Sir Ralph

Why would a non political not for profit charity organisation raise these issues if they didn’t occur? What happens if there is truth in the allegations - is there a rerun? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yqpr28jrwo

You can question any theory, religious concept or political view without being shouted down for being xy or z. It completely misses the point and is very 2020 (in fact it quashes debate and deflects). One of the reasons Brexit happened was because the political elite ignored people’s concerns and labelled them. Those same people that bemoan Brexit (I didn’t vote for it) are repeating the same mistake and it will play out again at the next election. It will likely result in an election result that those same people will again bemoan.

It is getting worse in some areas, mainly more urban areas and it’s very dangerous. One theory is that some people could get elected through block voting by, put it this way, having policies which are less publicly available. If you have whole families being told to vote by certain leaders then that’s not democracy. Again if posters on here don’t think that happens in some areas it’s extremely naive. Whichever party you vote for people need to be aware of it as a possibility as most people don’t want it

If you don’t know the story of Tower Hamlets this is worth a read for starters. Why would the voters in a borough re-elect somebody who was done for electoral fraud and the government had to go in to run the council? Nothing to do with block voting whatsoever. I really can’t believe people don’t think this happens - it’s shows extreme naivety https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-61358043 In summary he has faced repeated controversy over electoral fraud and governance. In 2015, a High Court found him guilty of corrupt and illegal practices in the 2014 election—including vote-rigging and misuse of council grants—voided the result, and banned him from office for five years. Despite this, he was re-elected in 2022 in the same borough. Fresh concerns emerged in 2024–2025, with government inspectors and later ministerial envoys sent in over financial mismanagement, senior appointments, weak oversight, and decision-making dominated by a close inner circle. He denies wrongdoing, calling the allegations politically or racially motivated.

Block voting by certain groups is happening across the country in specific areas. I have to deal with local politics now and again and the election is May will start to show this. It’s very very very naive to say this isn’t happening. Some elected politicians will be elected on the Gaza issue and other parties will be dependent on the vote of that group that they move to appease a group of people in order to get voted in. Those people then have a strong foothold in the decision making of those areas. Goodness knows what policy agreements those parties have with those groups of people. I think people need to wake up to that because it is happening.

Overrated show pony

There aren’t words….. Putin and Polanski would be like a mentally challenged snail negotiating with a lion

Probably yes but I think you should factor in that those countries have lost their royal families and therefore the rarity of major royal families in existence makes the UK more attractive to tourists. It may not appeal to you but to countries with a lack of such heritage (eg the US, ozzies, Canadians, South Americans, etc) this is more appealing

Thanks

You are entitled to your own opinion but I think you’re wrong on many counts and get angry when people disagree with you. When you get abusive and childish I say “cheerio”. I quote multiple more sources and articles you ever have so that is complete rubbish. I don’t tend to make these accusations at other people, only you and for a reason.Best we ignore each others posts but I’ll let you have the last word….

You will note that whenever I make a comment you attack it personally rather than engaging with the key point. Just now is a great example. Didn’t engage the point but attacked me. Look at the discussion with others just now, no abuse just different views. To my own shame I often then follow you down the childish route. If you just stick to the actual point being discussed rather than getting personal it would be better. Applies to both of us

Bloody hell we should frame this 🤣

Not really though. Odd typo from a company I am working with, which I corrected - Veritas and this. You seem more intent on picking up minor comments from me rather than engaging in any point raised. Some would call this childish. You don’t like me and I don’t like you but address substantive points.

Yep I have this time. Oh well.

🤣

Probably needs William and Kate in charge - a break from the old. They will be seen as less associated with the Andrew stuff than Charles

We disagree on this point about the monarchy generally. Whilst you might not identify with the monarchy a large number of people associate the royal family with their British heritage and, whilst not perfect, have pride in it. Some of the biggest nation gathering events have been around the royal family and some countries would love to have such tradition. The only reason I can see you want to remove this heritage and historical institution isn’t because of any negative impact but a view that they aren’t democratically elected, albeit this view is theoretical anyway because the Royal Fmaily has no power We talked about the economic impact. There is a difference between complete speculation and estimations. The reports cannot be completely accurate as they estimate figures but it doesn’t mean those estimates aren’t broadly accurate . Yet to see evidence that they don’t have a notable positive impact on the economy from a non political source.

This is your perspective and here-say though. At least I’ve put some evidence from parties with no apparent agenda. People normally take views based on evidence and advice. Having lived abroad in a country that loved the royals with Americans who also loved the royals my perspective is different to yours.

Yes it’s not an exact science obviously but to discount it on the grounds of being pure speculation and made up would be inaccurate. I can’t see data evidence which says that the royal family has limited impact on tourism. These parties don’t appear to have an agenda so it is clear that even if they are wrong to some degree there is still a significant positive impact

Yes some would but not as many - cue the evidence provided by me above, not speculation. I assume you aren’t arguing that the numbers wouldn’t change and that the royal family doesn’t have economic value once you have reviewed the articles provided?

As equally right you were about the crown estate, you are incorrect on this. You honestly don’t think that tourists don’t come to the UK because of the Royal family? Evidence: https://bmpwealth.com/how-the-monarchy-helps-add-value-to-the-uk-economy/ https://www.regionalstudies.org/rsa-blog/blog-the-impact-of-the-uk-royal-family-on-tourism/#:~:text=Recent attempts to measure the,to be £1.766 billion.

I was wrong - you are correct

I’m off the Switzerland to use Dignitas. Put me down now

Your post wasn’t funny - you were making a poor point