Poor baby - run home to mummy!

Prince Charles ‘cash-for-honours’ scandal grows with fresh allegations
Prince reportedly ‘met at least nine times’ with William Bortrick, the alleged fixer at heart of the claims.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/sep/19/prince-charles-cash-for-honours-scandal-grows-with-fresh-allegations?fbclid=IwAR1hvW50x3tlj4SeUlrGH3Wbax2XBBKSD_WI6Tcq4SC9E_51fkWtmIqN23Y

Don’t thank me. I wouldn’t contribute a penny to you.

The press have been talking about us

This week the Daily Mail covered Republic's Welsh billboards, quoting the leader of the Welsh Conservatives who was upset with us. That prompted lots more coverage, including the Mirror, ABC News, ITV, Sky News, the Sun who focussed on our Prince Andrew billboards, The National and the Express who claim that "Britons were fuming" over our posters.

And LBC GB News.

We’ve now raised over £26,000! Thank you!

Hmmmm Interesting , skilful & disingenuous words to use : ie
Reportedly, Conveyed her wish, Quoted, Let it be known.

No I don’t, but I’m not interesting enough.

Mollygo

Petera No, indeed I’ve made use of the facility in my genealogy research.
I’m against the contents being dragged into the public domain for people to criticise and argue about. I’d hate it if, for example, it was my father’s will (and he too received money from the public purse) that was being criticised in public by people who it really doesn’t concern.

You are, eloquently, making my point for me. I'm sure you would hate it, as would we all, but you don't - probably - have the time and resources to go to court to prevent it from happening.

Distaceful

Petera No, indeed I’ve made use of the facility in my genealogy research.
I’m against the contents being dragged into the public domain for people to criticise and argue about. I’d hate it if, for example, it was my father’s will (and he too received money from the public purse) that was being criticised in public by people who it really doesn’t concern.

Mollygo

Petera, “if this is regarded as intrusive for the Queen, why is it not intrusive for everyone else?”

It is intrusive for everyone else if others go and look.
The difference is that on GN threads and other social media people want to investigate, discuss, criticise and publicise their thoughts and opinions on what is in fact a private matter, whether wills are published or not.
GN has recently lost a well loved member. How many on here are curious enough to investigate her will, if it exists or would approve of others doing so and publicising their opinions on the details? Or to investigate mine, when I am gone as I have certainly received money from the public purse.

The answer is "probably none of us are curious enough". So that means you are against the idea of wills being public documents?

There is a ruling from the High Court.
Following a convention from 1910 the deaths of senior members of the Royal Family have been followed by an application to seal their wills, made to the president of the Family Division of the High Court and debated by the Attorney General, representing the public interest.
The Judge's ruling:
" There is a need to enhance the protection afforded to truly private aspects of the lives of this limited group of individuals in order to maintain the dignity of the Sovereign and close members of her family." (Daily telegraph 17.09.2021)

Exactly.

Petera, “if this is regarded as intrusive for the Queen, why is it not intrusive for everyone else?”

It is intrusive for everyone else if others go and look.
The difference is that on GN threads and other social media people want to investigate, discuss, criticise and publicise their thoughts and opinions on what is in fact a private matter, whether wills are published or not.
GN has recently lost a well loved member. How many on here are curious enough to investigate her will, if it exists or would approve of others doing so and publicising their opinions on the details? Or to investigate mine, when I am gone as I have certainly received money from the public purse.

Smileless2012

I wouldn't class myself as a RF supporter and I'm not saying it's right but I'm not interested in his will.

Me too Smileless2012.

For me, one of the least important things about the RF is how much money they have and who they decide to leave it to.

I guess it’s because they want to hide their wealth Petera. I can’t think of another reason to seal royal, or anyone else’s will.

Aveline

Are all Royal wills publicly available? Just wondering if this is a one off situation.

I believe that the Queen (or I suppose more correctly The Palace) went to court to stop her mother's will being published. Although they later bowed to pressure and release some, though not all, details.

The real point of course is that if this is regarded as intrusive for the Queen why is not intrusive for everyone else?

I wouldn't class myself as a RF supporter and I'm not saying it's right but I'm not interested in his will.

Sorry, typo, it should be their not there. Thanks for the info Petera.

Are all Royal wills publicly available? Just wondering if this is a one off situation.

maddyone

As the RF receive public money there finances need to be transparent. As I understand it, correct me if I’m wrong, normally wills are not sealed and therefore presumably they can be seen by anyone if they have a mind to look. This shows that the establishment is firmly behind protecting the RF and whatever finances they have. I cannot see what harm can possibly be done by not sealing the wills.

You are correct, wills are public documents after probate.

As the RF receive public money there finances need to be transparent. As I understand it, correct me if I’m wrong, normally wills are not sealed and therefore presumably they can be seen by anyone if they have a mind to look. This shows that the establishment is firmly behind protecting the RF and whatever finances they have. I cannot see what harm can possibly be done by not sealing the wills.

That is shocking. Can any of the RF supporters explain how this is acceptable?

Prince Phillip’s will is to be sealed for 90 years. We won’t know how much he was worth.

I agree Grany that there should be transparency with the royal family’s finances.

Lots of coverage now of Billboards around the country.

Prince Philip's will to be secret for 90 years
A judge says he made the ruling, in line with other royal deaths, to protect the Queen's dignity.

For someone with no proper job since 1947 he seemed to do awfully well financially. On a Parliamentary 'allowance' of £359k pa, that the Queen didn't have to reimburse the Treasury for, he'd amassed an estimated £28m by around 2000..

If anything, the monarch’s “constitutional role” should mean more transparency about her finances, not less.

See also FOI requests which they are largely exempt from.

Mad that we have a supposedly neutral head of state but no way of actually checking in on that.

It should be said that there’s no legal basis for this. It is just convention since the royals wanted to cover up a scandal at the start of the last century.

This from former royal guard all they all do is shake hands for charity.

twitter.com/LBC/status/1438561651154989056?s=20

Good, I’m pleased trisher. No one is above the law, although I am aware that this is a civil case.