Kate Middleton and her royal patronages are under scrutiny from anti-monarchists who said that her role in these big organizations is pointless.

The Duchess of Cambridge is the patron of major British institutions like the Natural History Museum and the National Portrait Gallery. However, analyst Caroline Feinnes, who has been studying the work of foundations and charity organizations for years, said that these institutions do not need Kate to boost their profiles.

In a discussion on the podcast from Republic CEO Graham Smith, Fiennes questioned Kate's role and participation in charities that are "large, well-known, well-established and wealthy." Fiennes recalled that Kate was named the royal patron of the Natural History Museum following her wedding to Prince William in 2011.

However, the expert made a biting comment about this role since she believes that the museum does not need Kate to tell the world that it exists. Fiennes pointed out that the site has always been a top attraction in London so she wondered what impact the Duchess of Cambridge would bring to such an institution if its already well-known.

Fiennes has been looking into data on the impact of the royal family on their patronages and came up with the conclusion that organizations do not benefit from having a royal patron. In another statement, Fiennes could only describe royal patrons as "high profile cheerleaders" who do not help charities increase their funding.

The royals are usually used for PR campaigns of these charities, especially for fund-raising efforts. However, Fiennes warned that organizations who expect some financial benefit from having royal patrons would be disappointed. Instead, she advised charities not to take on royals as patrons.

On the official Royal Family website, Kate's patronages cover visual arts, children's mental health and sports or outdoor activities. Together with William, Kate has established the Early Years Support and Heads Together under The Royal Foundation of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

When the right time comes, however, Kate will become the Queen Consort to William, whose destiny is to be the King of the United Kingdom after his father, Prince Charles. But the Republic also believes there will be no more monarch after Queen Elizabeth as the monarchical system will be abolished by then.

Smith said that Kate and William should just renounce their titles and royal roles as soon as possible. The Republic CEO said that there would be "very little to do" among the royals in 20 years as more people will prefer to elect a head of state.

Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams, however, disagreed with Smith's opinion and said that the royals, especially Kate and William, have done important work to raise awareness for mental health, children's issues and the environment. (Business Times)