£102.4 million

Name some of these charities so your claim can be believed

Elegran

Stephanie48

^Never any mention of money raised because the family never
disclose what they personally donate, and they do donate^
How do you know they donate, for certain?

How do you know they don't, for certain?

I wouldn’t say for certain that they don’t because I don’t know. But folks seem to think they know for certain that they do. I don’t really know why I bothered to comment because the determination to defend is steadfast. Sometimes, it can b3 good to accept that things change and attitudes can alter.

Anniebach

I know of two donations but can’t speak of them , if they choose not to say then it isn’t for me to say.

So Grany has to provide proof, but you don’t?

Big difference in private donations and naming charities who
have declared publicly they do not receive benefits from having the royal family involved

I should realise by now it’s pointless to try and discuss…..

I prefer to have the money spent on the Royal Family than for the beautification of a President in the form of Blair or Putin. The Family does a great deal in the promotion of the country and they reign, not rule, by consent. It costs us each a few pennies each year, that’s all, and Charles is determined to shrink the Family to those who carry out duties, rather than include the “hangers on”. They’re worth every penny.

The Royal family are stonkingly rich. If we decided not to have an RF in positions of power and privilege in the way this country is run, with an input to how the laws are set up, they'd still be stonkingly rich. I don't think anyone is advocating taking their fortunes away and making them live in a council estate in Coventry. So they could continue making all the private donations they like and none of us would be any the wiser. The only difference is that they wouldn't be in a position of political power.

And don't bother trying to tell me that they're not in a position of political power, because they are.

(ps - nothing against Coventry - just remembering Sue Townsend)

Hollycat

I prefer to have the money spent on the Royal Family than for the beautification of a President in the form of Blair or Putin. The Family does a great deal in the promotion of the country and they reign, not rule, by consent. It costs us each a few pennies each year, that’s all, and Charles is determined to shrink the Family to those who carry out duties, rather than include the “hangers on”. They’re worth every penny.

They don't have my consent.

Anyone with me?

President Salmond for me.

(Joke, joke. The President Blair/Putin/Trump/Johnson thing is SO OLD)

Can you provide examples of the RFs political power ?

Campaigners have called on the government to come clean about the extent of royal powers and when they have been used.

The call comes after a damning report in the Guardian newspaper today, in which evidence emerged that Prince Charles put pressure on John Major's government to change new legislation.

The changes were demanded so that tenants of the Duchy of Cornwall would not be granted their right to buy their homes, a right that is given to every other leaseholder in the country.

The changes were made against the government's wishes, because of concerns a row might cause a constitutional crisis.

"This is an absolute outrage. That we have a man who can threaten a constitutional crisis unless he gets what he wants is disgraceful."

"Buckingham Palace and the government have lied to the country, claiming that Queen’s consent is a "purely formal" part of the parliamentary process and is granted by the monarch as a matter of course."

"They have also claimed that "this process does not change the nature of any such bill". These claims are a lie."

"Prince Charles needs to be called to account for his actions, and the government needs to come clean about the extent of royal interference."

"This is just the latest in a series of revelations about the extent of royal interference. The Queen has lobbied to have herself exempted from environmental laws, race discriminations laws and to hide her personal wealth. This has to stop."

"The royal consent rules need to be scrapped, and we need to know exactly what laws were changed to suit royal interests as a result of royal lobbying."

Read the Guardian report.

The Guardian report ? ?

Bridgeit

Can you provide examples of the RFs political power ?

Private and confidential influence over the government via audiences with the PM. Veto over approval of laws. Specifically? Being able to get special and unique exemptions from environmental requirements in Scotland.

The Royal Consent rules have been described countless times by various posters on various threads, but still the call comes, ‘but they haven’t got any power’ or ‘give examples.’ Examples have been given and royal consent explained over and over, but still the inability to accept or understand, or maybe just not to see what isn’t wanted to be seen.

Or maybe seeing only what wants to see ?

Volver you need to stop telling these folk the truth..they like being subjects/peasants/commoners...pick whichever applies ...for some on here they all apply.
Quite why anyone thinks one family should be in power for ever is beyond me ...but thenI believe in democracy and a republic .

they like being subjects/peasants/commoners...pick whichever applies ...for some on here they all apply

I'm a citizen.
I've said that previously but you don't listen!!

You can be a peasant or whatever you choose ?

Bridgeit

Or maybe seeing only what wants to see ?

Royal Consent is a fact and has been used by the royals to benefit themselves. It’s hard to argue with facts.

You can be a peasant or whatever you choose

I thought the "Well I'm not but you are" style of argument went out of fashion once one left primary school.

Anyway I think being a "subject" is a state of mind.

Well I'm another who didn't give consent.
If we have to have kingdoms I'm inclined to go back to the Kingdom of Northumbria and York as its capital. If you're thinking that's a bit out of date, well no more so than a dodgy Germanic family being regarded as something special because the British RF ran out, and they had to find someone. I'm sure someone could dig me up a Plantagenet descendant, or another royal line, to fill the throne in Northumbria.
You see the whole RF thing is as ridiculous as that.

I believe we’re subjects here in Britain. I would prefer to be a citizen. If I’m wrong somebody will be along to tell me soon, I’m sure.

maddyone

I believe we’re subjects here in Britain. I would prefer to be a citizen. If I’m wrong somebody will be along to tell me soon, I’m sure.

According to the dictionary Maddyone you are a citizen.

It says on my passport I am a British Citizen (just got one of those new passports, they’re horrid)

maddyone

I believe we’re subjects here in Britain. I would prefer to be a citizen. If I’m wrong somebody will be along to tell me soon, I’m sure.

No, we are citizens.
www.gov.uk/check-british-citizenship

My passport states that I am.

volver

^You can be a peasant or whatever you choose^

I thought the "Well I'm not but you are" style of argument went out of fashion once one left primary school.

Anyway I think being a "subject" is a state of mind.

Anyway I think being a "subject" is a state of mind.

Which is exactly what I said ie you can choose what you want to think.

I bet I know what the RF think we all are!!!!