Gransnet forums

TV, radio, film, Arts

The Royals: Time to Go? - did anyone watch it?

(41 Posts)
ferry23 Wed 16-Sept-26 07:31:32

I thought Humphrys put forward a weak and hackneyed argument. Same old chestnuts with extra digs about income/taxes joined mainly by ex MP Norman Baker, not known for his empathy towards the Royal Family.

The Times reviewer, having watched the programme, reckoned the Royal Family is quite safe.

Their popularity was always going to wane a bit after Queen Elizabeth died. They're navigating through the Andrew MB and the Harry/Meghan debacles with a bit of positive leverage thrown in regarding the health of The King and The Princess of Wales.

Definitely, the Andrew MB situation has tarnished their reputation badly, but even that will fade with time.

I can't see any Oliver Cromwell's even on the most distant horizon right now.

Galaxy Wed 16-Sept-26 07:42:15

I dont think that in the modern era that is the way it will end. It will take decades but my guess is in the future they will trace the beginning of the end to the death of the Queen.

Samwam Wed 16-Sept-26 08:03:50

Yes saw a part too many adverts. Agree with John Humphrys why have one family as Head of State when we could elect like someone like Ireland Catherine Connolly a much better way of doing things.

They cost £500 million all told. Why do they get over £50 million between Charles and William the duchies, it should be rolled into the Crown estate the CE iwhich is state owned. Plus they get the Sovereign Grant on top which because of George Osborne has a golden rachet meaning money can never go down always up how handy for them.
Parliament aren't even allowed to discuss royals how crazy.

Other monarchies get around 40 to 10 million a big difference.

Then security costs £150 million.

Exempt from FOI laws why??
No transparency.

Then Andrew, the royals covered up for him even the late queen. What did they know, plenty.

What Andrew did sharing government business secrets with Epstein amounts to treason plus the sexual allegations.

Hope he goes to court like anyone else would.

Norman Baker speaks sense he has written a book National Debt royal mint. Shows how greedy the royals are. so does the historian Andrew Lownie good job there are people like them uncovering things royals would like kept secret.

It is time we question monarchy and have a discussion about their viability.

We could do much better.

nanna8 Wed 16-Sept-26 08:04:01

I think William will work on modernising the royal family so that it is more like some of the beloved European monarchies. I don’t like the alternatives, would you want a political figure in charge ? Can’t think of one single person in power anywhere in the world at the moment who would be respected and capable of playing the part.Sad really.

Sadgrandma Wed 16-Sept-26 08:25:44

What is the alternative? We could end up with a Donald Trump!
shock

Samwam Wed 16-Sept-26 08:25:46

Also the huge amount spent on BP Charles didn't contribute he does take the money from visitors to BP that should go to the Treasury.

fancythat Wed 16-Sept-26 09:12:16

Sadgrandma

What is the alternative? We could end up with a Donald Trump!
shock

Agreed.

Awful idea.

ginny Wed 16-Sept-26 09:34:10

I haven’t watched the programme yet but will be inter.
I think William will make changes but I doubt any of them will be a decrease in the money .

Calendargirl Wed 16-Sept-26 09:35:48

I watched it.

John Humphrys has aged quite a lot.

I’m a monarchist, but felt there were many pertinent points.

Why don’t they have to pay inheritance tax and capital gains tax?

Sums like that would go a long way to helping the country.

I’ve never given it a lot of thought, but realise just how wealthy they are, so think they could pay more.

I hope we don’t end up paying for the Sussexes security, think that would be the thin end of the wedge.

GrannyGravy13 Wed 16-Sept-26 09:43:42

Calendargirl there is no IHT from monarch to monarch.

The King, Prince William pay tax on earnings from the Duchy’s along with Capital Gains Tax.

Royals also pay council tax, and according to Google the rest of the Royals pay taxes.

Grantanow Wed 16-Sept-26 09:45:34

The King fills a role which would otherwise be open to retired politicians like Thatcher in the past, Truss, BJ, etc., and maybe even Farage. No thanks.

fancythat Wed 16-Sept-26 09:47:32

Grantanow

The King fills a role which would otherwise be open to retired politicians like Thatcher in the past, Truss, BJ, etc., and maybe even Farage. No thanks.

Terrible.

Calendargirl Wed 16-Sept-26 09:47:58

there is no IHT from monarch to monarch

Yes, I am well aware of that GG13, but my question in this day and age is WHY?

GrannyGravy13 Wed 16-Sept-26 09:56:51

Calendargirl

^there is no IHT from monarch to monarch^

Yes, I am well aware of that GG13, but my question in this day and age is WHY?

You are asking the wrong person, I disagree with U.K. IHT in its present form.

JenniRen Wed 16-Sept-26 11:07:44

Other countries manage their budgets without charging IHT.
It's grave-robbing

Calendargirl Wed 16-Sept-26 11:12:44

GG13

Yes, I also disagree with IHT in its present form, as it captures too many, dare I say, ‘ordinary’ people.

As long as it’s around though, I see no reason why the immensely wealthy Royals should not have to pay it.

JenniRen Wed 16-Sept-26 11:17:51

Hmm.

The question is not should the Royals pay IHT, the question is should it be abolished for everyone?

MT62 Wed 16-Sept-26 11:50:58

Think it should be slimmed right down now & modernising.

Magenta8 Wed 16-Sept-26 11:54:13

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

J52 Wed 16-Sept-26 12:13:36

Royals also pay council tax, and according to Google the rest of the Royals pay taxes interesting GG13

I suppose all those mansions, castles and palaces are paying no more than band H. Similar to a 5 bed detached in some places.
Do you know if the Scottish and Welsh Royal second homes are charged double Council Tax?
Interesting.

Smileless2012 Wed 16-Sept-26 12:35:33

The reason there's no IHT from monarch to monarch is so the crown's estates wont be broken up or gradually eroded and monarch to monarch is the only exception.

MrsQuigley Wed 16-Sept-26 12:42:04

Missed this in the listings. Will watch on catch-up. I did see a programme a while ago with David Dimbleby at the helm, that was interesting though would need to watch that again too, be interesting to compare their views.

MrsQuigley Wed 16-Sept-26 12:45:58

The David Dimbleby programme is called ‘What’s the Monarchy For’ and is still on IPlayer.

Samwam Wed 16-Sept-26 13:53:26

Smileless2012

The reason there's no IHT from monarch to monarch is so the crown's estates wont be broken up or gradually eroded and monarch to monarch is the only exception.

Things have changed in 30 years since John Major introduced this memorandum . Charles does not need financial independence, he can change this if he so wishes. He is a billionaire now.

nanna8 Wed 16-Sept-26 13:55:06

Just had a horrible thought. King Nigel. Eeeuuuwww.