King Charles praises ‘selfless’ people who form ‘backbone of society’ in Christmas speech

[youreavinalaff]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

So he is on a par with Esther Rantzen but much, much more costly. Thanks for clarifying. 

Like I said.........

[Chomper Higgot]

56 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

So he is on a par with Esther Rantzen but much, much more costly. Thanks for clarifying. 

You seem to have missed King Charles’ point.

 

The people who engage in charitable works form an ‘essential backbone of society’.

 

That would include Rantzen and many more.

 

I agree with his statement.

 

 

 

 

[ozimoron]

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You seem to have missed King Charles’ point.

 

The people who engage in charitable works form an ‘essential backbone of society’.

 

That would include Rantzen and many more.

 

I agree with his statement.

 

 

But he doesn't like all charities.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/08/ngozi-fulani-sistah-space-charity-boss-at-centre-of-royal-race-row-steps-down-over-abuse

[CG1 Blue]

On 12/26/2023 at 6:28 AM, youreavinalaff said:

Anyhow, if there were not any immigrants working in UK, a very large percentage of care homes would be grossly understaffed or closed down due to lack of staff. Many people in need of domiciliary care would not get it.

That's a myth trotted out by the left. If care homes couldn't employ cheap staff from abroad they'd be forced to offer proper wages, and then locals would apply for the roles. Immigrants are simply keeping wages low in care homes.  

[youreavinalaff]

1 minute ago, CG1 Blue said:

That's a myth trotted out by the left. If care homes couldn't employ cheap staff from abroad they'd be forced to offer proper wages, and then locals would apply for the roles. Immigrants are simply keeping wages low in care homes.  

Incorrect. 

 

I have been involved in social care for many years.

 

Every care/residential home I have been involved with have been paying good salaries. Higher than most retail outlets, as an example.

 

Add to that the paid breaks, pension schemes, paid holidays, double time on Christmas and New years day, time and a half on other bank holidays, enhanced rates at weekends, staff support schemes....the packages offered are very good.

 

The foreign staff are not cheap staff. Everyone gets the same package, regardless of nationality or immigration status.

[youreavinalaff]

33 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

But he doesn't like all charities.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/08/ngozi-fulani-sistah-space-charity-boss-at-centre-of-royal-race-row-steps-down-over-abuse

I can't see how your link backs your comment.

 

In fact, it contradicts your comment 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 28, 2023 by youreavinalaff

[ozimoron]

13 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

That's a myth trotted out by the left. If care homes couldn't employ cheap staff from abroad they'd be forced to offer proper wages, and then locals would apply for the roles. Immigrants are simply keeping wages low in care homes.  

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/25/care-homes-foreign-workers-tories-plans-limit-immigration

[ozimoron]

Just now, youreavinalaff said:

I can't see how your link backs your comment.

 

You'd need a history lesson in the relationship between Ngozi and the royal family.

[youreavinalaff]

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

You'd need a history lesson in the relationship between Ngozi and the royal family.

No, I don't.

 

I'm commenting on your link.

 

However, now you mention it. Are you referring to her accusing Charles and Camilla of domestic violence against Megan? Or maybe the subsequent closure of the charity after 200 posts on Twitter regarding misappropriation of funds?

Edited December 28, 2023 by youreavinalaff

[RayC]

4 hours ago, VocalNeal said:

 

How much would it cost if , say, Tony Blair was president?  How many tourist pounds would he bring in?

How would he personally help the poor?

 

I'm almost certain that the amount paid to an elected UK HoS - whoever it might be - would be substantially less than the annual £86m Sovereign Grant awarded to Charles.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

But he doesn't like all charities.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/08/ngozi-fulani-sistah-space-charity-boss-at-centre-of-royal-race-row-steps-down-over-abuse

The charity itself was not at issue.

 

But nice try.

[Nick Carter icp]

28 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I'm almost certain that the amount paid to an elected UK HoS - whoever it might be - would be substantially less than the annual £86m Sovereign Grant awarded to Charles.

 

   Doesn't that Sovereign grant money com from the Crown Estate , and its a percentage of the income 

[Nick Carter icp]

29 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The charity itself was not at issue.

 

But nice try.

 

And Buckingham Palace invited the charity to the event at the Palace 

[scottiejohn]

56 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I'm almost certain that the amount paid to an elected UK HoS - whoever it might be - would be substantially less than the annual £86m Sovereign Grant awarded to Charles.

The Sovereign Grant Act 2011 (c. 15) is the Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that introduced the Sovereign Grant, the payment that is paid annually to the monarch by the government in order to fund the monarch's official duties. It is usually set as a percentage of annual income from the Crown Estate. The Sovereign Grant Act was the biggest reform to the finances of the British royal family since the inception of the Civil List in 1760. In addition to the Sovereign Grant, the monarch continues to receive the revenue of the Duchy of Lancaster, while the Prince of Wales receives the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall.

