Royal Gossip
April 25, 2019, 09:27:22 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 11   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Duchy of Cornwall  (Read 37256 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15381



« Reply #40 on: October 04, 2012, 03:38:16 am »

but as mememe said this way the money flows back to locals rather then the big national pot who would spend it on god knows what.

I disagree with your last statement.
If it weren't for the duchy Charles wouldn't have an income since being in his position virtually forbid him from getting a regular 9/5 job:
He can't work for the gov because that would be to political,
It would be frowned upon if he started to work in the private sector as well claims of 'gaining favour' would be made sooner or later.
The military isn't really good either, look at what William is doing or rather isn't.
If he did what he's doing now with getting a substitute pay from the gov in stead of the duchy income ppl would moan even more about how much he is costing the taxpayers!
And you honestly can't expect a grown man to live of his parents for half his life?

So if the duchy income belongs to the ppl
Who's gonna pay for Charles and his family?
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #41 on: October 04, 2012, 03:49:18 am »

The Duchy of Lancaster brings in enough to support them. The communities pay for their visits so it is basically just their living that would have to be supplied. I would not consider that living off of his parents because I think considering how the Duchies came into existence they don't really deserve them more than the people do.

The objective of the Duchy is more about providing wealth than providing necessities. Should the tax payers give up the money so one man can obtain great wealth because he was born into a certain family first?

I am interested in the personalities that make up the worlds Monarchies but at heart I am a republican. I find it rather silly for a nation of people to support one family because they were born to a certain person. It resembles benefits to me but they are excessive benefits.
Logged
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15381



« Reply #42 on: October 04, 2012, 04:09:38 am »

I see your point from a logical POV as a person I believe all people are equal and I wouldn't bow to anyone or give automatic respect (it has to be earned)
But for some reason my system is soo used to the wealthy royal and aristo class I find it hard to agree with you laugh

I know this makes no sense but there you have it. blink tehe

It's one of the reasons I find American high society so fascinating they removed nearly all traces of this 'old European wealthy bloodlines' class.
 
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #43 on: October 04, 2012, 04:28:12 am »

I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me. We all have different experiences that we draw from to form our opinions.

As people we are all equal IMO money and class doesn't make you a better person. I have seen some real lowlifes that have money but I have met some really genuine goodness in some wealthy people also.

 
Logged
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15381



« Reply #44 on: October 04, 2012, 04:48:21 am »

 thumbsup that I can agree to, money is no indicator for behaviour or morals.

I think personally that I'm mostly in awe with the history and the power struggles that is connected to these old bloodlines not the wealth that much.
But then again as I said before I like pretty things with a good story connected to it  (art, jewels, houses) and these ppl seem to have a lot of those.
i think that's why I like royals so much they have history running trough their veins even if they don't want to acknowledge it (like william) or turn it into a farce (like harry)
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #45 on: October 04, 2012, 04:57:32 am »

I love the history of the Monarchies also and not just the BRF. I also find it fascinating how they could fool so many through history yet some people finally stood up and took their rights back and others got some rights but chose to still support them.   huh

They do have some very interesting ancestors though and they also have quite a few crazy ones.    tehe
Logged
Kettlefish
royal watcher

Offline Offline

Posts: 9


« Reply #46 on: October 04, 2012, 04:59:31 am »

Charles inherited the Duchy as a birthright, it is an entailed private estate.  It is his.  Just like Henry Percy inherited his and any other person in GB who inherited an estate as a birthright.  It sucks,  but thats the way it is.  If people want a birthright removed from one aristo then where do you stop?  Do you insist on other aristos give up their inheritance??  
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #47 on: October 04, 2012, 05:08:49 am »

Most of the nobles got their estates by providing services to the crown or buying it. They didn't just murder the inhabitants and then take the land or steal the land from monasteries etc.

The crown estates were given away so the people could take care of the responsibilities of the crown yet the crown was still allowed to receive the benefits. Benefits and no responsibilities Hmmm that sounds like W&K.

If they want all the benefits of being the crown then IMO they can have the responsibilities also. This is not the 13th or 14 etc century.

I don't base my opinions on outdated documents but I base it on what I think is right. I think it is wrong for the people of the country to have to take care of a certain family just because they were born.
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2663



« Reply #48 on: October 04, 2012, 06:03:53 am »

Most nobles got their lands by providing services to the monarch - true - but what were those services - killing the locals and running the local area for the monarch and so they were rewarded with their lands for their services to the monarch.  The monarchs didn't do the actual killing but left that to their underlings whose descendents are now the older noble families.

The Crown Estates are worth over 300 million pounds to the government and the monarch gets 15% back.  That 15% is used to carry out the official duties of the monarchy e.g. pay for state visits etc as well as the upkeep of the royal palaces (but it is way behind on that schedule as they aren't getting enough money to keep up the maintenance).  The bulk of the Crown Estates is used by the government for its own purposes e.g. running the country.

The Duchies are to give them a private income so they can live in a manner befitting their position.  The Duchies are not part of the Crown Estates.

The Duchy of Lancaster currently supports all of the royal family except the Wales and Cambridges.

As the situation is currently with intestate people in the Duchy of Cornwall because Charles give that money to charity in the Duchy Cornwall that money stays in the Duchy rather than have the government spend it on people anywhere it likes - this means that local money stays local rather than leaves the local area because someone forgot to leave a will and has no living relatives who could make a claim on the estate.

Take away the Duchies and you can't logically take away one and not the other then the governmen would have to pay a salary to the Head of State but also couldn't complain when the rest of the family do other things such as stand for election to parliament, openly criticise the government, not turn up to state occasions etc etc as they would have to have a real job.

Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #49 on: October 04, 2012, 06:16:55 am »

I have said it before but I shall repeat it. I don't care if the rest of them get outside jobs. Beatrice and Eugenie are royals and they are getting outside jobs and the world did not come to an end because of it.

If the Nobles didn't do as they were told by the King then their own lives would have been forfeit, it is called survival. It was also during a time where life wasn't as important to people as it is now. The Nobles did earn the land given to them by the Crown by rendering a service. If you feel they should abolish the entire class system then I can go along with that. Take it all back and use it only for the people.   tehe

Some want to live in the past and some look towards the future. The money will not be removed locally because the business etc. will remain where they are.

I understand why they put out all this PR to hold onto the lifestyles that they have now but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

You can logically take one away without the other because there is only one Head of State and they can all live off of the proceeds from one. Then Charles would have to do as he is told and keep his mouth shut.   Lips Sealed
Logged
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 38563



WWW
« Reply #50 on: October 04, 2012, 06:41:09 am »

but as mememe said this way the money flows back to locals rather then the big national pot who would spend it on god knows what.

I disagree with your last statement.
If it weren't for the duchy Charles wouldn't have an income since being in his position virtually forbid him from getting a regular 9/5 job:
He can't work for the gov because that would be to political,
It would be frowned upon if he started to work in the private sector as well claims of 'gaining favour' would be made sooner or later.
The military isn't really good either, look at what William is doing or rather isn't.
If he did what he's doing now with getting a substitute pay from the gov in stead of the duchy income ppl would moan even more about how much he is costing the taxpayers!
And you honestly can't expect a grown man to live of his parents for half his life?

So if the duchy income belongs to the ppl
Who's gonna pay for Charles and his family?

Charles has had the Civil List payments and the RF charges their travel/wardrobe expenses to the Foreign Office; second, Charles has income from private investments, as does the entire RF on the side. The Queen Mother had quite a lot of money to give to her grandchildren and I don't think that he needs so many castles, palaces, etc. since after all, Buckingham, Sandringham, Kensington, Windsor can easily provide space if he needs it so much. If he got rid of Highgrove and got rid of several other manors I am certain that he could end up with more than enough sliced off. As for staff, it's not like the RF pays them much anyway.

I don't care wherever someone is born, life isn't fair, never has been, but Charles needs to cut back on his real estate, land holdings, and frankly I don't care about the class system since class will never really go away anyhow.

Quote
And what has Charles been doing with this money for the last 40 years?

*Supporting himself in lavish style
*Using it as an experimental ground for his farming theories
*Supporting his ex-wife in lavish style
*Supporting his sons in lavish style
*Supporting his mistress (now his new wife) in lavish style

All the while, he plays at being poor and penniless and is now apparently getting money/goods/property from people who don't have wills drawn up after they die. It might be a law, but it looks to me like the entire RF is grubbing for all they can get out of the citizenry. In a while they will be getting the Crown Estates and then he will ahve that to play with and end up enjoying the whole income from the Duchies and Estates.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #51 on: October 04, 2012, 11:42:46 am »

Once again the misleading yarn is being peddled of the Duchy of Cornwall (and Lancaster) being the personal property of Prince Charles. It is not.

