While our politicians are busy declaring war on our nearest neighbours we can be thankful that we have at least one grown up doing the right thing.
Long may he outlast our current bunch of idiots.
The Monarchy is hardly ideal but it's by far the best thing we have in terms of a state figurehead although I suppose SUnak is a marked improvement on Johnson, at least he can tuck his own shirt in.
I wouldn't want to shake his hand with massive sausage fingers.
I am sure he could excuse the size of your fingers
Can't stand the lot of them.
Should of got rid of the lot of them in 1936.
Awww shit what happened to the Queen?
Victoria?
Awww shit what happened to the Queen?
I hope Freddy is Ok not heard anything about him for awhile.
£8 million is being provided by the Government for a portrait in every public building…
Biggest sponger of the lot.
Chapeau sir 😂
Should of got rid of the lot of them in 1936.
Should HAVE. Where has this of nonsense come from?
The Monarchy is hardly ideal but it’s by far the best thing we have in terms of a state figurehead
Think that's my pragmatic take on it.
£8 million is being provided by the Government for a portrait in every public building…
Which is not the fault of the of the Monarchy, but like immigration, they are a handy distraction from our incompetent overlords.
Biggest sponger of the lot.
🎩
£8 million is a rounding error these days, Jeremy Hunt probably found that down that back of the sofa.
£8 million is a rounding error these days
Exactly this, it’s a fortune for the average person, but there are actually a fair few individuals who could fund that, it’s small change when compared to the amounts that governments are used to dealing with.
Biggest sponger of the lot
bravo!!
£8 million is being provided by the you
Fixed for you. We, the tax payer are funding a pictures of the entitled mood swing to be placed in public buildings.
we have at least one grown up doing the right thing.
what’s he doing?
Now he's King the correct title is His Majesty. Protocol is everything where handouts are concerned!
there are actually a fair few individuals who could fund that,
Like the King!
Now he’s King the correct title is His Majesty. Protocol is everything where handouts are concerned!
Someone suggested “the monarch formerly known as Prince” and I just kind of liked that.
There was also the suggestion that his speaking German to their parliament was demonstrating his fluency as part of his citizenship application. To be fair with his ancestry he might well qualify.
My fave quote of that was
Dowden said portraits will “serve as a visible reminder in buildings up and down the country of the nation’s ultimate public servant”.
He added: “They will help us turn a page in our history and pay a fitting tribute to our new sovereign.”
what’s he doing?
Not getting stuck at Dover 🙂
I hope Freddy is Ok not heard anything about him for awhile
He had a crash and they've cancelled production
Eight million? Drop in the ocean. the true cost of the royals
Royalists & brexiteers, **** right off.
Edited, ho hum, if only I could get links to work,
Royalty and Brexit are very similar imo - you won't know what you've lost until it's gone....
Things that shouldn't be mentioned on stw - royalty, Brexit, Shimano Vs SRAM & if a gravel bike is actually a 90's Mountain bike. They are all just too decisive.
Royalists & brexiteers, **** right off.
Alternatively, Royalty and Brexit have the similarity that if you vote to get rid of something, you'd better be bloody sure you understand what it is that will replace it. A headline amount of savings painted on the side of a bus to be invested in public services won't fool anyone....
Sometimes the lesser evil is to work with and reform what you've got.
We ought to have a referendum on continuing with heredity monarchy, and rather than needing ID just bring your National Insurance No.
Anyone voting to keep it pays extra and those of us against it don't have to pay their 'share' - that'd find out whether those saying they "support it", really support it.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/863893/support-for-the-monarchy-in-britain-by-age/
Anyone voting to keep it pays extra and those of us against it don’t have to pay their ‘share’ – that’d find out whether those saying they “support it”, really support it.
If we are just going on monetary value of the royals your argument falls down at every hurdle, much like the pro Brexit argument..... The grant which funds the royal household, paid by the taxpayer in 21/22 was 107million, so £2.50pa (approximately) per voter.....</span>
60% of international tourists, from which my buisness benefits to the tune of around 15k a year, say that the monarchy is part of the reason they visit the UK. So upto 9k of my trade pa could be indirectly due to the royals. And that's as a very very small village shop in the middle of nowhere. Some of that 9kwpuld be vat so goes back in the UK coffers, and some will be used for in paye etc.
Of course you could add in to royal costs things like policing events and security etc, but those events also bring trade and value to the UK.
A proportion of 60% of our £106billion international tourism industry is significant.
For those thinking of voting 'no' in your fantasy referendum would actually have to 'pay there share' of the taxes and income lost.... So the royal in tourism value have a direct impact of upto £63,600,000,000 - would you vote 'no' if the bill was £2.5k pa in compensation for those voting that votes yes?
Now, as for the moral and social argument I can see why someone would be anti royal.
Royalty and Brexit are very similar imo
The overlap between supporters of both is going to be high.
Oh wait you dont mean that.
Perhaps you mean Johnson trying to prorogue parliament using the royal prerogative?
Or both Elizabeth and Charles interfering in laws for their personal gain?
That the royals have been busy trying to suppress people finding out how much they interfere on the grounds that it will damage their position of impartiality says it all really.
We could get rid of them and replace them with cheap lookalikes. That way tourists are fooled, we keep their money and save a few quid.
That the royals have been busy trying to suppress people finding out how much they interfere on the grounds that it will damage their position of impartiality says it all really.
This could be said about any person or organisation with wealth and influence - says more about capitalism than it does monarchy.
The Monarchy is very flawed and needs reforming, but I've become very cynical about anyone telling me to vote against something because they think it will free up money for other public services.
This could be said about any person or organisation with wealth and influence – says more about capitalism than it does monarchy.
The monarch has the ability to interfere with legislation that financially impacts them, it’s specifically a monarchy problem.
As regards tourist revenue, France seems to do okay, just picking one republic.
60% of international tourists, from which my buisness benefits to the tune of around 15k a year, say that the monarchy is part of the reason they visit the UK
Buckingham Palace gets circa 550k pa whereas Versailles gets +10m.
says more about capitalism than it does monarchy.
Cool you point me to the law that gives the preview option to all the others and I will take the claim seriously otherwise it seems a rather poor attempt at deflection.
Buying / influencing your way into the house of lords is a direct example, or any other unelected board of power.
Who you know and the money you have to wield, has more impact than titles.
Much like Brexit, it is very easy to to be negative, with one liners - power, interference, cost to the public etc than it is to be pro without complex in-depth discussion which is very dull and doesn't make great headlines.
Buying / influencing your way into the house of lords is a direct example
Nope. There is absolute no comparison between the two.
Its also unclear whether they use that far more limited power. In several high profile cases they are known not to participate in the law making. It seems just a prestige thing.
A proportion of 60% of our £106billion international tourism industry is significant.
If the case for the royalty attracting tourists and generating huge income for the nation's coffers is so strong why aren't the royalty more involved?
There is a real possibility that tourists coming to the UK don't even get to see the King of England. His Royal Highness could at specific times stand on the balcony at Buckingham Palace and wave at the tourists, I'm sure they would find it hugely satisfying.
A visitor centre could be opened in Buckingham Palace with a shop selling royalty-themed memorabilia.
If the UK monarchy is a serious tourism asset it doesn't seem to have been fully exploited to its maximum potential.
Edit: I don't understand why King Charles isn't required to always a crown when on monarchy related business, in the same way that someone working on a building site is required to wear a hard hat - its a job requirement.
Hmmm if we're going to start 'disbanding' rich institutions that have undue, and undemocratic, influence in this country I'd like to suggest we remove the Church of England from all aspects of government and day-to-day life.
I'd be happy to retain the Royal family if we could get rid of the Church of England.
I don’t understand why King Charles isn’t required to always a crown when on monarchy related business, in the same way that someone working on a building site is required to wear a hard hat – its a job requirement.
I kinda agree to this, much In the same way princesses and the like have to wear tiara's at formal events with evening gowns. I'd like to see a more everyday crown worn at regal events (although not daily).
The monarchy are not using the queen mother's crown for Camilla due to colonial jewels (one massive diamond particularly). I also doubt that tiaras will be worn at the event either by Kate and other HRH's. Charles seems to want to reduce the pomp and pageantry of the monarchy, which imo is a good thing.
I’d be happy to retain the Royal family if we could get rid of the Church of England
Just the church of england? All religious institutions?
Just the church of england? All religious institutions?
I'd like to see all religious institutions removed from positions of governmental or legal influence. They can do their worshipping in a place of worship rather than Parliament. I'm sure they're of great comfort and importance to a lot of people, but "god said so" has no place in creating legislation in a modern society.
Oh alright then, all religious institutions ;o)
Leave the Royals until that's all sorted.
