49 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

For the first time since WW2 the British people needs the leadership of a 'defender of the faith' monarch.  A King who can tell the feeble government to defend our borders and fight them on the beaches if necessary.

 

He should speak up about Pakistani rape gangs and the erosion of woman's rights.

 

But what do we get?  Total silence on the key issues, plus weak platitudes about the environment.

 

Do the Royals not realise that a future Islamic government in the UK will get rid of the monarchy and replace it with a Caliph?  Their days are numbered, not because the traditional 'British' people will oust them, but because they allowed an invasion of people who do not share their values and do not care about English history.

  With respect - what a load of rubbish!

 

For reference re: Pakistan, currently a member of the British Commonwealth of which King Charles 111 is the Head! (Google)

 

Yes, Pakistan is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, having joined in 1947. It left the organization in 1972 but rejoined in 1989. 

• Initial Membership: Pakistan joined the British Commonwealth (now known as the Commonwealth of Nations) in 1947, shortly after gaining independence.
• Withdrawal: It withdrew from the Commonwealth in 1972, in protest of the support for East Pakistan's secession and the creation of Bangladesh.
• Rejoining: Pakistan officially rejoined the Commonwealth in 1989.
• Suspension: Pakistan was suspended from the Commonwealth from 1999 to 2008 due to political instability, but its membership was restored in 2008. 

 

 

Many years ago I heard it said that the reason that Australians pin up one side of their slouch hats was to accommodate the chip on their shoulder. Apart from being rather amusing (within the context of military banter), I actually think that it is rather unfair to the people of a country which in many ways I rather admire, and regret never having visited.

 

Then you came on the scene...

17 hours ago, Keeps said:

Do we really need the UK Royals?

 

Yes. Otherwise, whose  image are you going to have on the coins? Rolf Harris? 

Farage.

1 hour ago, fondue zoo said:

 

That's a fair point, but there is a difference between having leaders and having hereditary monarchs.

How do you know what were hereditary as leaders, whether human or animal.

Only human history may tell you that.......😉

 

G.B. had quite a few family Royal sir name changes during its time.....🤗

1 hour ago, JAG said:

Many years ago I heard it said that the reason that Australians pin up one side of their slouch hats was to accommodate the chip on their shoulder. Apart from being rather amusing (within the context of military banter), I actually think that it is rather unfair to the people of a country which in many ways I rather admire, and regret never having visited.

 

Then you came on the scene...

.......used to admire ........

 

Their currency is down the toilet.

Their cities are drug ridden violent immigrant hell holes.

Currently facing digital id and the removing of all freedoms for their kids.

Restricted in taking their pensions overseas.

Travel restrictions for all during the slightest diseases.

Nightmare planning restrictions on everything.

Lowest education standards in the western world.

 

The list is endless!

 

Back on topic,

I quite like Prince Andrew, he adds a certain comedy element to the family. Which is needed to distract from the pompous virtue signalling from the frightened cowardly timid sexual deviant (I want to be your Tampax) adulterer known as King Charles.

5 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

.......used to admire ........

 

Their currency is down the toilet.

Their cities are drug ridden violent immigrant hell holes.

Currently facing digital id and the removing of all freedoms for their kids.

Restricted in taking their pensions overseas.

Travel restrictions for all during the slightest diseases.

Nightmare planning restrictions on everything.

Lowest education standards in the western world.

 

The list is endless!

 

Back on topic,

I quite like Prince Andrew, he adds a certain comedy element to the family. Which is needed to distract from the pompous virtue signalling from the frightened cowardly timid sexual deviant (I want to be you Tampax) adulterer known as King Charles.

Of course you would like Andy, as you seem to be an anti-Brit Brit too, it seems, in which case your username is a bit strange, eh...

And I suppose every other country is perfect, even the one you are sitting in.....🤣

Having no royal family means nothing.

The problem lies with filling the space with an elected president (i.e. a politician). Replacing the House of Lords with more politicians. Anything that leads to more politicians with their snouts in the trough is a bigger problem.

 

4 minutes ago, transam said:

Of course you would like Andy, as you seem to be an anti-Brit Brit too, it seems, in which case your username is a bit strange, eh...

And I suppose every other country is perfect, even the one you are sitting in.....🤣

The whole western world is going to hell in a hand basket.

Soon living in Britain will be the same as living in Pakistan.

 

As for Thailand, better than living in Manchester.