It is a constitutional arrangement dating from the middle ages whereby the Duchy provides an income for the heir to the throne but only if that heir is the Prince of Wales.

If there is no Prince of Wales and that has happened a few times the income from the Duchy reverts to the Treasury. If there were no monarchy (i.e Republic) neither PC nor HM would be able to gallop off into the sunset with theses estates.

If it is PC's personal property how is it that he canot sell any of the assets? Or he has to supply the Public Accounts Committee with the accounts?

Neither the Duke of Northumberland nor Devonshire nor any other aristos who truly own their private estates have to do any of this and neither do they get tax breaks like the Duchy of Cornwall which does not pay corporation or capital gains tax and PC himself makes an offer on his tax. The Queen does not pay death duties - it was this that crippled most of the old grand estates after World War 1.

The Duke of Devonshire has just trotted down to Southebys again with a Titian drawing to raise a few million to carry on their work on Chatsworth.

All they own is Sandringham and Balmoral however there some interesting details in Hansard from the 1830/40s which shows that public money even found its way into those.

As for Bon Vacantia I should bloody well think they have paid the deceased money into something more worthy than their bank accounts.Charles may have given it up a few decades ago but everyone living on both Duchies throughout WW1 and WW2 who died intestate had their estates paid into both Duchies - how many people died in the 20th century? Further they were not paying any tax on these amounts so it was a double bonus.

I urge everyone to take a look at the following link. You can download and save it as apdf if you haven't time right now.
All 55 pages whereby the the Public Accounts Committee really put both Duchies on the spot - Cornwall more than Lancaster. You will see that PC runs his "own private fiefdom" and states it is a public estate when it suits them and a private one when they try to avoid such as FOI.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmpubacc/313/313.pdf
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 11:46:34 am by True Brit » Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #52 on: October 04, 2012, 01:33:04 pm »

The Law of the Land should be followed.

Quote
In Britain, dying without a will, known as ‘dying intestate’, means money left by the deceased goes to the Government.

But in Cornwall, their property passes to Prince Charles in what critics say amounts to the Royal overseeing a secret fiefdom.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2212319/Prince-Charles-earns-1m-estates-people-dying-just-years-thanks-medieval-law.html

Quote
The powers date back to the creation of the Duchy of Cornwall estate in 1337 by King Edward III. The estate was created to provide an income for the King's son and heir, Prince Edward, otherwise known as The Black Prince, who became the first Duke of Cornwall.

Following Medieval Laws to Hold onto Profit is wrong in my Opinion. This is 2012 and everything should be updated.
Quote
The money received through the law is donated to a selection of charities through the Duke of Cornwall's Benevolent Fund, minus an amount for "ex gratia payments and other associated costs" – which accounted for £86,000 last year.

The Benevolent Fund received £450,000 last year, while £154,000 was held back to meet the cost of any future claims on currently unclaimed properties.

Not quite using it all for charity but uses some to make sure he gets more.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-princes-duchy-estate-is-paid-a-packet-by-cornwalls-dead-8196546.html
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 01:37:48 pm by Snokitty » Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #53 on: October 04, 2012, 02:05:48 pm »

True Brit   thankyou  for the article. It is filled with a lot of interesting things that I was unaware of. It shows there is a need for the Duchy of Cornwall and Charles's dealings need to be investigated thoroughly.

He doesn't even own Highgrove. He went through let's call them back channels to acquire it.

Everyone should read the article you posted it would teach them a lot.   thankyou
Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #54 on: October 04, 2012, 02:43:32 pm »

 thankyou Snokitty re Highgrove he bought this using Duchy funds so it belongs to the Duchy but they claim in the PAC minutes that PC "pays the market rate" for the rental - however the Duchy won't say how they set the market rate for a start and in any case the rental goes into the Duchy profits which in turn go back to PC so he is in effect paying his rent on one hand and getting it back again.

Thre as similar sleight of hand when he grew some trees as Charles Windsor Esquire on Duchy owned land using EU grants and then when the trees grew they were flle and sold back to the Duchy i.e. he was selling them to himself.

If Parliament decided to abolish both duchies (but still retain the monarchy) they would be able to do so.

