On borrowed time - the royals

Making me laugh on here at how many are saying what a great job QE has done!!!! What great job exactly??
Probably most of these posters were amongst those back in those days/years following the death of Diana roundly condemning the same person.

I am, proudly, a live-long republican. Back in the past I twice refused an invite to attend so-called Garden Parties at Buck House.

This family is one of the richest in the world, and yet we, stupid suckers, still give them so much more money each year. Do not play the 'bring in tourists' card, it has been shown again and again (on here and elsewhere) as being totally false. None of the royal palaces appear anywhere amongst top-listed places that tourists visit, and our tourist industry would not be any the less if there was no RF/

However, I must admit that I find far more ludicrous is the House of Lords, which is at its largest at present than ever before. How on earth can we even consider we are are any sort of democracy when we are governed by a totally un-elected and untouchable second house, and an unelected and totally untouchable Head of State?

GrannyRose15 Why are you so against having a choice?

Alegrias: thank you for your response. These were great answers and I am learning a lot from reading them.

I was commenting on the article someone posted a link to earlier. PCs involvement had been misrepresented. I don't have a dog in the race so I'm not invested in whether it should or shouldn't apply to the Duchy.

NellG

But...they never had the right to buy in the first place, all that happened was that nothing changed. Nothing was taken away and nothing improved.

If y'all are going to report this stuff, report it honestly. A bunch of naive people bought leasehold properties on PC s land. More fool them.

I I thought leasehold law elsewhere had changed? Lots of things change - why should the Duchy be excluded from change? Divine right of kings?

But...they never had the right to buy in the first place, all that happened was that nothing changed. Nothing was taken away and nothing improved.

If y'all are going to report this stuff, report it honestly. A bunch of naive people bought leasehold properties on PC s land. More fool them.

jacqrose

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.

Don't be daft. That's not how it would work at all and you know it. There would be career politicians jostling into position from the moment they became parish councillors. They would all have the backing of a political party otherwise no-one could afford to run.
Police and crime commissioners were supposed to be non-political at the start but that very soon became a party race like all other elections.

When the Queen dies, there will be such an outpouring of grief from our nationwide ‘pearly kings and queens’, that all the sympathy will automatically transfer to PC and his family. We will be blindly dragged along, even those now harbouring doubts about the heir to the throne.
My gripe (amongst others) is the hidden and obscene wealth the family possess. We as subjects have no idea of the scale of this, apart from the extortionate amount we are told about for yearly upkeep. And why did I have to pay through my nose (or my ears as my Italian friend says?) to trot round a section of Buck House?
Mary Robinson proved to be an excellent President in Ireland and I’m sure it won’t be too hard, out of our whole population, to find one decent person to do the job at a fraction of the price.
In the meantime, I’m vastly enjoying this soap opera, but that does not mean it makes practical sense at this stage of our history.

Thank you Grany. Good post.
Charles was given special exemptions to prevent tenants buying.
The Duchy was set up to provide an income for the son of Edward III. It should be returned to the nation.

nanna8

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.

It is second homes which are the problem in Cornwall, nanna8, not The Duchy.

the Duchy must be brought under public control and used for the benefit of everyone.

I'm not telling anyone where I've hidden my Duchy honey, (on special offer from Waitrose) in case it gets confiscated.

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

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

Keep the red flag flying Grany!

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.

Monet = money, Freudian slip ???

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.

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)

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.

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

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?

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

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

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.

Callistemon ?

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.