Not that I could afford to live in Manchester, beyond subsistence living.

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

The whole western world is going to hell in a hand basket.

Soon living in Britain will be the same as living in Pakistan.

 

As for Thailand, better than living in Manchester.

Not that I could afford to live in Manchester, beyond subsistence living.

Brit were once run by the Italians for 500 years, the Normans took over G.B. a thousand years back, G.B. has had quite a few factions, the same as many other countries. If the USA didn't help out, you would be speaking German.

 

In our resent history, the governments of the day have changed G.B., they all laughed at Enoch Powell, but we all know now he was right....🥴

At least our royals pay tax now, and bring in millions of tourists, many countries still have royals, but tourists don't flock there, to see them or the palaces/castles...

They’ve always been a nuisance invading Ireland and Scotland and wales ,colonising countries all over the world and grabbing land where possible ,and bumping off opposition . Like a mafia really

Need?.......no, not really.

 

Want?.......many do, I think, in the same way they abdicate responsibility for their own lives to a God.

22 hours ago, georgegeorgia said:

Do we really need to pay these UK  Royal family to be the Royal family.

 

The hangers on ..the duke of Wellington etc getting paid to do what ?

 

It's time these people got a proper job 

What are the hangers on , the cousins etc getting paid for ?

The Duchess of York , just ridiculous 

 

Some Royal family came to Australia last week she didn't even attract a crowd ,no one cares yet she got her and her hangers on a free holiday hotel travel ...what a life !!

 

Hoping Australia calls for another referendum to get vote them OUT !

 

The hangers on ..the duke of Wellington etc getting paid to do what ?

 

It might be better to know a little bit about the subject before you start spouting off. The Duke of Wellington, like the other non royal 23 dukes in Britain absolutely nothing to do with the British Royal Family.

18 hours ago, Burma Bill said:

 

Do not have to. For example:- (Google)

 

The Duchy of Cornwall is a private estate established in 1337 to provide an income for the heir to the British throne. The current Duke of Cornwall, Prince William, uses the revenue to fund his public, private, and charitable activities and those of his family. The estate includes a wide range of land, from farms to residential and commercial properties, across 19 counties in England and Wales. 

 

The Duchy of Cornwall is worth around £1.3 billion ($1.5 billion), composed of a large portfolio of land, properties, and financial assets across the UK, primarily in the south-west. This private estate provides income to the Prince of Wales (currently Prince William) and includes holdings such as farmland, commercial real estate, and holiday rentals. 

 

There are also the Royal Estates of Windsor, Sandringham and Balmoral covering many thosands of acres of land. 

 

The Duchy of Lancaster provides a personal income for HM KIng Charles 111:-

 

The Duchy of Lancaster was valued at £647.6 million at the end of March 2024, with a net income of £27.4 million paid to the reigning sovereign for the 2023/24 financial year. It is an ancient private estate of land, property, and other investments that provides independent income for the monarch, rather than being funded by taxpayers. 

 

 

 

The British Monarchy is funded by the Sovereign Grant, which is itself funded by the Crown Estate.

 

Sovereign Grant:

 

Quote

 

The Sovereign Grant is an annual payment from the government to fund the official duties of the British Monarch and support the maintenance of the Royal Palaces. It is funded by the revenue from the Crown Estate, which is surrendered to the government in exchange for the grant. The grant covers the official household costs, such as receptions, and the expenses for official engagements and travel. 

 

How it works

• Funding source: The Sovereign Grant is based on a percentage of the Crown Estate's annual profits. The revenue from the Crown Estate is paid to the government, which then returns a portion to the Royal Household as the grant.
• Amount and increase: The grant amount is determined by the Crown Estate's profits. For 2025-26, it is £132.1 million, up from £86.3 million in 2024-25.
• Usage: The money is used to support the monarch's official duties and maintain the occupied Royal Palaces.
• What it does not cover: The Sovereign Grant does not provide a personal allowance or income to any member of the Royal Family. It also does not include certain other costs, such as the cost of security, which is not itemized. 

 

 

 

Crown Estate

 

Historically, Crown Estate properties were administered by the reigning monarch to help fund the business of governing the country. In 1760, George III surrendered control over the estate's revenues to the Treasury,[6] thus relieving him of the responsibility of paying for the costs of the civil service, defence costs, the national debt, and his own personal debts. In return, he received an annual grant known as the Civil List*.