The PAC pdf  attached in my last post is the one I keep intending to take apart for forum members to read in sections so they can see just what is going on there. Which ever way you cut it this is public money.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 02:45:22 pm by True Brit » Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #55 on: October 04, 2012, 02:51:48 pm »

You are welcome True Brit.

It says he pays £336,000 a year as rent for Highgrove and to me it seems like it would be more when you consider the property and all the improvements.

He also makes more than the Monarch but she supports more royal family members. The Queen also doesn't have anything to do with the running of the Duchy but Charles has his hand in all aspects of the Duchy of Cornwall including appointing the people who oversee it.

It just all seems so shady.  
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2663



« Reply #56 on: October 04, 2012, 10:40:38 pm »

The Law of the Land should be followed.

Charles is following 'the law of the land' - that law is that anyone dying intestate in the Duchy means the money goes to the Duchy - that is the law and Charles is following that law.


Quote
In Britain, dying without a will, known as ‘dying intestate’, means money left by the deceased goes to the Government.

But in Cornwall, their property passes to Prince Charles in what critics say amounts to the Royal overseeing a secret fiefdom.

Perfectly legal.


Quote
The powers date back to the creation of the Duchy of Cornwall estate in 1337 by King Edward III. The estate was created to provide an income for the King's son and heir, Prince Edward, otherwise known as The Black Prince, who became the first Duke of Cornwall.

Quote
Following Medieval Laws to Hold onto Profit is wrong in my Opinion. This is 2012 and everything should be updated.

You are entitled to your opinion of course but please don't try to make out that Charles is breaking the law by having these monies paid to him when he is in fact following the law.

Quote
The money received through the law is donated to a selection of charities through the Duke of Cornwall's Benevolent Fund, minus an amount for "ex gratia payments and other associated costs" – which accounted for £86,000 last year.

The Benevolent Fund received £450,000 last year, while £154,000 was held back to meet the cost of any future claims on currently unclaimed properties.

Quote
Not quite using it all for charity but uses some to make sure he gets more.

You did read the latter part of the quote I assume.

....to meet the cost of any future claims on currently unclaimed properties.


That means that some of the money is kept aside in case a claimant comes forward in the future and can prove that they are entitled to the money.  If they didn't have that reserve they would have to find the money from some other source if a claimant comes forward.  This is simply a sensible business practice.

Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2663



« Reply #57 on: October 04, 2012, 10:58:55 pm »


=Charles has had the Civil List payments

Charles has never been on the Civil List for the simple reason that as Duke of Cornwall he has always had an independent income.


Quote
and the RF charges their travel/wardrobe expenses to the Foreign Office;

Only when they were sent on behalf of the Foreign Office - so their employer for the trip picked up their expenses - my employer pays my expenses when I have to go somewhere for work - doesn't yours?

Quote
second, Charles has income from private investments, as does the entire RF on the side.

Sure he has but that doesn't mean that he should have to support himself and work for the government and people at the same time with no income or support from them - it is more than 100 years since the idea of people having to work for the government unpaid went out the window when the British starting paying their MPs -

Quote
The Queen Mother had quite a lot of money to give to her grandchildren

We actually don't know how much money she had but we do know that to avoid tax she left the bulk of her estate to The Queen - no death duties on monarch to monarch inheritance but there are death duties on anything she left to anyone else including Charles and as he is the future King past examples would suggest that he would have received the smallest amount considering he will get the largest amount in the end

Quote
and I don't think that he needs so many castles, palaces, etc. since after all, Buckingham, Sandringham, Kensington, Windsor can easily provide space if he needs it so much. If he got rid of Highgrove

Can't sell Highgrove as it the way it was purchased it is now part of the assets of the Duchy of Cornwall and so can't be sold - the Duke of Cornwall can't sell any of the assets - he lives on the income alone

Quote
and got rid of several other manors I am certain that he could end up with more than enough sliced off.
 

Most of the other houses he uses are actually part of larger estates which he doesn't own e.g. Birkhall is part of the Balmoral estate and that belongs to The Queen.l  We are assuming that she will leave Balmoral to Charles but like Sandringham it is a personal possession so it is possible she could leave it to any of her children or grandchildren and not to Charles at all.

Quote
As for staff, it's not like the RF pays them much anyway.
 

