It's all about fairness isn't it? Why should they live in central London when many Stankhovite families can't?
Chat Forum
Royal family civil list to be capped at £26k...
-
Posted 4 months ago #
-
I always feel that the civil list is a small price to pay to avoid Tony Blair/Thatcher/Golden Brown being our head of state.
Posted 4 months ago # -
How does one remove Mrs Windsor from office if one thinks she has given the royal assent to many a law that should never have been enacted?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Giving our tax revenues to support the richest family in the country instead of the poorest. Is that fair?
[ducks]
Posted 4 months ago # -
How does one remove Mrs Windsor from office
wait a few years. she's getting on a bit.
My view is that the fewer politicians we have involved in running things the better.
Posted 4 months ago # -
How does one remove Mrs Windsor from office if one thinks she has given the royal assent to many a law that should never have been enacted?
So you're not a fan of democracy?
Posted 4 months ago # -
I always feel that the civil list is a small price to pay to avoid Tony Blair/Thatcher/Golden Brown being our head of state.
There's an intermediate solution, surely. Vote me in as Head of State and I won't get in the way, but I won't be entirely useless (toss it off skiing etc) either.
I reckon I could do the job for 80,000k pa and I'd only need one castle.
Something to think about.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Has anyone ever done a cost benefit analysis on the Royals? I'd be interested and it would shut a few people up. Or not.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I'm in favour of an elected presidency with the last ditch power not to automatically sign any bill place before them into law if they have reasonable doubts about it's constitutionality or effect on the nation.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I'm in favour of an elected presidency with the last ditch power not to automatically sign any bill place before them into law if they have reasonable doubts about it's constitutionality or effect on the nation.
What you're in favour of is irrelevant - what do you think Liz should have done given the constitution we do have?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Okay, 65k pa and shared use of Buck House.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Used the royal perogative to create a constitutional conference to write a UK constittion, then abdicate.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Used the royal perogative to create a constitutional conference to write a UK constittion, then abdicate.
You really don't believe in democracy then?
Posted 4 months ago # -
It's a question of profiles.
Several people have told me that - side-on - my face would look pretty sweet on a stamp or a twenty pence piece.
Posted 4 months ago # -
But how would look as a statue? Would you want pigeons crapping on your likeness?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Has anyone ever done a cost benefit analysis on
the Royalscity investment bankers? I'd be interested and it would shut a few people up. Or not.[ducks again]
Posted 4 months ago # -
But how would look as a statue? Would you want pigeons crapping on your likeness?
I'd take one for the nation on that one. It's a sacrifice I'm prepared to take for good old Blighty.
50k pa and an office in Westminster with a drop-down bed.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Royal family may not work but they do make money for the country
Estimated 107 Milllion from the wedding week alone, And when I went to america in the summer there were countless speacial edition magazines on it. which will increase tourism to the UK.
you have to look at the big picture
Posted 4 months ago # -
We used to make things. Now the best we can do is a bloody royal pageant...
Posted 4 months ago # -
Has anyone ever done a cost benefit analysis on the Royals?
I've read various things that claim the Royal's generate wealth for the UK. Tourism is the obvious thing. There's probably other factors.
it would shut a few people up.
Excellent optimism. Seriously misplaced though.
Posted 4 months ago # -
you have to look at the big picture
Can't we just continue doing what makes Britain great, and not look beyond the end of our own noses?
It's just that if we start appreciating there's a bigger picture, and that we're part of a wider world, we'd have a lot less to moan and complain about.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I've read various things that claim the Royal's generate wealth for the UK. Tourism is the obvious thing. There's probably other factors.
The French killed all of theirs off, but still get plenty of visitors to Versailles.
Do we actually need the Saxe-Coburg Gothas around to be able to profit from their legacy?Posted 4 months ago # -
I've read various things that claim the Royal's generate wealth for the UK. Tourism is the obvious thing.
Absolutely true. No-one ever goes to France, Germany, Russia, Italy, China, the Czech Republic, Greece, Portugal, Egypt or Turkey on holiday because they disposed of their royals.Posted 4 months ago # -
>Estimated 107 Milllion from the wedding week alone<
Which pales into insignificance when you factor in the lost productivity due to the holiday.
Mind you we do or did have Andy jetting about the globe helping prop up our arms industry - there's another thing we Brits can be soo proud of. And Chuck always has a good word to say about contemporary architecture.
Posted 4 months ago # -
The French killed all of theirs off, but still get plenty of visitors to Versailles.
Absolutely true. No-one ever goes to France, Germany, Russia, Italy, China, the Czech Republic, Greece, Portugal, Egypt or Turkey on holiday because they disposed of their royals.
Precisely. Just think how many more visitors they'd all be getting if they still had some Royals/Monarchy... very short-sighted decision, killing them all off ...
Posted 4 months ago # -
If you factor in revenues from the Crown Estate - in name at least the monarch's property portfolio - which are handed over to the Treasury (c 183m PA, although probably a bit less at the moment), then it's clearly not all one way traffic.
Crown Estate includes physical property - quite a bit of the West End, and stuff like foreshore rights along the coast.
You could argue that these are not actually owned by the Queen, but effectively by the state, and that she would not have the legal right to take these revenues back at present. However, it's not hard to see a historical situation where a more thorough separation of royal family and state would have left those assets, or most of them, in the royal family's hands.
It's certainly worth bearing in mind when looking at the full equation.
Liz and her clan as ordinary citizens would not perform civic duties - my understanding is that a fair sum of the civil list is spent on staff organising those functions, rather than paying for Bentleys.
Posted 4 months ago # -
it's not hard to see a historical situation where a more thorough separation of royal family and state would have left those assets, or most of them, in the royal family's hands.
My patchy understanding of European history is that situations in which a thorough separation of monarchy and state takes place are often accompanied by situations in which there is a thorough separation of monarch and head.Posted 4 months ago # -
Outdated, obsolete, embarrassment.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I didn't think my post was that bad.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Awwwwww. Wanna hug?
Anyone?
Posted 4 months ago # -
Outdated, obsolete, embarrassment.
Hmmm, well there's quite a history associated with them but not sure that really means they're outdated. Embarrassing? I can't see that. I was pretty ambivalent about them really but seeing how much happiness they bring to so many people, such as at the recent wedding, I think they're well worth the money.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I've read various things that claim the Royal's generate wealth for the UK. Tourism is the obvious thing.
this always makes me laugh/other.
i'm sure that tourists who visit
the uklondon do so because they think they might meet the royal family.Posted 4 months ago # -
Outdated, obsolete, embarrassment.
You may well have a point, but this isn't the thread about 29'ers
Posted 4 months ago # -
i'm sure that tourists who visit the uk london do so because they think they might meet the royal family.
Well if it's not because of the Royal Family I don't know so many people bother going to look at Buckingham Palace as it isn't particuarly attractive.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I was pretty ambivalent about them really but seeing how much happiness they bring to so many people, such as at the recent wedding, I think they're well worth the money.
That's an argument for putting Posh and Becks on the Civil List.Posted 4 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
