[News] Prince Andrew interviewed about allegations

[Thunder Bolt]

The Duchy is a corporation that isn't incorporated, a company that isn't registered, it trades like any other business yet refuses to pay tax and enjoys unique legal privileges.

You are playing with semantics. I’ve already said the Duke pays income tax voluntarily.

 

[beorhthelm]

It goes directly to the duke of Cornwall. The duchy website says it does.

apologies, you're quite right. goes to the Duke not the Duchy. he then gives it to a benevolent fund, the swine.

on the tax, seems Charles pays tax on revenue paid to him while the capital assets stay in the Duchy. really the Duchy and setup are not where problems with monarchy lay. like the tourism argument its a distraction from the core question of the place in the constitution of the nation.

i dont think its ideal, wouldnt design it like this, but the alternative has proven pretty crap and dont see much point in changing it. the best way would be to appoint someone as a chairman like role for a extended period. trouble is how to select the right person, voting is political and problematic, if they have no grounding in governance they'd be overwhelmed.

 

[1066familyman]

apologies, you're quite right. goes to the Duke not the Duchy. he then gives it to a benevolent fund, the swine.

Blimey!, That's phenomenal philanthropy! Especially with the worry and juggling of low wages, inflation and huge energy bills hanging over his head, like the rest of us.

Well played Charles, you absolute legend!

 

[Creaky]

I doubt it. A president would be an individual. I can’t see us finding a presidents sons legal settlement from public funds. That probably a bad example but let’s face it a president would be strutised and held to account to the same rules as other public service figure.

Queenie and her hangers on are in their own league when it comes to what rules they need to follow. For example is the duchy of Cornwall/Lancaster a private or public owned entity. It’s private when they want it to be and public when they don’t want to pay tax on it’s income.

Apart from whether or not we need yet another level of political governance there would be be a whole new organisational department to staff.

The Sovereign Grant for 20/21 was £86m of which more than half was spent on property maintenance.

The expenses for Macron in the same period was well over 100m € and does not include any maintenance costs. Not only that but each ex-president is costing France an extra 10m €. There is no reason to believe that a UK office of president would cost the UK less.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Far be it for me to start a rumour, but has anybody heard that 12M only buys silence until the end of the Jubilee year ?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Apart from whether or not we need yet another level of political governance there would be be a whole new organisational department to staff.

The Sovereign Grant for 20/21 was £86m of which more than half was spent on property maintenance.

The expenses for Macron in the same period was well over 100m € and does not include any maintenance costs. Not only that but each ex-president is costing France an extra 10m €. There is no reason to believe that a UK office of president would cost the UK less.

That Sovereign Grant of £86M comes of out of the Crown Estates income of £385M to the Treasury.
So, in effect, the Royal Family costs each of us 77p.

 

[Lower West Stander]

What baffles me somewhat is how the Queen seems to be immune to any criticism whatsoever.

Andrew and Charles are her kids. Andrew in particular seems to have been massively indulged by her despite being a total dick. I know we all have something of a blind spot where our kids are concerned but this goes rather beyond that. If she is paying Andrew’s legal fees she needs to understand this is now in the public interest.

Ever since she totally misjudged public opinion after Diana’s death, the press seem to have decided she can’t do anything wrong. I’m not anti her but she does seem to represent a bygone age and the monarchy hasn’t adapted to modern society as result.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Easy 10]

In Cornwall, when an individual dies with no will or surviving relatives their property (or 'estate') passes to The Duke of Cornwall. The same is true on the dissolution of a company registered in Cornwall where any remaining assets pass to The Duke of Cornwall. This is known as bona vacantia.

Not to be confused with prima nocta (still active in Cornwall) - giving the lawful right of a monarch or feudal lord to have sex with a staff member of Halfords on the night of her wedding.

 

[Seagull58]

Not to be confused with prima nocta (still active in Cornwall) - giving the lawful right of a monarch or feudal lord to have sex with a staff member of Halfords on the night of her wedding.

His or her wedding, surely?

 

[Miximate]

I will not defend the appalling entitled attitude and actions of Andrew for a second. Equally, I can’t begin to imagine the trauma of this woman and others that have been affected by this disgraceful despicable behaviour and would gladly see all those responsible pursued and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

I do have two questions…..some time ago, Ms Giuffre suggested there was no interest in cash settlement but only in justice.
1. Did she have the option to refuse the settlement (and continue the case)?
2. Can she still pursue a criminal or civil case that requires Andrew to give evidence.

 

[Rodney Thomas]

Apart from whether or not we need yet another level of political governance there would be be a whole new organisational department to staff.

The Sovereign Grant for 20/21 was £86m of which more than half was spent on property maintenance.

The expenses for Macron in the same period was well over 100m € and does not include any maintenance costs. Not only that but each ex-president is costing France an extra 10m €. There is no reason to believe that a UK office of president would cost the UK less.

Without bothering to look it up. I'm pretty sure the British PM costs more than the French one. Comparing the Queen to Macron isn't really a like for like comparison.

 

[Creaky]

Without bothering to look it up. I'm pretty sure the British PM costs more than the French one. Comparing the Queen to Macron isn't really a like for like comparison.

