It’s no surprise that if you have money and at least a few connections, you can climb a lot of rungs in the ladder of British society. For example, I think this is what George and Amal Clooney did. While both George and Amal had their own connections, all it really took was George donating generously to the Prince’s Trust or some charity close to Prince Charles’ heart, and suddenly the Clooneys were given a lot of access to Charles. That’s how it works for most people who seek that kind of royal connection and are willing to pay for it. And then there are those people who pay for the introduction, basically. Apparently, the Duchess of Cornwall’s nephew is one of those middle-men who provides introductions for a price. Now that nephew, Ben Elliot, is being accused of selling access to his aunt and the Prince of Wales.
Ben Elliot, nephew of Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall and the chairman of the Tory party in the U.K., has been accused of running an “access capitalism” service, allegedly trading off his connection to his aunt’s husband, Prince Charles.
The U.K. Sunday Times reported that Mohamed Amersi, a telecom millionaire who paid £15,000 a year ($20,000) to be part of the elite sector of Elliot’s posh person’s concierge service Quintessentially, was flown to meet Charles in Scotland. Whether the prince, and would-be king, knew or realized that Elliot was arranging such meetings is unknown, as Charles declined to comment to the Sunday Times.
“Unless you have somebody like him who opens these doors for you, it’s not possible, it’s not so easy,” Amersi told The Sunday Times, adding, “I call it access capitalism. It’s the same point. You get access, you get invitations, you get privileged relationships if you are part of the set-up, and where you are financially making a contribution to be a part of that set up. Absolutely.”
Amersi next became a trustee of one of the prince’s charities and has since donated more than £1.2m ($1.7m) to them, the Sunday Times reported. Leaked emails, the paper said, showed that Elliot had written “Well done” to Amersi after his first donation. Amersi said the top-tier membership of Quintessentially meant he was “invited to be exposed to the establishment here, whether it is the royal establishment, Clarence House, St James’s Palace, Buckingham Palace, Dumfries House, whether it is the government and No 10 and other influential aspects of government.”
The Times reports: “Documents also suggest Elliot used his royal connections to bolster his political fundraising. In one email sent in 2015—four years before he became Conservative Party chairman—Elliot told Amersi that Charles ‘spoke highly of you,’ before requesting a donation to Zac Goldsmith, the Conservative minister and his close friend.”
The Times also quoted a whistleblower with insider knowledge of Quintessentially, who said Elliot’s royal ties were “explicitly used as both a sales and a retention tool. When trying to bring new clients on board or up-sell existing clients, Quintessentially will say: ‘Well, we can get tickets to Wimbledon, the day to day, bread and butter stuff.’ And then they will say: last year, for example, ‘We took some clients up to Dumfries House to have dinner with His Royal Highness’… so it is certainly used as a business tool.”
A friend of Elliot told The Sunday Times: “Ben Elliot does not ‘sell access’ to HRH the Prince of Wales or the royal family… Ben Elliot’s work as Conservative Party co-chair is entirely separate from his other interests. There is no conflict of interest.”
A spokesman for Elliot told The Sunday Times: “Mr. Elliot assisted Mr Amersi in meeting the Prince of Wales because he wanted to support the prince’s charitable work, and Mr Elliot is proud that led to large donations from Mr. Amersi to good causes. This was entirely about helping to raise money for charity. The Quintessentially Foundation is proud to support major charity fundraisers. Some of these charities have patrons from the royal family, like many charities across the country. “Mr. Elliot does not raise money from Quintessentially members in his role as Conservative Party chairman,” the spokesman added. ”
Mr. Elliot has helped raise more than £13 million for charities through the Quintessentially Foundation, which has supported more than 50 charities. He is proud of this work. He has also worked to support many other charities and good causes across the U.K.”
I mean… none of this is really shocking? I assumed that this is just how it works, not just in the UK but in most countries with a wealthy elite. The thing that surprises me is that Ben Elliot sounds like he was actually good at his job. He was good at parlaying his Tory contacts, rich clients and royal connections to fundraise and provide introductions to people who were perfectly willing to pay for that kind of access. And I mean… does anyone think that people would donate millions to the Prince’s Trust if they were not getting access to Charles in some way? I can’t believe I’m defending Ben Elliott, but he sounds like any other well-connected lobbyist and fundraiser. Now, we can totally debate whether the system is broken! It absolutely is. But Elliott sounds like he’s just good at exploiting a system which already thrives on exploitation.
Exclusive: £15k a year which includes access to Prince Charles
The Tory chairman, who is also a nephew of the future king, has profited from his ties to the prince, a major party donor has claimed.https://t.co/LHe9kK0rZn
— The Sunday Times (@thesundaytimes) July 31, 2021
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.
