I suggest a campaign about ...

Stop the royal family being exempt from the freedom of information act.

329 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Bill BakerBill Baker shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    133 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Mark JohnsonMark Johnson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I would like 38 Degrees to campaign on our behalf to reduce the privileges enjoyed by The Duchy of Cornwall. Read the two following news articles and you will see that as income from the Duchy increases, so does our funding, and Prince Charles thumbs his nose at us by intervening in the democratic process with impunity. Extraordinary that Britain considers itself a modern democracy and criticizes countries like Zimbabwe for corruption!

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18645331

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/9567188/Cabinet-must-release-guidance-on-Prince-of-Wales-intervention-say-legal-experts.html

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        agree, the royals have too many privileges and living on our expense while the country is struggling to survive, it is time this has to change

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        C- guessing you have trouble with basic things so I will spell this out simply for you. Just because some of the Americans like the Royals does not necessarily mean they like or dislike Britain. There has always been issue like this between Britain and America, nothing new really (regarding the link you linked me). If the EU decided to do that they impose regulation of the EU itself there is not much they can do to London. Also I do not think I know more then Diane , she does have a name. I was showing her that the Royals are liked by a lot of people. Clearly you do not know the EU scene , as none of us can become a super power, only united we can. Currently Germany has the biggest economy in the EU then France and Britain fight for 2nd and 3rd year after year. Your post is very hard to understand, but just because the USA has the biggest dept in the world does not mean, they are not a leading economic power, or that Britain which is currently 6/7th in the world. Also the UK dept is not the highest in the EU either. You also forget the UK is part of the EU. Also Royal family not German or free loaders , leprechaun do not come from the UK. Also other EU countries have Royals and our are popular within the EU to. Finally I am a history student so understand the modern world is very easy to do, clearly I do so more. then you. ps tech Germany has more dept then the UK.

      • C.C. commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        The Brit knows better what the Americans do and think than an American herself. So much hypocrisy. I think that is a valid argument. Definitely people are more likely to watch free things on TV, it’s common sense. From this veranlassung, your country UK is filled with free loaders, starting with the royals, eh? Yes, let people pay to watch them, like any Hollywood movie, and let's count the sales. It is a great argument, Diane! A monarchist’s mindset could hardly understand beyond 12th century’s killed pigs smoke. And you are talking about the US’ economic crisis? Guess it’s a joke , when your country has the highest debt in the whole Europe and is definitely not numbered among the next economic powers of the world. To say more, bank after bank sink in fraudulent transactions. Both EU and US set up new regulations which I find hard for these financial institutions to pass without giving up thievery. With people thinking like you, we all end up in poverty feeding ourselves with big illusions! And maybe the Germans will bring back some royals too to help us with our economy and give us some national pride. Now, this arrogant Brit below will say he knows better what the Germans or the rest of Europe think about his royals too ha ha! What a visionary you are, not far from the nose of a leprechaun!

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Diane- ahaha I am sure more than half the population of the USA know who the royals are and where the UK. None of us actually believe everyone is the USA loves the royals, but we know a lot do because a lot come over to this country and a lot fill the streets when the Royals go over to America. Look at Prince Williams tours. Do you know, that is the worst argument I have heard, even with it being free, people can choice not to watch the events on TV, and they are not forced to watch it. Plus even if people think they are celebs with titles so what, still makes them popular. Just because something is popular does not mean you should/would make money of it. Well, ABC,CNN, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, Fox, and CTV all covered the Royal wedding. So yes all small channels lol Really? There was an average audience of 22 million American viewers watching the Royal wedding with over 60 million watching some part of the wedding. With over 100 million from China alone, so tell me which other celebs draw this much attention? Also they would not be known if it was not for the fact they are the British Royal family, so here is your proof. Yes, because you watch something because you are not a fan, do not make me laugh and stop living in a dream world. People moving to the USA has nothing to do with not wanting a monarchy in the most part. My friend has marriaged an American but she is moving out to the USA and not because we have a monarchy. Most people go because of economic reasons and weather. No one thinks the UK is perfect so people will want to always live, here. “Kings and queens are only in monarchies, they can't be in a country like min” typical no shit, a country with monarchies can only have kings and Queen. However some believe the head of state of America is like a monarch without the title.

      • Diane PettersonDiane Petterson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Free info for "anonymous"...you have to teach at least half of the US who the British Royals are and where the UK is on the map. Just the American ignorance....sniff sniff . The British ignorance, on the other side, is to believe Americans love the royals, when the house actually pays for heavy publicity to create the "popularity" illusion. The other vast majority of the Americans thinks they are celebrities with cool titles, who make people in their country believe in fairy tales, as Hollywood does it too with many occasions. Have you ever asked yourself , if any royal related event wouldn't be free to watch on my country's territory on certain TV channels (mainly ABC, the decadent CNN lately, or some other low rated US channels), how many Americans or others in the world would pay for viewing? For example, put it on the big screens, in cinemas, and watch the sales worldwide! If there would be huge sales, then that is another argument for the fact they would be equally liked as any other VIP. In the end, there is no way you can prove they would be popular solely because they are the British royal family more than any other celebrity outthere. Of course, there is a small percent of Americans who knows what they are and they can relate them to the history of the world, but they usually have some connection or another with Britain (academics, business, politicians, tourists etc), but that doesn't makes them fans. (oh,and plenty of British living in the US- yes, they left the UK! and now they play the British patriots, mainly to meet the American expectations of mother country lovers). But, if you want to believe the popularity myth by any means, in this case that's only your personal problem. Kings and queens are only in monarchies, they can't be in a country like mine,

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Richard- or is the fact that they produce document ever year showing Royal spending, when they do not need to under law, shows us that they are protecting themselves from people who want to know every little detail just to be noise and twist is against them? After all none of us on here are subject to freedom of information act, and we could be getting are living from the taxpayer.