That seems a bit illogical - if the British PM costs more than the French one then it surely suggests that a British presidency will also cost more than a French one - certainly doesn’t suggest it will cost less.

 

[clapham_gull]

Bonkers sorry.

We are defending an institution that has absolutely zero involvement (practically) in the political process and the tax payer forks out millions yearly...

.. in order to maintain the status quo they have zero involvement in the political process.

Have an unelected hereditary Head of State if you want one but let's not spend millions on the rest of the the family.

Give the King/Queen a wage (even though are independently multi millionaires), but the rest of them can go out to work like we do.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

I will not defend the appalling entitled attitude and actions of Andrew for a second. Equally, I can’t begin to imagine the trauma of this woman and others that have been affected by this disgraceful despicable behaviour and would gladly see all those responsible pursued and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

I do have two questions…..some time ago, Ms Giuffre suggested there was no interest in cash settlement but only in justice.
1. Did she have the option to refuse the settlement (and continue the case)?
2. Can she still pursue a criminal or civil case that requires Andrew to give evidence.

She could refuse a settlement if she wanted to (nobody can compel you to accept an offer), but once you have accepted an out of court settlement that is effectively the end of the case.

 

[Seagull58]

I will not defend the appalling entitled attitude and actions of Andrew for a second. Equally, I can’t begin to imagine the trauma of this woman and others that have been affected by this disgraceful despicable behaviour and would gladly see all those responsible pursued and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

I do have two questions…..some time ago, Ms Giuffre suggested there was no interest in cash settlement but only in justice.
1. Did she have the option to refuse the settlement (and continue the case)?
2. Can she still pursue a criminal or civil case that requires Andrew to give evidence.

She suggested it but it appears that she was talking bollocks.
She had the option to refuse the settlement but has chosen to accept it whereby the money goes to her charity.
A criminal case would still be possible, I guess, if a Federal or State prosecutor was prepared to take it on.

 

[Simster]

She suggested it but it appears that she was talking bollocks.
She had the option to refuse the settlement but has chosen to accept it whereby the money goes to her charity.
A criminal case would still be possible, I guess, if a Federal or State prosecutor was prepared to take it on.

"Talking bollocks" = everyone has their price.

Ultimately, if you are offered a payout of funds beyond your wildest dreams, it must test your principles. Being honest, I've got some principles myself that I know would go by the wayside for a chance of being set up for life, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.

The shame here is not with her, it's with a probable nonce who has bought his way out of justice. To compound matters, he's bought it with the Queen's/tax-payer's money rather than his own.

 

[um bongo molongo]

I always think the argument for abolishing the monarchy makes sense. Until I think about President Boris Johnson…
If we can’t be trusted not to elect amoral f***tards, then we need a monarchy.

 

[Simster]

I always think the argument for abolishing the monarchy makes sense. Until I think about President Boris Johnson…
If we can’t be trusted not to elect amoral f***tards, then we need a monarchy.

Doesn't Andrew show the exact opposite? At least we can boot out Johnson after five years.

 

[clapham_gull]

I always think the argument for abolishing the monarchy makes sense. Until I think about President Boris Johnson…
If we can’t be trusted not to elect amoral f***tards, then we need a monarchy.

President Blair, President Johnson, President Ant and Dec blah, blah, blah, blah.

Sorry. You'd judge them on their performance and vote them in or out.

It's a false equivalence anyway. We pay millions for an unelected Head of State (and their family) to keep them out of any tangible role in public life.

The current Monarch has barely made a speech to the nation the entire time they have been on the throne.

When they have it's been politically directed.

It's also completely inhumane that a women in her 90s is expected to be "working" on behalf of the nation at all, irrespective of her privilege and wealth.

It's dysfunctional nonsense and very expensive dysfunctional nonsense too.

By all means have an unelected heredity benign Head of State. But let's be honest about what that actually means and fund it accordingly without teams of associated staff in grace and favour homes laying out ironed clothes for their relatives to put on in the morning.

Also let them retire gracefully without an expectancy they perform the role until they die.

 

[BadFish]

President Blair, President Johnson, President Ant and Dec blah, blah, blah, blah.

Sorry. You'd judge them on their performance and vote them in or out.

It's a false equivalence anyway. We pay millions for an unelected Head of State (and their family) to keep them out of any tangible role in public life.

The current Monarch has barely made a speech to the nation the entire time they have been on the throne.

When they have it's been politically directed.

It's also completely inhumane that a women in her 90s is expected to be "working" on behalf of the nation at all, irrespective of her privilege and wealth.

It's dysfunctional nonsense and very expensive dysfunctional nonsense too.

By all means have an unelected heredity benign Head of State. But let's be honest about what that actually means and fund it accordingly without teams of associated staff in grace and favour homes laying out ironed clothes for their relatives to put on in the morning.

Also let them retire gracefully without an expectancy they perform the role until they die.

Also, make sure the family members we pay for are not involved with sex traffickers, underage girls and convicted sex offenders. And if there is serious enough of an allegation that they are prepared to pay 12 million quid, ensure that these allegations are investigated and the family member is either cleared of such grubby allegations or found guilty and punished.

Surely as our head of state family firm we could expect a great deal more transparency and leadership over such grubby moral and legal matters?

If this had been our elected head of state, could they expect to voted in once more? or would they have already resigned?