Why does the Royal family need so much money?


(Trevor Hunton) #61

Monarchy and its heritage? Foreign tourists do not visit England hoping to see the Queen, they visit England for its history, in the big tourist picture, Queenie is irrelevant, its the legacy left by Britain’s royal families which is relevant, just as it is in France. The Queen only owns a couple of properties and Buck house isn’t one of them, but apparently if they abolished the monarchy, left the royals to live off what they own, then the average citizen would be around 50p a week better off, wouldn’t hurt the Royals that much because they own quite a bit, and without having to contribute to the upkeep of places like Buck house and Windsor, they should be Quid’s in.


(stella wood) #62

Hi Martin… I am just asking folk to look at where the money comes from that “pays” for our Monarchy…instead of simply moaning that the Monarchy costs “us” too much…and saying “get rid of them”.

A bit like the British public (possibly) being misled about the financial facts… or were they alternative facts… before voting on Brexit… a lot of folk are not happy with the way figures were bandied about…


(Trevor Hunton) #63

Its all on wiki, civil list, crown estate’s, dutchy of Cornwall, plus the new system Cam introduced to replace the civil list. Queen gets 15% of the profit from the crown estate’s.


(stella wood) #64

So who gets the 85% profit from the crown estates ??


(Martin Cooper) #65

I’m just asking the question is the possible financial cost of a democratic head of state, dependent on purely cost?

If your answer is yes than its an intersting point of view for me, just to keep the status quo.

Martin


(stella wood) #66

Martin, I am suggesting that folk discuss/think about all the ramifications before opting to change the status quo…

Costs seem very high on most folks’ agendas at the moment… I am not opting for or against a democratic head of state… I am just suggesting that we look for actual figures rather than random thoughts…


(Martin Cooper) #67

But you originally suggested the cost aspect of it?

To me your orginal comment was keep the status quo or possible pay more for a democratic replacement? You said " Do the Sums"? Did I miss understand you? :slight_smile:

Martin


(stella wood) #68

I think we may be at cross-purposes. .this thread seems full of folk unhappy with what the RF cost…

I am not saying decisions should be swayed by costs… but it is essential to have the full details (financial and otherwise) before decisions are made…

and I was pointing out that there will be a substantial financial settlement to be made by the Country to the RFamily… if the Country decides to cancel the financial agreement which was made a few hundred years ago…unless the Country hands back the Crown Estates to the RF and loses out on all that revenue…

It would be interesting to know just how much that settlement figure would be…

.


(Trevor Hunton) #69

A couple of billion or so. Profit last year was 365 million. Includes a couple of million acres of land, shed loads of property, thousands of acres of sea bed, the crown estate’s made 27 million profit out of wind farm’s. Then on top of that there’s the Dutchy of Cornwall, also a nice little earner for both the Queen and Charles.


(Timothy Cole) #70

Another corker.

The Royals own very little and their wealth has mainly been inherited. Income earned from the Crown Estate etc is taxed and surpluses used to maintain property etc, they can’t use it to have a fleet of Ferraris sitting outside Buck House.

I can understand why in the 21st century it seems mad to some that the head of state isn’t elected but as the Royals have no real power and from birth are expected to serve the nation I for one don’t see the need to change.


(Barbara Deane) #71

It will not change.


(stella wood) #72

It would be interesting to clarify where the 85% of the profit from Crown Estates actually goes (that part the Queen does not get).

and are you saying that the Crown Estates are valued at £2 billion …??


(Timothy Cole) #73

The Crown Estates are worth £12 billion plus.


(Barbara Deane) #74

What do people do with all that wealth?

Who else is that wealthy and more wealthy than that?

Money seems to have taken over life totally.
If you really have very little or not enough…or even none
the thought of starving or dying because you are cold must take
over your mind.
And the growing of the millions and billions takes over too…
surely…if not there would be less or none of the people in group…with
not ebough!


(stella wood) #75

Thanks @tim17… I thought it would be more than the “couple of billion” mentioned by @Trev57.

As I understand things…If the country decided to “do away” with the Monarchy…the Royal Family as hereditary owners of Crown Estates…would presumably wish to be recompensed properly or have their property/investments (Crown Estates) returned to their full control and benefit…

“shades of Brexit” perhaps :zipper_mouth_face:… but I do feel it is really important that (reasonably) correct figures are used in all discussions/debates…


(Trevor Hunton) #76

As I stated Stella, a couple of billion or so is what the queens theoretical share of the crown estates is worth, as in 15%.


(stella wood) #77

Trevor… I think that the Crown Estates belong to the descendants of George 111 etc…as in The Royal Family…Sovereign of the Day etc etc… and not the government…


(Trevor Hunton) #78

I think you will find in theory the crown estate’s belongs to the state. In today’s money, George had amassed 200 million Quid’s worth of debt, the agreement was that the state would basically take over the crown estate’s and pay George an annual income as well as helping him with his debts. At that time, income from the crown estates was supposed to fund the country but fell well short, George did quite well out of it, as have all who have followed after. Things might have been different if Albert hadn’t died. According to wiki, no one owns the crown estate’s, its sort of a Royal trust fund. I firmly believe that if the UK abolished the monarchy in the morning it would make no difference to UK tourism.


(Peter Juselius) #79

I visited London once for only one reason: to have meals at couple of Indian restaurants.

Business visits where not that fun.


(stella wood) #80

Wiki is quite extensive in its explanation of the Crown Estate… and here are a few lines:

The Crown Estate is a collection of lands and holdings in the United Kingdom belonging to the British monarch … the “Sovereign’s public estate”

The revenues from these hereditary possessions have been placed by the monarch at the disposition of Her Majesty’s Government and thus proceed directly to Her Majesty’s Treasury for the benefit of the British nation.

So, it would seem to be as I had thought… George III did not disinherit his descendants…the future Sovereigns… his financial agreement was with the Government for his lifetime. However, each subsequent Sovereign has been asked and has agreed to continue the arrangement…

Currently, as we know, our present Queen gets 15% of the annual profit… and the British Nation gets 85% of the annual profit…