😁🤭 What is done in the darkness, always come to light. Who knew Heir Force 1 was such a cheap date? Just 15K?? Handsy Andy charged 500K, Prince Rent a Kent charged 200k, Heir Force 2 and Mumbles charged 32K for their respective services.
Its been such a rough weekend for the Royals left in Blighty, everybody was catching Ls 😅
Catching L’s 😂😂😂
News You Can’t Use or Fun Fact:
Ben Elliot is married to Mary-Clare Winwood, US-born daughter of the musician Steve Winwood.
Wonder if this gives if contacts in the US?????? IMAO, most people would rather meet Steve Winwood than Heir Force 1 or PWT!
Isn’t this the same thing that Fergie got busted for? How is this different?
They are all at it. Some are just a lot cheap than others and more protected by The Powers That Be.
She was female and got caught.It’s the old boy club.It’s like poker, men don’t let women in the game. Andrew did this too
Fergie was simply lining her own/Andrew’s pockets. Elliot gave $13 million to charity. Like, he probably gave just as much to his own pockets, but cash for access never sounds as bad as when there is a charity involved. William got a lot of crap for a charity dinner where the biggest donors got to sit next to him, but many people pushed back because it was such a good way to raise money for charity. I’m not sure he’s done that since though. Charles does this kind of thing quietly regularly for his various charitable endeavors, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he made Elliot donate a certain amount in order to allow him to sell access to him to others.
They are undermining democracy and this way they are killing the opportunities of people who can’t afford this kind of “service”. People should be way more angry about this as this is how the people have to accept high prices for bad services. Or does anbody think that these “services” don’t pay back by increasing the profits of the “donor”? These are businessmen who pay for these “services” and they wouldn’t do it if there was no money in it. Government contracts for example. and the taxpayer is footing the bill in the end. Be angry! And make good use of your right to vote!
Sounds just like what Freeloader did, when she tried selling access to Pedo for £50K, and the Duke of Kent (?) or was it Glouchester (?) (one of TQ’s cousins…they all look like the Russian Tsar) tried to sell access to TQ TO Russians. Apparently it’s a lucrative business.
And if you think *none* of those donations don’t find their way into private pockets, as well as the charities, well… I have the deed for London Bridge to sell you!
Didn’t Sophie ALSO get busted for this? They are all such grifters covering it up in stolen jewels and privilege. It’s so ridiculous.
And now we know why those picks of Jack were leaked!! Anytime negative stories about Chuck and Camilla pop up … under the bus someone must go
That’s exactly what I was thinking!
Agreed, I commented on that story earlier saying it was part of something nefarious behind the scenes and here we are. Bring on the distractions.
i don’t think these things are always so conspiratorial … no leaks, no throwing under the bus … sometimes the timing just happens to be *chef’s kiss*
In all fairness, the Jack story was irresistible. Photos even!
royal access seems pretty cheap
So let me get this straight, the UK press has no problem exposing shady practices surrounding charles & Camilla, exposing highly unfavorable tapes of Sophie wessex or write mockingly about Edward, and make up nonsense where the sussexes are concerned.
But they can’t expose whatever it is they have on william? That deal he has with them must be mighty
Well, someone has to leak the stories.
Charles is crown prince. William comes after him. Its just wild to me that william can comfortably leak about his own father who is higher up then him and quite literally the next king. What kind off deal does he have with the tabloids because im pretty sure that if charles leaked some juicy info about william the tabloids would still not write about it or it would be an extremely watered down version of it.
I really don’t understand how William became untouchable either and that fool has more to hide than everyone else going by all of the deleted tweets from reporters. Will Jung Un will be king regardless so why can’t he be dragged every once in while? It makes no sense.
I’m developing such a conspiracy theory around this but the only thing that makes sense to me is that whatever they know about William is actually very damaging to the monarchy. Like they’re afraid it would jumpstart the republican movement in the UK or something.
OR whatever they know about him would be very hurtful to the Queen so when reporters say things like “can’t wait to be able to report on William” what they really mean is “when the queen dies we can report on it.” Like no one wants to be the one to ruin the queen’s final years because they put out the story about her grandson and drugs or affairs or whatever.
@becks1: i just (sort off) said the same thing. But i think the queen herself got involved to protect william. Because whatever mess he got himself i to must be so bad she thought it would ruin the monarchy. Let’s be honest, the queen is the reason these tabloids aren’t writing about andrew. So maybe she’s also the reason they’re not willing to write about whatever it is that they know about william.
This is the very curious part. It seems the press all know about many William stories that they “can’t” report…yet. But that dam is going to break at some point.
Is it ever? At this point im truly skeptical. Seems like they would rather throw everybody, including the corgis under the bus than reveal whatever it is they have on william. And as long as meghan and harry are breathing and continue to do their thing the press is never going to run out of things to write about.
@Pao, Well, I don’t know if it will for sure, obviously. But it really seems like the press are not thrilled to be sitting on juicy stories. And the plan was never for Harry & Meghan to get more control over their own narrative. So it feels currently like the deal is to foment outrage about H&M on occasion but increasingly to throw the rest of the family (Charles & Camilla, Jack & Eugenie at the moment) under the bus. Once the Cambridge kids are a little older, they’ll be fodder, too.
I think there’s a tight pact to protect William & the Middletons (I still don’t really get why). Once one side turns against the other–and I think they will–I bet the reporters will start spilling tea.
At this point i feel like the queen herself is involved to protect william from whatever mess he caused. Maybe SHE is the one that made a pact with the press in order to safe williams ass. Whatever the media might think of other royal family members they have reverence for the queen and the institution she represents.
If that is the case then whatever they are hiding on williams behalf must be so bad that the queen thought it could put the future of the monarchy in jeopardy.
There has to be a super injunction in place because there is no way the press would keep quiet voluntarily. And one of the terms of the super injunction is that the UK press can’t even talk about it existing. Some international media should maybe investigate and expose that because it’s how the Beckham super injunction got mentioned.
It seems extreme for a super injunction to go in place just for an affair, so it would have to be something more damaging, like an illegitimate child, or maybe that talk about William being compromised by Russians is what this is about.
The media gladly reported on Charles having an affair once it became too obvious things were going sideways. So they have to have more than this on William because his father is more powerful than he is.
Nic919: i think it might be a criminal offense. Like what william did could land him in prison. Money laundering or a Ponzi scheme or something else all in disguise of “charity”. Or maybe he stole from charities.
The monarchy would survive an affair. Especially if they had been nice to meghan and harry. And i also think that the monarchy is solid enough to welcome a illegitimate child.
@Pao.. the Queen may be involved. From a strtegic standpoint,Charles’s age means he wont rule very long so protecting William increasesthe odd of RF longevity, at least theoretcally.
I think they can write what they have on W if they want to but then they will lose access to reporting on their appearances, tours, children ect the palace will no longer invite them.
Or what Becks said makes sense if what they have on W is too damaging to the monarchy the tabloids don’t want to take the monarchy down since they are making money off them..
I honestly don’t think that they are too worried about acces because
1 the Cambridges aren’t that interesting and don’t pull a big reading audience
2. They were quite content writing negative about the Cambridges before meghan arrived on the scene. And guess what? They were still being wined and dined, they were still invited on royal tours, and they were still invited on royal engagements.
William is a Tory, just like the owners of the newspapers. Charles is also a Tory, but he’s a little green-y and mystical, which they despise. They probably think it will be easier to control William too, because he only cares about himself.
Agreed. This is how large charitable donations are handled. People give to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC with the expectation that they’ll be invited to certain galas and get their names on the NYTimes’s society pages. Folks give big bucks to the Catholic Church with the expectation that they’ll get to meet bishops and cardinals. And while I love Harry and Meghan, I have to believe that Harry was given a job in tech for the social cachet and public prominence he brings — not because he’s become a tech whiz kid since leaving the UK. He’s smart and he works hard, and I’m sure the company he now works for is delighted to have him, but he got the job because he did something similar to what Camilla’s nephew did — although in fairness, he’s offering access to himself, and no one else.
The one aspect of this that gives me pause is the political fundraising. In the above examples, and in the case of the donations to Chucky’s charities and causes, the quid pro quo is access to the royals and social standing. What was promised this Amersi dude in exchange for donations to the Tories?
Nice try dragging the Sussexes name into into this. When Harry was hired, there was a big press announcement. There is a reason why this was done on the QT. That’s how influence peddling works.
But the purpose is the same, even if the execution varies. Please understand — I adore the Sussexes, and I’m a big admirer of everything they do to make the world a better place. But they ARE using their position and visibility to accomplish their goals, and the organizations with which they work are also using the Sussexes’ position and visibility to accomplish their goals (and power to them both). The difference here is that Amersi is purchasing someone else’s position and visibility for his own uses — which is why I’m far more concerned about his donations to Tories.
@booboocita
No, the purposes are not the same. In the Elliot situation, the object was to exert influence without appearing to do so. In Harry’s, everything is out in the open. You’re glossing over the coverup as if it means nothing. But the coverup makes it a crime.
