no personal investment in doing anything with them, either way tbh. True democracy is a human impossibility and a political ideal, I do what I can to maintain and improve the rights we have, fight the battles I believe can be won and invest my efforts in the issues that stand to make the most tangible positive difference. Deposing the monarchy isn't one of them - it's akin to tilting at windmills.

Elegran what is the point of her discussing all of the laws with the PM of the day if she can only have an effect on it in extremis? Is there anything more extreme than a PM trying to prorogue Parliament to get his way without having to get parliamentary agreement? And yet that happened.

So either she is exerting influence on the content of the legislation, which is not acceptable, or she is making no difference at all. Why then do we expect her to spend so much time in her final years doing completely useless tasks?

Anniebach

Has it been reported who holds a handkerchief for him to blow his nose !

Rumour has it he does have a loo roll valet, who folds the paper for him and delivers it on a silver salver...

Anniebach

Has it been reported who holds a handkerchief for him to blow his nose !

Apparently there has been a job vacancy since Covid19 arrived, Anniebach.

Ashcombe

If it came to a choice between the current system and a republic, then I would find it difficult to make a decision. Currently, we have no leaders with integrity. Who would be President? There have been a few disastrous ones in recent times.

Who would be president? The person we chose - that's the point, not whether or not we might make a bad choice.

Callistemon ?

NellG One of your words was speculation. This is what you get when people aren’t accountable. And what is the press and broadcasters for if not to hold the powerful to account. We like to think it is a free press here. If we don’t aim for as free a society as possible, to push for democracy in all areas, we might as well pack up and move to North Korea. I can see you are trying to give an opposing view and I appreciate that but I get the feeling you don’t entirely believe that viewpoint yourself. It is difficult to argue against logic.

Alegrias The Queen has a right - and a duty - to "advise, encourage and warn" ministers. She can't do that without being au fait with the work of the ministers and the detail of what she is to "advise, encourage and warn" them about. She has a very robust attitude to her duty.

It seems (from an unnamed! source in the "Scotsman") that after being "caught out" by Johnson's proprogation of Parliament, she herself sought clarification on just when and how she could dismiss a prime minister www.scotsman.com/news/politics/queen-sought-advice-sacking-prime-minister-source-claims-1406452

vegansrock

Prince Charles stopped tenants on his estates buying their homes. He is reported to have his shoelaces ironed, his toothpaste squeezed by his valet, takes his own toilet seat on trips, and is a stickler for protocol. Not exactly going to modernise the monarchy is he?

Perhaps someone would care to address the first sentence of Veganrock's post.

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/09/prince-charles-vetted-laws-that-stop-his-tenants-buying-their-homes

I'm not disagreeing with you about the Queen's approach and her duty Elegran. But if she advises, encourages and warns, but the PM is not allowed or inclined to do anything about it, what is the point of it all?

Everyone knew the pro-rogation was illegal. So although he lied to her, and did something illegal, nothing was done. She did nothing to prevent the overruling of "her own" Parliament. So what is the point, really?

No one going to challenge Vegansrock? hmm....

nadateturbe

No one going to challenge Vegansrock? hmm....

A bunch of people rented and bought property in the Duchy knowing that they would never have the right to buy the freehold. They should take it up with the conveyancers they used if they feel they were missold, but in all honesty looks like a classic case of caveat emptor. They never had the right to buy in the first place.

Duchy

It's time the Duchy was exposed for what it is - a very modern business dressed up as a feudal landed estate. It's time we re-nationalised the Duchy, so its assets and profits can be used for the benefit of the community.

Why we need to take back the Duchy
The Duchy belongs to the nation, yet pays its profits to Prince Charles
The Duchy refuses to pay corporation tax, swelling Charles's income
The Duchy provides Charles with a unique veto over new laws that affect his own private interests
The Duchy enjoys various unique powers and privileges, no doubt as a result of that veto

These privileges include exemption from planning laws, the freedom to build on areas of outstanding natural beauty and protection from freedom of information laws

A simple seven-point plan for taking back the Duchy:

The Duchy to cease to exist independently of the Crown Estate
Duchy revenue and assets within Cornwall should be invested in local Cornish communities
All other revenues and assets of the Duchy should belong to the nation as part of the Crown Estate
The Crown Estate should be re-named the National Estate, to reflect its purpose and ownership more accurately.
All legal privileges and exemptions enjoyed by the Duchy should come to an end
Where the Duchy acts as a public authority these responsibilities should be transfered to appropriate bodies and government agencies
Where the Duchy plays a cultural or historic role within Cornwall these functions should either be transferred to the Cornwall Council or to an independent Duchy Trust (in which Prince Charles will play no role and which would give him no privileges)

There certainly shouldn’t be any poverty at all in Cornwall with all that Monet floating around. Oh, I forgot ,it isn’t distributed but kept in one already rich person’s pocket.

Monet = money, Freudian slip ???

Republic is campaigning against the Duchy of Cornwall, calling for it to be taken off Prince Charles and effectively 're-nationalised'.

The Duchy is a corporation that isn't incorporated, a company that isn't registered, it trades like any other business yet refuses to pay tax and enjoys unique legal privileges. We're talking here about the organisation run by Charles, not the land to the west of Devon. Cornwall should continue to enjoy its unique status but the Duchy must be brought under public control and used for the benefit of everyone.

Damn, I knew it was a trap!!! ?

Keep the red flag flying Grany!

It has been established since the 1300s, I'm not sure Companies House existed back then.