*The Civil List was replaced by the Sovereign Grant in 2011.

 

Crown Estate Income: The Crown Estate's net income is paid to HM Treasury (the government). For 2023, this was £1.1 billion in profit, with 88% going to the Treasury and 12% going to the monarch.

 

Ergo, the British Monarchy has given up its income in return for funding from the government.

The Royal Family's Pedophile Problem

https://corbettreport.substack.com/p/the-royal-familys-pedophile-problem

 

7 hours ago, brian69 said:

At least our royals pay tax now, and bring in millions of tourists, many countries still have royals, but tourists don't flock there, to see them or the palaces/castles...

they do when they come here by all accounts

10 hours ago, Peter Crow said:

Farage.

Well I doubt it , he is not Australian , although I can understand them wanting to show there respect for him for his endeavours in their motherland, 

11 hours ago, Burma Bill said:

  With respect - what a load of rubbish!

 

For reference re: Pakistan, currently a member of the British Commonwealth of which King Charles 111 is the Head! (Google)

 

Yes, Pakistan is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, having joined in 1947. It left the organization in 1972 but rejoined in 1989. 

• Initial Membership: Pakistan joined the British Commonwealth (now known as the Commonwealth of Nations) in 1947, shortly after gaining independence.
• Withdrawal: It withdrew from the Commonwealth in 1972, in protest of the support for East Pakistan's secession and the creation of Bangladesh.
• Rejoining: Pakistan officially rejoined the Commonwealth in 1989.
• Suspension: Pakistan was suspended from the Commonwealth from 1999 to 2008 due to political instability, but its membership was restored in 2008. 

 

 

oh my god , how on earth was that allowed to happen? somebody should be sacked.  Does this , as I suspect , have "financial implications"  I mean are we actually sending them money, ?   The UK ,,"redefining pathetic stupidity"

13 hours ago, transam said:

Not really, don't apes have a leader, I was under the impression that there has always been a leader, whether in a tribe, encampment or even a herd of something.

 

Didn't the USA once have Chiefs, before they were dealt with, who controlled an area, same as the UK for many a century has had King's, the Romans too had their head honcho's.....🤗

 

Yes they do - like a C-in-C - Commander in Chimp 🦍

Well if a majority of the Brits are foolish enough to accept it...

10 hours ago, 3NUMBAS said:

They’ve always been a nuisance invading Ireland and Scotland and wales ,colonising countries all over the world and grabbing land where possible ,and bumping off opposition . Like a mafia really

Hypocrisy from the English isnt it when they protest against Israel, but invaded Northern Ireland themselves ,why not hand it back ?

On 12/3/2025 at 3:38 AM, georgegeorgia said:

Hopefully the PM of Australia will have a referendum like some radio announcers are calling for .

Australia needs to be a Republic,

Why?

On 12/2/2025 at 8:20 PM, georgegeorgia said:

Do we really need to pay these UK  Royal family to be the Royal family.

 

The hangers on ..the duke of Wellington etc getting paid to do what ?

 

It's time these people got a proper job 

What are the hangers on , the cousins etc getting paid for ?

The Duchess of York , just ridiculous 

 

Some Royal family came to Australia last week she didn't even attract a crowd ,no one cares yet she got her and her hangers on a free holiday hotel travel ...what a life !!

 

Hoping Australia calls for another referendum to get vote them OUT !

We dumped them in 1776.

31 minutes ago, connda said:

We dumped them in 1776.

 

...and replaced them with a presidency more powerful than any constitutional monarchy, in 2025

5 minutes ago, samtam said:

 

...and replaced them with a presidency more powerful than any constitutional monarchy, in 2025

 

How's that working out for you?

35 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

 

How's that working out for you?

 

...how's that working out for them...

(I'm not American.)

On 12/3/2025 at 10:29 AM, JAG said:

Personally I would call for a referendum on whether one needs more whinging janitors, but then I am not an Australian!

Good one

11 hours ago, Sigmund said:

Well if a majority of the Brits are foolish enough to accept it...

Foolish to accept our history, why is that, the USA accepts Trump, which is very funny indeed......................😆

On 12/3/2025 at 9:05 AM, Summerinsiam said:

No, we don't need them. Long live the republic!

So you didn't move to Thailand then.................?    

2 hours ago, samtam said:

 

...how's that working out for them...

(I'm not American.)

 

Ok then