Scrap the Sovereign Grant

They don't do too much the Royals hardly work at all. And not good for tourism

m.youtube.com/watch?v=c5NpJnw7thY

Not much more slimming down to do, he wouldn’t cut off
Anne, Sophie and Edward they do much , this leaves William and Kate.

I definitely would not sign it. I am a royalist and proud of being so. However, I do think Charles will slim down the monarchy when he is King and I think that is the right thing to do.

A president would mean politics involved

Just a comment on the value of the Monarchy to the country. It is estimated to be about £1.7bn, of which £550M is from tourism. The rest is patronage, Royal Warrants etc. The annual value of tourism to the UK is estimated to be around £150bn, so it wouldn't be a disaster for tourism or the economy in general if we didn't have the Monarchy. Incidentally, for scale, angling contributes about $1.4bn to the UK economy annually.

I'm not a royalist. We need to fund a head of state somehow and I don't have strong feelings about how we do it. The alternative to a monarchy isn't a US-style presidency, it could be an Irish style presidency, if we wanted one. But the population would rather have as a figurehead someone chosen because their ancestor used to be the butler to the King of Scots in the 12th Century, irrespective of what that person is like.

From what I understand, the Soveriegn Grant is money from the Crown Estates which is handed over to the Government. They then pay back a percentage of it to the Queen who pays all her bills, including staff costs with this money. So it was the RF's money to begin with. I think this began with George III. On the other hand, all the Queen's security costs come from the tax payer. Sandringham and Balmoral are her private homes. Buckingham Palace is used for State business. Not sure about Windsor, but surely that is used to host visiting dignitaries. I do not begrudge my 60p a year towards this family.

Signing a petition will make no difference whatsoever.

Totally agree Craftyone

the alternative is republic/democrat president, like in america

Thanks but no flipping way. Our royal family and the history is worth every penny

Windsor Castle and Stonehenge have similar visitor numbers 1.5 million. The castle has a £20 plus cost that is £30 million alone, pretty significant I would say. Stonehenge also £20 entry but if you are an English Heritage member it’s free.
The main disadvantage with the Royals is the cost of security, it would be no concern if some obscure nobody performed whatever ceremony.
It is clear that the UK does value Royal ceremony or patronage or we would not ask them to participate in events. Look at the diaries of the active Royals and they are pretty extensive, and they do it at no cost to the venue. They could choose a celebrity and get charged for the appearance. The Royal events in London always seem well attended and enthusiastic.

If the Royals were replaced by a President and salaried functionaries to preform the same role, you would save the security cost but loose the ceremonial appeal

Not all year round

Grany the buildings are open to the public

Annie I said the buildings and history are of interest to the public but not the RF People would come visit if these buildings were open up to the public and would bring in lots of revenue.

The palace is up to no good.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=pSQyDNN4BYg

Grany yesterday you said of the buildings

‘They could be open to the public become tourist attractions
and bring in a lot more revenue’

Now you say these buildings are of little interest to tourists

RF is good for tourism Davidhs
This claim is untrue and irrelevant. Even VisitBritain, our national tourist agency, can't find any evidence for it.

Chester Zoo, Stonehenge and the Roman Baths are all more successful tourist attractions than Windsor Castle, which is the only occupied royal residence to attract visitors in large numbers. If Windsor Castle was included in the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions (ALVA) list of top attractions it would come in at number 18.

However, the Sovereign Grant is just one part of the total cost of the monarchy. The royal family's security bill is picked up by the metropolitan police, for example, while the costs of royal visits are borne by local councils.

Meanwhile, income from the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall – despite belonging to the nation - goes directly to the Queen and Prince Charles respectively, depriving the treasury of tens of millions of pounds every year.

Having a Royal family is part of the UKs appeal to visitors and in tourism alone repays its cost. Most of that cost is salaries of security and other workers to enable the engagements to take place.
Having said that, the Royals that do not do public duty should pay their own way. Although Charles is not my favorite Royal he runs the Duchy of Cornwall well, it does make a profit but that profit is used to improve the properties, not for personal extravagance.

We just can't afford them atm. Give all the kids free school meals instead.

As well as Sovereign Grant P Phillip gets £400,000

I agree with you Paddyanne They are parasites and very entitled.

They don't pay inheritance tax they have accumulated lots of wealth over many years.
Queen has 10 million in off shore tax havens

Their wills are sealed What have they got to hide

The crown estates were handed over in payment of debts,,,,,they were to be allowed an income from them.Shame other folk can have a wee arrangement like that....vile entitled parasites

signed,Ill sign to get rid of them altogether any time I'm asked.Waste of public money ,parasites one and all.YESI do know what a parasite is and the description suit them to a T

Grany, signed, I'm sure they can manage on less!

Yes, definitely scrap the Sovereign Grant. Return to the system of the Crown receiving the income from the Crown Estate. It's about £304 million. The Crown Estate is valued at £12 billion. Just give it all back to HMQ and let her decide what to do with her own inherited property. I'm sure that taxpayers will be completely willing to make up the shortfall to the Treasury. Great idea.

And the tax payer doesn't fund anything.. but you know my peculiar views on this...