Harry has no political influence to sell, according to Salty White Island, his own family, and the British media.
This seems slightly different though. Like why didn’t this guy just donate a bunch of money directly to the prince’s trust with the hopes of being invited to galas or whatever else that Charles would be at. This sounds like he pays a large fee to Camilla’s nephew to be connected with famous or powerful people, including Charles, and then after he met Charles, he decided to donate. That’s different than what happens when people donate directly to the MET, or directly donate to a royal’s patronage or charitable trust, or even people wanting to do work with the businesses that Harry is a part of so that they might meet Harry. This very much seems like this guy runs a business where he makes money for himself by introducing people to other people: you pay a fee to thus guy to meet people one on one in a more private setting and get a conversation with them, and then maybe if you like the person you met and they like you and you can help each other out, you donate to their charity or political campaign (presumably to prolong your access to them and get favors). It’s different than when someone donates directly to a charity to meet a famous patron, because with that all the money goes to charity. With this, a lot of money just goes to Camilla’s nephew’s bank account.
This is nowhere near the same as Harry’s position at Betterup. People are paying Ben Elliott for access to Charles, so Charles can use his position as future king of England to get something done. Most likely in regards to laws as we now know that Chuckles and even the queen can influence policies. And let’s not even pretend that those laws that the queen and King Tampon are involved in are only in relation to themselves. I’m certain that they aren’t the only ones who benefit.
Yeah if he has the money to throw around, why not donate directly and get a meeting that way? But I guess the point of this company is that you don’t have to just throw around millions to get access, you can get the access up front.
I did not know that Camilla’s nephew was the head of the tory party.
Technically, he’s also Charles nephew, by marriage.
Thank you for explaining it so clearly Amy Bee. And its funny that someone who “adores the Sussexes” is quick to try and link their name with this, instead of oh lets say Jack Brooksbank’s name or Beatrice’s name and how they got their cushy “jobs”. But even those are not the same as this. Camilla’s nephew is pocketing the money in exchange for introductions, that’s what makes it scandalous.
The firm Harry is working for is selling an actual service not just the chance to meet Harry. Get real.
I think you explained it well, Booboocita. But the difference lies in, as you say, that Harry is only trading on himself whereas this nephew (and the Queen’s relations and Andrew) were selling access… not quite sure what for though since it seems the Queen only changes things to suit herself. Like in America people buy access to politicians to try and change policies to suit themselves (or, in the case of the GOP, just buy the politician outright so they do whatever the money bags wants)
H&M are always accused of using their “royal connections”, but it’s all fine and dandy for royal hanger ons like this Ben Elliott fellow to sell access to the future king of England. It seems like none of these folks have any actual money so I wouldn’t be surprised if they skimmed some money off the top for facilitating the deal a la Andrew. Uphold the queen’s values my ass. They are all shady ass hell.
I absolutely hate that stories like these go absolutely nowhere and when they do people either shrug, or they go out of their way to defend the royals. But meghan doing literally anything brings out the pitchforks. Its ridiculous.
The whole “H and M use their royal connections/are selling their access to the Queen” thing is so stupid. Harry and Meghan *are* royals, they don’t have to sell access to other royals like this guy does in order to get people to want to support them. They’re not random nobodies selling access to the Queen or Charles or Kate. They ARE royals, they ARE famous, which is why people want to work with them and fund their projects. Just like with all the other royals. This article is literally about how people pay money to meet Charles and then they give money to his charity to keep seeing him. The Queen gets to have a big parade paid for by the government and have people come wave at her because she’s the Queen. William gets to hang out with David Attenborough because he’s a royal prince. Kate gets to wear designer clothes and meet Jill Biden because she’s a royal. No one is accusing any of these other royals of “selling access” to another royal. Designers don’t give Kate clothes with the hopes that Kate will give those clothes to the Queen. David Attenborough doesn’t go hang out with William with the hopes that William will introduce him to Camilla some day. No one is working with Harry and Meghan because they actually hope to hang out with Charles.
@Amy Too For real. H&M don’t have to use their royal connections they are the royal connection. I guess the RF and BM are just mad that the Sussexes aren’t as desperate as all those coattail riders being for change and attention. It’s pathetic what those like the Wessexes have to do in order to maintain themselves.
He doesn’t address the 15K in his statement. Presumably that money went into his pocket and nit to anybody’s charity.
The 15K was a subscription fee to Elliot’s concierge service. Rich people don’t use Ticketmaster like the rest of us.
