PR Catastrophe for the Royal Family

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊







Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,952
Surrey
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...e-to-courtiers-overspending-report-finds.html

In these times of austerity, even the most ardent royalist must conceede this looks absolutely awful.
I think you'll find the most ardent royalist will continue to find more and more bizarre reasons to continue supporting this antiquated charade.

I can guarantee you that, despite austerity measures elsewhere, despite calls by MPs for the Royals to rein in their spending, it will be the taxpayer who ends up picking up the bill. And then it will be swept under the carpet, and the Royal household will tell us what fantastic value for money they nevertheless provide.
 


spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
I think you'll find the most ardent royalist will continue to find more and more bizarre reasons to continue supporting this antiquated charade.

I can guarantee you that, despite austerity measures elsewhere, despite calls by MPs for the Royals to rein in their spending, it will be the taxpayer who ends up picking up the bill. And then it will be swept under the carpet, and the Royal household will tell us what fantastic value for money they nevertheless provide.

The horrible truth here is that the Royal Household couldn't care a fig, it's not their money why should they?

Perhaps we should privatise the Royal family. I'm sure the Chinese would be happy to pay.
 




Uncle Spielberg

Well-known member
Jul 6, 2003
43,097
Lancing
They may be rich and have a pampered life but I could not think of anything worse than having 300 engagements a year to see a load of people you do not give a toss about and having to be on your best behaviour at all times without so much as a dropped fart. The Queen is a Trooper !
 






brakespear

Doctor Worm
Feb 24, 2009
12,326
Sleeping on the roof
They may be rich and have a pampered life but I could not think of anything worse than having 300 engagements a year to see a load of people you do not give a toss about and having to be on your best behaviour at all times without so much as a dropped fart. The Queen is a Trooper !

Well that just sounds like a normal day at work to me :)
 


Thunder Bolt

Silly old bat
I think you'll find the most ardent royalist will continue to find more and more bizarre reasons to continue supporting this antiquated charade.

I can guarantee you that, despite austerity measures elsewhere, despite calls by MPs for the Royals to rein in their spending, it will be the taxpayer who ends up picking up the bill. And then it will be swept under the carpet, and the Royal household will tell us what fantastic value for money they nevertheless provide.

Quoted from the article
In April 2012 the Sovereign Grant replaced the old way of funding the Royal family through the Civil List and various Government grants.
The Sovereign Grant represents 15 per cent of the net surplus income of the Crown Estate, land holdings that generate money for the Treasury.



15% to the Royal Family to pay for staff and upkeep of the buildings
85% to the Treasury.
 




Uncle Spielberg

Well-known member
Jul 6, 2003
43,097
Lancing
At 87 she must have many days now when she wants to say f*ck off I just want to stay in and watch the Jeremy Kyle show. In effect they are prisoners.
 


Shropshire Seagull

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2004
8,790
Telford
I read this to be a pop at Queen's advisors not the royal family per se:

Report by the Commons public accounts committee finds the Queen’s advisers are failing to control her finances.

So, for example, is it your fault if your pension fund under-performs because the pension investment advisors were failing to control your finances or do you blame yourself for being wealthy enough to afford a pension?
 


Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,526
The arse end of Hangleton
I think you'll find the most ardent royalist will continue to find more and more bizarre reasons to continue supporting this antiquated charade.

I can guarantee you that, despite austerity measures elsewhere, despite calls by MPs for the Royals to rein in their spending, it will be the taxpayer who ends up picking up the bill. And then it will be swept under the carpet, and the Royal household will tell us what fantastic value for money they nevertheless provide.

As an ardent royalist I disagree ! The article is short on any real financial detail but if the overall suggestion is correct then the Royals need to deal with it and deal with it urgently.

That said I would still support keeping the Royal family. There is an argument that the running of the palaces etc should fall to the government and that the key members of the Royal family be paid a wage out of income generated from palaces and lands. After all, if we were a republic the taxpayer would have to pay for the palaces etc.
 




D

Deleted member 22389

Guest
I think you'll find the most ardent royalist will continue to find more and more bizarre reasons to continue supporting this antiquated charade.

I can guarantee you that, despite austerity measures elsewhere, despite calls by MPs for the Royals to rein in their spending, it will be the taxpayer who ends up picking up the bill. And then it will be swept under the carpet, and the Royal household will tell us what fantastic value for money they nevertheless provide.

I kind of agree with you here. It's not her fault, it is the people who are advising them.
 




Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,952
Surrey
Quoted from the article
In April 2012 the Sovereign Grant replaced the old way of funding the Royal family through the Civil List and various Government grants.
The Sovereign Grant represents 15 per cent of the net surplus income of the Crown Estate, land holdings that generate money for the Treasury.



15% to the Royal Family to pay for staff and upkeep of the buildings
85% to the Treasury.
What is your point?

As I understand it, they were told they could skim off 15% of Crown estate profits (which isn't Royal property anyway) to pay for their upkeep rather than a fixed amount. They have since been criticised because they haven't managed the Crown estate sufficiently well to cover their costs.
 




Fungus

Well-known member
NSC Patron
May 21, 2004
7,158
Truro
They may be rich and have a pampered life but I could not think of anything worse than having 300 engagements a year to see a load of people you do not give a toss about and having to be on your best behaviour at all times without so much as a dropped fart.!

Seriously?
 






Creaky

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2013
3,862
Hookwood - Nr Horley
The horrible truth here is that the Royal Household couldn't care a fig, it's not their money why should they?

Perhaps we should privatise the Royal family. I'm sure the Chinese would be happy to pay.

I'm sure that the Queen would be quite happy for the estates owned by her to be put back into her hands together with the income they generate - currently she is effectively paying 85% tax on their income!
 




spring hall convert

Well-known member
Nov 3, 2009
9,608
Brighton
They may be rich and have a pampered life but I could not think of anything worse than having 300 engagements a year to see a load of people you do not give a toss about and having to be on your best behaviour at all times without so much as a dropped fart. The Queen is a Trooper !

I work 250 odd days a year, pay for my own lunch, travel budget airlines on my own dollar and don't have a bunch of obsequious lackies seeing to my every need morning, noon and night. Where's my multi million pound budget?
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top