        Bob- Case and point you can not, other wise you would have come back with something better then that.

      • BobBob commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Oh so it is you Adam? Yes, I can do a lot better but just for an instant I let myself sink to your level.

      • RichardRichard commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        The question that needs to be asked is, as the ancient Romans used to say, 'cui bono', or in English, 'who benefits'. The only people who benefit from the present exemption are those with something to hide.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Bob- best you can do? clearly cannot prove me wrong! Boom Boom! ps you need to do research it pays off.

        Pval- look whos talking!

      • BobBob commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Get back to your studies Adam, you badly need to judging by your posts.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Diane . If you read the post right, you would see that that was no hint or mention of USA republicanism. So why this line? trying to "get one over"?. Yes the USA did get rid of monarchy, but a lot of Americans love the Royals.

        The fact that they are liked by millions counters what you said about the UK being a laughing stock which is simple not true. Like the fact that they are more then celebrities and people know that. As if they where only a celebrity image, there would not be so much of a republican movement in the UK.

        You did, as a lot "No head of state in a democratic country is exempted from FoI" as I belive other monarchies are not subject to there acts in there countries.

        Misbehavior is not disclosed by the acted.

        Every head of state is exempt from FOI for private affairs, it is no different for a monarchy. The Royal household does not full under the cretia in the act, regardless of whether the Queen is head of state. Like I said they do release information that we can all see. How is it a contradiction? They only people moaning about it is republicans why? because they want to be noise. Simple. Respect has nothing to do with it.

      • Diane PettersonDiane Petterson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        It seems you confound USA Republicans with the British ones. No similarities there. We got rid of monarchy long time ago. As far as millions watching them, that is a cheap argument, making them one of the thousands of other celebrities, which is what they are in the present times from a public point of view. Still not gaining respect for that. Of course republics are not only the democratic countries, who said otherwise?
        Misbehavior is not covered on the act, but it can be disclosed thanks to it.
        The queen being exempted from FoI as a private person while she is the head of state in the same time makes a huge contradiction. Only in Britain! No respect.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Diane- I did not say that no public body is covered by FoI. I said they, meaning the Royals are not covered by FOI. Why? they are not a public body. Also not every democratic country's Head of state is cover by FOI. You need to stop making out that republics are only the democratic countries, they are not.

        NHS and armed focres and losing jobs have nothing to do with FOI. Misbehaviour is not covered on the act. It seems you do not know what the FOI is here in the UK.

        The Queen is exempted because she is a person and sovereignty not a public body or a government body. The Royal household, deals with both the private and public income of the Queen etc therefore it is not as straight forward as being open to the act. Sadly republicans are trying to be noise about the royal family. Besides, royal accounts of public money are available online for us to read.

        Funny thing is not becoming a joke for the rest of the world. Seeming millions and millions watch royal events all over the world, and turn out to watch the events or royal tours. I would suggest you look into the wealth of the royals and then look at people from the USA they have the same sort of income from estates.

        You talk of respect, yet you do not know the meaning of it. Oh and funny thing is the only people who do not respect them are republicans like you, I wonder why.

        Research is a good thing. Do it.

      • Diane PettersonDiane Petterson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        When you write that no pubic body is covered by the FoI, I do not think you refer to your head of state. No head of state in a democratic country is exempted from FoI. NHS? armed forces? if they misbehave they might lose their job. Why is your head of state exempted from FoI? UK becomes more and more of a joke with this royal family you call "rich". Why are they rich? They don't enter the free markets competition because of the crony government protection in the name of 'national heritage' with, perhaps, a bunch of delusional people's consent. It's hard to get some respect this way!

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        They are not a public body that is why they are not covered by the freedom of information act. It is time people learned what the act is in place to do. Only republicans and noise people want them cover by the Freedom of information, due to wanting to know ever little detail of there lifes. It has to be point out that none of you are cover by the act nor are the millions of other families that work for the public. The NHS and armed forces emplees do not have to give the public accounts on what they spent there money on, yet it is "public" money that pays for them nor the people on benefits. The Royal accounts for the public money is made public every year. You lot can view them quite easily. Also the royals pay more then the average person in taxes and I dare say more then many on here put together for your whole life. You only moan about there wealth etc because you do not have it and if the royals were not around that wealth would not be going to you that is for sure. Get a life, there is more important things to worry about.

        Oh and btw Charles is not meddling in public policys at all only republicans thinks so. Which funny enough is a load of crap as we the "people" can lobby mps as well. Fun that. Also his he does not own all of Cornwall, and the veto has been known for years, and it does not matter either. As you do not know, if the veto would or has changed your life.

        Marcia Simpson-James - the royals are exempt from the freedom of information and have been for years and the public know about it. They are not a public body, you are not subject tothis act either.

        blue - what a load of rubbish sorry.

      • BobBob commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Well of course the FOI exemption is designed to hide things they, (royals and executive), would rather we, the people, were not party to. I think it's Charles none stop meddling in public policy decision making, with his 6 hand-written letters per day to ministers. Then there's his personal veto over any proposed legislation, and his mother's veto, that might affect his personal interests. Given that Charles permission has been sought 12 times since 2008 it would be interesting to know what objections, if any, he raised, and how were the 12 Bills amended to accommodate him.

      ← Previous 1 3 4 5 6 7

      Feedback and Knowledge Base