The monarchy is in serious trouble – and will finish. This ‘grasping’ behavior could also be their downfall, predicts eminent royal professional A.N. WILSON

How safe is our monarchy? While the late Queen was alive, there was no doubt about the answer: the overwhelming majority of Britons believed the monarchy was the chief factor in our ‘Kingdom’ being ‘United’.

After all, we are a deeply divided country. Many Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish people resent the Westminster government as well as the London-based ethos and economic bias of our society.

But the King is a wonderful antidote to this. True, Buckingham Palace is in London, but the King is a Welsh speaker. His Prince’s Trust helped to revivify many deprived parts of Britain.

And his love of Scotland, the country where he went to school and keeps a house, Birkhall, on the Balmoral estate, is palpably obvious. No politician has such a range nor has met so many different sorts of people.

When we heard the choir’s hymn after the King laid a wreath at the Cenotaph this month, many of us must have felt the words, ‘Beneath the shadow of thy throne, thy saints have dwelt secure’, applied not just to our religious hopes but to our political views, too.

But now the opposite point of view is gathering strength. During the last Queen’s reign, Republicanism as a serious political discourse did not really exist. In the past few weeks, however, we have seen well-funded and well-organised expressions of Republicanism by clever people intent on abolishing the monarchy.

We should take them seriously for, in spite of the strengths of the monarchy, embodied in King Charles, the institution is not nearly as stable as my opening remarks might have implied.

Earlier this month, The Sunday Times and Channel 4’s Dispatches programme investigated the finances of the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster – which provide enormous personal and private income for the King and the Prince of Wales.

Channel 4’s Dispatches this month found that several beloved institutions are having to pay rent to the royal duchies, among them the NHS

Crowds line the Mall to celebrate King Charles’s birthday at Trooping the Colour in June

It found that several beloved institutions are having to pay rent to the royal duchies, among them the NHS. The health service is held to be sacred by many Britons – more so even than the Crown.

And yet it is being charged a large sum – £11.4million over 15 years, no less – to rent a warehouse for vital ambulances.

Despite being patronised by the King himself, the RNLI is also paying £600 a year to use duchy beaches for six of its lifeboat stations. And that’s to say nothing of the charities – including Macmillan, Comic Relief and Marie Curie – which paid prodigious rents to use an office block in London.

This is a huge conflict of interest which cannot easily be resolved and, unfortunately, is a problem of the Royal Family’s own making.

Back in 1837, politicians begged the young Queen Victoria not to pocket the enormous profits from the Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster but instead put them towards the public purse.

She refused and became the richest woman in the world thanks to the income she received from land including Liverpool Docks and the Yorkshire spa town of Harrogate. She went on to buy the Sandringham estate and build Balmoral Castle, firmly placing her and her family in the ranks of the super-rich. As Prince of Wales, Charles agreed to pay some tax on the duchies but he has always had a blind spot about the disastrous legacy left by Victoria.

During the Queen’s reign, AN WILSON writes, Republicanism as a serious political discourse did not really exist

Until her reign, the monarchs were dependent on Parliament for most of their money, which came through the Civil List. Although they dwelt in palaces and castles, these were no more truly their own than the Vatican is the private fiefdom of the Popes. Reforms introduced by Victoria, however, paved the way for the monarchy to hold on to private wealth.

It seems the King has doggedly continued to do this – and William shows no signs of being any different. This single fact makes them seem like little more than what they are (in a private capacity): not representatives of national unity but members of the super-rich club, along with big landowners and international billionaires.

These things really matter for those of us who treasure the monarchy and feel gratitude to those royals who have kept the show on the road.

Just last week, the campaign group Led By Donkeys (whose targets have included the Tory Party and Elon Musk) launched an online protest in response to the Dispatches investigation. After writing ‘Charles stop fleecing Britain’ in the sand on a beach in Cornwall, the group photographed them from the air and sent a picture of the slogan to countless phones.

This all happened at a time when Prince William, on a visit to Northern Ireland, found himself being heckled by crowds of pro-Palestinian demonstrators.

Aware that it would be a disaster if either he or the King waded into the inflammatory area of Middle Eastern politics, William has trodden a cautious line – professing deep sorrow for the plight of the refugees and civilian casualties in Gaza. But it is unthinkable that crowds of whatever political persuasion would have shouted at the late Queen, particularly in the ultra-loyalist Northern Ireland.

AN WILSON notes that, at present, the monarchy could be said to look strong. However, three of its key pillars – the King, Queen Camilla and the Princess of Wales – have all battled illness over the past year

She was held in such awe that when she bravely held out a hand to IRA officer Martin McGuinness, he smiled sheepishly and bowed as if he was a monarchist.

But, of course, the whole Republican cause in Northern Ireland is based on the idea that – north and south of the border – the monarchy will be sent packing.

The people of Wales, except for the most ardent cottage-burners and Free Wales Army members, warmed to Prince Charles when he tried to learn Welsh at Aberystwyth University. But William has made no such overtures to the principality and it is not hard to imagine Welsh Labour voters, as well as Plaid Cymru, becoming broadly Republican.

What of England? One of the things which made the monarch seem part of the English fabric was the Church, of which the King is Supreme Governor. The resignation in disgrace of the Archbishop of Canterbury has left the CofE in tatters and Prince William makes no secret of the fact that he is not especially religious.

Meanwhile, over in Westminster, Keir Starmer is abolishing the right of the few remaining hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords. Apart from the monarchy, there is no area of national or political life where the hereditary principle any longer seems to apply. In such a context, the Republican argument – that it is absurd for a head of state to be the product of an accident of birth – looks stronger than ever.

When the King and Queen Camilla went to Australia, they were booed in Parliament by a woman wanting more recognition of aboriginal rights. This sort of thing never happened when the late Queen was still alive.

So, we monarchists are feeling nervous. At present, yes, the monarchy could be said to look strong. Three of its key pillars, however – the King, Queen Camilla and the Princess of Wales – have all battled illness over the past year.

We cherish them, and wish them well. But… no one wants to write these words: imagine a Royal Family with Charles, Camilla and Kate removed from the scene. How strong would it all look then?