Ben Elliot, as a member of the Tory party, is also selling access to Boris Johnson and Government Ministers. That’s why this is making the news. Plus, selling access to royalty to Tory donors makes a mockery of the stance that the royal family is apolitical.
Agreed, we need more light shining on how our government is actually run.
Thank you Amy Bee as this point was missing from discussions. I’m assuming cash for access happens all the time & if it’s for charity I don’t see the issue. but Ben Elliot is a Tory party chairman & after arranging access to the future king for one of the businessmen, sounds like the Tory party got a nice little donation too. That’s problematic to the ‘apolitical’ royals. Where are the press who were crying about Meghan encouraging US citizens to vote when she didn’t say names.
As for William I suspect he is more protected than Charles because Charles image was already somewhat tarnished by tampongate, war of the worlds & William was meant to be the great hope after him- Diana’s son who would be coming in as a younger monarch & with an attractive family. Plus I guess William’s views are more aligned with newspaper editors than Charles & they think he’s more malleable.
In some ways IMO William is worse than his father. As a “family man” he totally messed up in his treatment of his brother and his wife. IMO.
This is just how the elite operate. Bog standard corruption, influence peddling, and nepotism. It’s depressing, but it’s just the way the world is. What makes this scandalous is that politics are involved when the royal family is supposed to be apolitical. Now, that’s a joke and everyone knows it, but this whole story blows the plausible deniability out of the water with how connected it reveals the royal institution to be with the tories.
Pitch @ Palace 2.0
Wait, so prince Charles is the uncle of the head of the ruling party?!!
But the royals aren’t political, don’t worry.
A few years ago my work (a college ) was approached to get involved with the Prince’s Trust and I became the designated contact. As part of the program we had a lot of access to genuine A list celebs, TV , sports, music stars. We were told that there was a shopping list of people to choose from as no one turns down a chance to have access and dinner at CH or Highgrove and rub shoulders with PC.
Iris Elba was both a beneficiary and an ambassador for the PT. They were very open about this and all the celebs we worked with were delightful.
This Ben Eliot set up just seems so shady/sordid and what about political connections/influence and links to the Tory party ??
Charles allowed and apparently paid Camilla’s sister to redecorate one of his and Camilla’s residence.
I worked in fundraising for a year and I don’t see how this is any different. You give a donation to the wealthy person’s cause you want to have face time with (in this case Prince Charles) or pay a ticket to get you access to an event the wealthy person will be attending. As a thank you, the wealthy person grants you an audience and you start to cultivate a relationship of mutual benefit. In this case, the guy who wanted to meet Charles paid Camilla’s nephew to give him access but it’s all the same. The rich all use each other. I don’t think Charles is a victim here? He got money for his charities and is probably happy about it.
I think it’s more the obvious coverup and the royals saying they’re apolitical but clearly supporting the Tory party that’s the problem here.
There is a reason there is a term called politically exposed person in aml. politicians and heads of state are high risk targets for corruption and they ought to be held to a higher standard. they all do pay to play. it’s nefarious when you ask and provide something in return. e.g favorable prices or contracts. I am just sick of this morally bankrupt bunch of grifters.
What is confusing me here is that there seems to be two Quintessentially entities: the “concierge” service and the foundation. I agree that it is not unheard or unusual for a foundation to offer access to high profile figures to get donations but it seems like this report is claiming that people had to pay for use of the concierge service FIRST before they could get access to Charles and if that’s true that’s a huge problem. It’s one thing if people are paying money to a respected charity to get time with Charles; it’s another if they have to pay cash to a for profit org ran by his nephew to get access to him.
Joan Rivers gave a lot of money to the Prince’s Trust and it garnered her an invite to Charles’ birthday parties and even to his second wedding. IMO it did not hurt her prospects when she criticized Diana publicly. She did a complete U turn from being an admirer of Diana. So her $$$ brought her access as well.
I would pay $15,000 not to meet Charles. An even higher figure to avoid the Cambridges.
Fergie used to do this with Andrew all the time (of course no one wants to these days) it was probably her main source of income.
Sounds awfully like Pay for Play to me.
Gross. The more I learn about how the lives of the rich and famous operate, the more I glad I am to be a normal person. This is classic pay for play.
I wonder if the aristocracy like the Dukes of Northumberland and Westminster are just as bad? How far down the British class system does this pay for play rot extend?
Talk about privilege that excludes people. If you cannot pay their fee, you cannot meet them. This cuts across race, religion, and a lot of other lines.
I wish there were more articles on this sort of pay for access in the press. I want to know how far down does the grifting descend.
And they accuse Meghan of being grifter.
Make me laugh harder royals. It has been a minute.