 

The Crown Estate is a collection of lands and holdings in the United Kingdom belonging to the British monarch as a corporation sole, making it "the sovereign's public estate", which is neither government property nor part of the monarch's private estate. 

WiKi

 

 

Edited December 28, 2023 by scottiejohn

[Chomper Higgot]

14 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

And Buckingham Palace invited the charity to the event at the Palace 

That happens sometimes 

[scottiejohn]

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

I'm almost certain that the amount paid to an elected UK HoS - whoever it might be - would be substantially less than the annual £86m Sovereign Grant awarded to Charles.

The Sovereign Grant Act 2011 (c. 15) is the Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that introduced the Sovereign Grant, the payment that is paid annually to the monarch by the government in order to fund the monarch's official duties. It is usually set as a percentage of annual income from the Crown Estate.  

WiKi

In other words the government gets more from the "Crown Estate" than it pays the Royal Family!

[Nick Carter icp]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

That happens sometimes 

 

   It shoes that the charity wasn't disliked by B.P 

[RayC]

12 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

The Sovereign Grant Act 2011 (c. 15) is the Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that introduced the Sovereign Grant, the payment that is paid annually to the monarch by the government in order to fund the monarch's official duties. It is usually set as a percentage of annual income from the Crown Estate.  

WiKi

In other words the government gets more from the "Crown Estate" than it pays the Royal Family!

 

12 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Doesn't that Sovereign grant money com from the Crown Estate , and its a percentage of the income 

 

The Crown Estate is a property management company. If the institution of the Monarchy ceased to exist, the Crown Estate would continue to generate revenue and profit.

 

I don't understand the principle behind linking the sum allocated to the HoS to perform their official duties to the revenue/ profits made by a company, especially given that the Monarch has no role in the day-to-day operation of the company.

 

I am dubious to say the least, that the level of expenditure associated with the Monarchy is justified and offers 'value for money'. For example, 

 

"The total Sovereign Grant for 2022-23, amounted to £86.3 million (2021-22: £86.3 million), which is made up of a core grant of £51.8 million which funds official travel, property maintenance and the operating costs of The Sovereign’s household." (Source: https://www.royal.uk/media-pack/financial-reports-2022-23) 

 

compared with the costs associated with running the Office of the President of Ireland - an elected HoS -which amounted to €4.8m in 2021 (https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40729734.html). 

 

I accept that differences in functions, etc make a direct comparison of the costs of servicing the two HoS' households difficult, but I also would need some convincing that the cost of running the Royal Household should be 10 times that of the Irish President's Office. 

 

Imo the idea that the Institution of the Monarchy 'costs in' is, at best, unproven.

[RuamRudy]

13 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

The Crown Estate is a collection of lands and holdings in the United Kingdom belonging to the British monarch as a corporation sole, making it "the sovereign's public estate", which is neither government property nor part of the monarch's private estate. 

 

 

It would be interesting to know exactly what Charles did to acquire those multitude of stately homes, palaces and vast swathes of land across the UK. I suspect, like his mother before him, he has done diddly squat to acquire them. Had he been taxed like us mere mortals upon inheriting them, it would be a start, but my preference would be to turn them over in their entirety to the people of the UK. Property which can be shown to have been purchased by his family could be kept, Castle Mey, for example, but those which have been passed down from one incumbent to the next by dint of being stolen in bygone times should revert to the people of the UK and all royal ties and obligations be cut.

[RuamRudy]

18 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You seem to have missed King Charles’ point.

 

The people who engage in charitable works form an ‘essential backbone of society’.

 

That would include Rantzen and many more.

 

I agree with his statement.

 

 

 

 

 

I was more in awe of the breathtaking hypocrisy of the man who has taken so much from the country whilst returning so little, trying to show solidarity with those who are struggling to support the most vulnerable in our society. 

[Chomper Higgot]

38 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I was more in awe of the breathtaking hypocrisy of the man who has taken so much from the country whilst returning so little, trying to show solidarity with those who are struggling to support the most vulnerable in our society. 

Opinions differ.

[youreavinalaff]

6 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

It would be interesting to know exactly what Charles did to acquire those multitude of stately homes, palaces and vast swathes of land across the UK. I suspect, like his mother before him, he has done diddly squat to acquire them. Had he been taxed like us mere mortals upon inheriting them, it would be a start, but my preference would be to turn them over in their entirety to the people of the UK. Property which can be shown to have been purchased by his family could be kept, Castle Mey, for example, but those which have been passed down from one incumbent to the next by dint of being stolen in bygone times should revert to the people of the UK and all royal ties and obligations be cut.

Charles does not inherit. It's owned by the monarchy. Custodianship is move on.

 

 

 

 

[youreavinalaff]

6 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

I was more in awe of the breathtaking hypocrisy of the man who has taken so much from the country whilst returning so little, trying to show solidarity with those who are struggling to support the most vulnerable in our society. 

Exactly what has he taken from the country?