Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Whether you do or not is really a matter of semantics, but I certainly didn't "mean" only that income - I meant the whole range of her private income, which includes money from estates (whether including the Duchy of Lancaster or not), her investment portfolio and all that nonsense.
    The "private" income she makes from the royal duchies is over £15m a year, this allows her to live a life of luxury without dipping into her own pockets. This income is no different to the crown estate income in the sense that it belongs to the sovereign and not the Windsor family.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MostUncivilised)
    Her earnings? That can only said to be the case if she takes back responsibility for paying the salaries of judges and the armed forces that George III surrendered in 1760.

    If you were to take those costs against the earnings of the crown estate since 1760 (particularly considering the costs of the armed forces during the World Wars), the Royal Family would be so indebted to parliament they would go bankrupt.

    Edit: Or if we're to be fair, maybe the Queen should just take responsibility for 15% of the salaries of judges and the armed forces. Do you think the royal finances could bear that? Or could it fairly be said to be a complete farce to claim that the crown estate is the property of the Queen without applying the same historical financial responsibilities of the crown?
    The government absorbed the costs of the military after the Glorious Revolution, long before the civil list was introduced.
    Your logic is a bit silly anyway because as Parliament came to pay for everything they also took over responsibilty for taxation, so it was swings and roundabouts really. If you want the Crown to start paying for everything again you also have to give them back the right to levy their own taxes.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveSmith99)
    The "private" income she makes from the royal duchies is over £15m a year, this allows her to live a life of luxury without dipping into her own pockets. This income is no different to the crown estate income in the sense that it belongs to the sovereign and not the Windsor family.
    Well, thank you. You seem to have had a prepared response for an answer to the question you asked me, and when I failed to give the desired answer, decided to trot your rebuttal out anyway.

    You appear to be (somewhat cack-handedly by bringing up the "Windsor family", which is of course not a recognised legal entity) trying to emphasise the division between the personal property of the Person of the Sovereign and the property adhering to the style or title of the Sovereign.

    Whilst in an extremely unusual constitutional circumstance, the courts may essentially have to invent rules of this nature, they do not exist at present in the form you suggest. These legal concepts are not truly separate , they are - and always have been - merged and entangled. The Duchy of Lancaster is, of course, different to the Crown Estate precisely because it is treated differently - something you clearly have a political, rather than legal, objection to.

    Whilst this may not satisfy the aspirant pedant or the lover of clean legal concepts, it will likely continue to be the case for so long as we have a monarchy. Why? Because it is a problem to which it is not worth the effort of determining an answer. That's why I ignored this aspect when you asked me that last question.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Well, thank you. You seem to have had a prepared response for an answer to the question you asked me, and when I failed to give the desired answer, decided to trot your rebuttal out anyway.

    You appear to be (somewhat cack-handedly by bringing up the "Windsor family", which is of course not a recognised legal entity) trying to emphasise the division between the personal property of the Person of the Sovereign and the property adhering to the style or title of the Sovereign.

    Whilst in an extremely unusual constitutional circumstance, the courts may essentially have to invent rules of this nature, they do not exist at present in the form you suggest. These legal concepts are not truly separate , they are - and always have been - merged and entangled. The Duchy of Lancaster is, of course, different to the Crown Estate precisely because it is treated differently - something you clearly have a political, rather than legal, objection to.

    Whilst this may not satisfy the aspirant pedant or the lover of clean legal concepts, it will likely continue to be the case for so long as we have a monarchy. Why? Because it is a problem to which it is not worth the effort of determining an answer. That's why I ignored this aspect when you asked me that last question.
    Well that because I thought your answer was a little bit daft. There is a difference between the personal property of the Windsor family and the property of the sovereign; Buckingham palace is the property of the sovereign, Balmoral is the property of the Windsor family because it was purchased by Prince Albert, The Crown Jewels are the property of the sovereign, Sandringham is the property of the Windsor family because it was purchased by Queen Victoria. Any income her family makes on things like Balmoral and Sandringham is fair enough, it should be classed as private income. If her family were no longer in power then they would still receive this income, if they were no longer in power then they would not continue to receive the money of those who die without wills in cornwall, or other money that goes into the privy purse.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.