KING Charles’s estate has announced it will transfer more than £100 million into ethical investment funds following backlash when it was revealed his estate was “collecting money from the dead”.
An investigation by The Guardian revealed the monarch was using the feudal concept of “bona vacantia” to hoover up the estates of people who died without a will or next of kin.
It found the funds had been used to renovate properties owned by the King, with the Duchy of Lancaster admitting it was used to finance the restoration of what it calls “public and historic properties”.
However, a spokesperson for the Duchy told The Guardian on Friday: “In line with the King’s longstanding support of ethical investing, the Duchy of Lancaster has begun the process of transferring its investment portfolio into ESG (ethical, social or environmental) funds.
“This process is expected to be completed by the end of the financial year.”
The statement came after the Duchy initially declined to tell The Guardian whether the charities it gave money to - Duchy of Lancaster Benevolent Fund and the Duchy of Lancaster Jubilee Trust - had invested in oil, gas, tobacco, weapons or mining companies.
READ MORE: Four SNP seats on General Election most marginal list, research finds
However, the newspaper also reported there has been no suggestion from the estate that it plans to cease collecting bona vacantia funds.
The shift in investment will bring the Duchy of Lancaster’s policy into line with that of the Duchy of Cornwall – another royal estate that receives bona vacantia funds – which has an ethical investment policy.
Charles previously owned and closely managed the Duchy of Cornwall, which raises profits for the heir to the throne.
When Charles (below) became King, it was inherited by his son Prince William.
The accounts for the Duchy of Cornwall state: “The fund is entirely invested in the Newton SRI Fund for Charities, a global and diversified portfolio of equities and fixed interest securities with particular emphasis on environmental, social and governance considerations, screened against negative socially responsible investment criteria.”
Reacting to the latest news on Twitter/X, anti-monarchy campaign group Republic said: “An admission of unethical investments, but they will still be investing money taken from the dead.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel