Which style of monarchy do you prefer?

Kensington Palace is a Crown Property, not privately owned. As in other Crown properties the monarch rents it back from the state in exchange for it being used for other purposes by the state. This arrangement was started in the reign of George 111rd with an agreement between the Crown and Parliament. It's an enormous portfolio, with all the explanatory information readily available on line.

Wasting your time Eloethan. Unfortunately.

People live there.

Gransnet never fails to amaze 😁

An opportunity for the NT to take it on maybe.

Anniebach

Kensington Palace is owned by the King for the people, not privately owned by the King, when he dies it will pass to the reigning monarch until there is no monarchy.

Then go to rack and ruin!

Kensington Palace is owned by the King for the people, not privately owned by the King, when he dies it will pass to the reigning monarch until there is no monarchy.

Would you rather it went to rack and ruin through lack of maintenance?

Actually, I think some would!!

Mt61

Anniebach

They fund their own properties, not Windsor or Buck House etc

Got at least a million from the public purse to do up Kensington

Kensington Palace is open to the public as a Historic Royal Palace. Obviously not the parts where people live but it's not a private residence.

Many people live there and pay rent at commercial rates.
The public can book parts of it for wedding receptions, dinners, functions.

Would you rather it went to rack and ruin through lack of maintenance?

Every person who does a job in this country "serves"

Not really, in that meaning of the word.

Every person who does a job in this country "serves", and many of them receive very little for their service, however vital that service may be - for example care workers.

Members of the royal family do perform certain functions but I don't think those functions can be compared to that of ordinary working people. Meeting people and shaking hands with them for a couple of hours a day cannot be compared to, for instance, doing a long shift in a hospital, making your own way home and being responsible, after a full day's work, for all the domestic duties that arise.

The royal family lives a very cossetted existence, with all the extraneous duties that ordinary people have to perform, taken care of by someone else. Yet it is those ordinary people who pay for the upkeep of this family.

Anniebach

They fund their own properties, not Windsor or Buck House etc

Got at least a million from the public purse to do up Kensington

I agree, they serve not rule

I agree Callistemon. The older I get, the more I recognise the commitment within the RF to public service

Anniebach

Do you really think of *ruling classes ^ ?

I thought they served us, not ruled over us.

Do you really think of *ruling classes ^ ?

Agree Eloethan.

I think the monarchy is an outdated concept, through which the notion of "blue blood" reinforces a system of unearned privilege. I suppose we can only be grateful that we don't live in Thailand where any criticism of the king can result in lengthy periods of imprisonment. Thankfully, we've moved on a bit from that but the basic principle of a ruling class still remains.

I wonder where Grany is.

Oh I agree entirely. I was surprised.

Ps I meant bus passes not being transferable across the borders, not your post!

silverlining48

Probably nothing at all Callistemon.

😁

It's annoying, though.

Probably nothing at all Callistemon.

Interesting indeed Huia not really a surprise. But disturbing.

Interesting discussion to compare Queen Elizabeth to King Charles. Its alright to have preferences but as many have said already, they are different people in different times. Queen Elizabeth grew into her role and did the best she could, with alot of support and guidance from elder members of her family. I'm not sure King Charles has the same benefits, despite support from Camilla, who I think is a wonderful wife to him.

Sorry badly worded! It is “ How The Royal Family Shut Down Investigations”