But theyy do get paid more than the handouts from the government so they are better off with a job than unemployed.  From personal knowledge of people who have worked for the RF the money isn't good but having BP on the CV does open doors to much better paid jobs later on - a small sacrifice now for a bigger return later.

Quote
I don't care wherever someone is born, life isn't fair, never has been, but Charles needs to cut back on his real estate, land holdings, and frankly I don't care about the class system since class will never really go away anyhow.

You do understand that a large amount of the real estate is part of the Duchy and so can't be sold - it is his whether he wants it or not.  

Quote
And what has Charles been doing with this money for the last 40 years?

*Supporting himself in lavish style
*Using it as an experimental ground for his farming theories
*Supporting his ex-wife in lavish style
*Supporting his sons in lavish style
*Supporting his mistress (now his new wife) in lavish style

He is a rich man living as a rich man - don't most rich men support their families in lavish styles.  Hardly a crime

Quote
All the while, he plays at being poor and penniless and is now apparently getting money/goods/property from people who don't have wills drawn up after they die. It might be a law, but it looks to me like the entire RF is grubbing for all they can get out of the citizenry. In a while they will be getting the Crown Estates and then he will ahve that to play with and end up enjoying the whole income from the Duchies and Estates.

Charles is abiding by the law - this isn't something new that he is doing with the estates but something that has been happening since the middle ages - and what does he do with this money - keep it - no - he puts it back into the Duchy - hardly 'moneygrubbing' but returning it the best, legal way he can.  If he does lose this right then the government will use it for who knows what purpose but most likely not back into the Duchy from which it came.

The Royal Family will NOT be getting the Crown Estates - they will be getting 15% of the income of the Crown Estates which will amount to around 30 million pounds and there is a cap in there as well to limit it to about that amount.  Guess what they get from the Civil List (The Queen and Philip - the only two on the Civil List), Grants-in-Aid (for the maintenance of the palaces) and other sources - about 30 million pounds.  They won't be getting an increase with the change in the funding but the Queen will have more control over how the money is spent - so rather than having to spend xxxxx pounds on maintenance at Windsor she can decide to spend yyyy on Windsor and up to zzzz on BP because it is in more need - or some other need.  She will still have to pay her official staff - the ones like her secretaries who communicate with the government, and the cost of State Visits etc from that money.  This money is simply the money needed to run the office of the Head of State and the maintenance of the government owned royal palaces.

« Last Edit: October 05, 2012, 02:36:07 am by akasha2411 » Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #58 on: October 04, 2012, 11:00:53 pm »

The law of the land is that the state gets the property. The laws for the Duchy are different from the laws that everyone else has to follow.

Just because something is legal does not make it right. There are many laws still on the books that allow a man to beat his wife, I guess you approve of those laws also. Most laws are never removed just updated to match the times so to speak and that is what needs to be done with the Duchy of Cornwall.

I didn't make out like Charles was doing anything I said medieval laws should be updated IMO. Get over it MMM I do have a right to my opinion just because it doesn't match your book doesn't mean I don't have that right.

Quote
You did read the latter part of the quote I assume.

....to meet the cost of any future claims on currently unclaimed properties.

Yes I did read the latter part and what it says is this
Quote
The Benevolent Fund received £450,000 last year, while £154,000 was held back to meet the cost of any future claims on currently unclaimed properties.
Which means he keeps part of the money to make sure he continues to get more of the people's properties. Why would he need the extra money and do the right thing by giving it to people who have a claim to the property. It clearly states that all properties where no will is left goes to the Duchy. If there is no will left it automatically goes to the Duchy. The people would have no chance against  the Duchy because apparently Charles sets money aside to make sure he gets to keep the land.

This is not a classroom and you are not my teacher MMM I can read and comprehend what I read. I also do not have such a hard on for Prince Charles that it blinds my judgement in everything about him.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2012, 11:05:47 pm by Snokitty » Logged
True Brit
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4434


« Reply #59 on: April 04, 2013, 04:20:26 pm »

A Cornish peer wants the Duchy of Cornwall to pay its income over to the Cornish people and the people of the Scillies instead of paying it to Charles. The Duchy refuses to comment - well they won't. He is introducing a Private Members Bill but I suspect it will probably fail.

Still interesting way to keep the debate going.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22012547
Logged

" Kate, Pippa and Carole Middleton seen at Manolo Blahnik today.. overheard asking if they carried shoes for cloven hooves. "
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 11   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!