Would that involve giving them back all their property?
At this point, the UK's relationship with the monarchy is like the USA's relationship with the Indians.
We both know we stole all their land and have no intention of giving it back, so we'll keep supporting them as long as they dance nice for the tourists.
Not actually privatise the monarchy, but Kings and Queens should be allowed to reign until they reach a fixed age e.g circa 60
If anything they are already privatised the royal family is a business and its members earn their money from their estates Charles certainly does .
The only reason the taxpayer coughs up is for the buildings and staff as they (not the staff ) belong to the British people but Sandrigham and the estates in Scotland are owned by the royal family and the taxpayer does not contribute to their upkeep.
No. I'd rather pay more tax and keep the Monarchy.
Also, how do you privatise part of the government?
No, though they need to adapt. The queen works very hard and I respect her. I'm not a fanatical monarchist but there are legitimate reasons for having them. I'd sooner trust the queen than a lot of the politicians.
Dunno about the younger royals or how they will turn out - I would HATE to be a major royal would prefer being ordinary.
We cant just still be sitting here spouting tourism when the tenth most popular tourist attraction in the Uk is buckingham palace anyway , people come to the UK to visit family see the lake district or go to wales or scotland
Not one of the royals earn their money , not one of them have helped the poor in this country , not one would visit a homeless hostel or a food bank , why should we care about them , they do not give two flying hoots about us , they never have and never will
No how on earth do you expect to privatise a family even the royal Family.
Also I presume you don't know that they tribute far more to the exchequer than they receive.
