mudcat.org: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Sort Descending - Printer Friendly - Home


BS: Time to sell the royal residences

theleveller 14 Jun 10 - 08:12 AM
Amergin 14 Jun 10 - 08:20 AM
John MacKenzie 14 Jun 10 - 08:27 AM
gnu 14 Jun 10 - 08:28 AM
SINSULL 14 Jun 10 - 08:28 AM
Tug the Cox 14 Jun 10 - 08:32 AM
Crow Sister (off with the fairies) 14 Jun 10 - 08:39 AM
Bryn Pugh 14 Jun 10 - 09:14 AM
MMario 14 Jun 10 - 09:25 AM
Richard Bridge 14 Jun 10 - 09:26 AM
Richard Bridge 14 Jun 10 - 09:27 AM
theleveller 14 Jun 10 - 09:43 AM
Dave the Gnome 14 Jun 10 - 09:51 AM
Rapparee 14 Jun 10 - 09:54 AM
MarkS 14 Jun 10 - 10:11 AM
theleveller 14 Jun 10 - 10:17 AM
Stu 14 Jun 10 - 10:33 AM
John MacKenzie 14 Jun 10 - 10:41 AM
Bill D 14 Jun 10 - 10:50 AM
theleveller 14 Jun 10 - 11:03 AM
Howard Jones 14 Jun 10 - 12:30 PM
Mingulay 14 Jun 10 - 12:30 PM
Lizzie Cornish 1 14 Jun 10 - 01:45 PM
Crow Sister (off with the fairies) 14 Jun 10 - 01:50 PM
Paul Burke 14 Jun 10 - 01:52 PM
Lizzie Cornish 1 14 Jun 10 - 02:02 PM
Dave the Gnome 14 Jun 10 - 02:03 PM
Lizzie Cornish 1 14 Jun 10 - 02:19 PM
Paul Burke 14 Jun 10 - 03:12 PM
theleveller 14 Jun 10 - 03:49 PM
Lizzie Cornish 1 14 Jun 10 - 05:46 PM
Lizzie Cornish 1 14 Jun 10 - 05:47 PM
Richard Bridge 14 Jun 10 - 05:49 PM
Lizzie Cornish 1 14 Jun 10 - 06:14 PM
theleveller 15 Jun 10 - 03:40 AM
Dave the Gnome 15 Jun 10 - 03:46 AM
theleveller 15 Jun 10 - 04:17 AM
Stu 15 Jun 10 - 04:50 AM
GUEST,Lizzie Cornish 15 Jun 10 - 06:21 AM
theleveller 15 Jun 10 - 07:10 AM
Will Fly 15 Jun 10 - 08:46 AM
Fred McCormick 15 Jun 10 - 09:23 AM
Dave the Gnome 15 Jun 10 - 10:27 AM
Richard Bridge 15 Jun 10 - 03:50 PM
Emma B 15 Jun 10 - 05:55 PM
Ed T 15 Jun 10 - 06:12 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jun 10 - 06:18 PM
Emma B 15 Jun 10 - 06:20 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jun 10 - 06:38 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 15 Jun 10 - 06:51 PM
McGrath of Harlow 15 Jun 10 - 07:13 PM
Tug the Cox 15 Jun 10 - 08:00 PM
Smokey. 15 Jun 10 - 08:40 PM
Emma B 15 Jun 10 - 08:49 PM
Smokey. 15 Jun 10 - 09:06 PM
GUEST,Rotter 16 Jun 10 - 01:25 AM
John MacKenzie 16 Jun 10 - 03:23 AM
theleveller 16 Jun 10 - 03:57 AM
Dave the Gnome 16 Jun 10 - 04:34 AM
Howard Jones 16 Jun 10 - 05:34 AM
Gervase 16 Jun 10 - 06:07 AM
Dave the Gnome 16 Jun 10 - 06:09 AM
Amergin 16 Jun 10 - 06:34 AM
GUEST,Rotter 16 Jun 10 - 09:29 AM
Emma B 16 Jun 10 - 10:05 AM
Backwoodsman 16 Jun 10 - 10:15 AM
MMario 16 Jun 10 - 10:18 AM
Emma B 16 Jun 10 - 01:49 PM
Paul Burke 16 Jun 10 - 02:08 PM
Smokey. 16 Jun 10 - 05:25 PM
McGrath of Harlow 16 Jun 10 - 06:57 PM
Smokey. 16 Jun 10 - 07:36 PM
Paul Burke 17 Jun 10 - 01:18 PM
MMario 17 Jun 10 - 01:28 PM
Smokey. 17 Jun 10 - 02:05 PM
McGrath of Harlow 17 Jun 10 - 07:00 PM
Paul Burke 17 Jun 10 - 07:39 PM
Smokey. 17 Jun 10 - 07:58 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jun 10 - 08:16 PM
Don(Wyziwyg)T 17 Jun 10 - 08:24 PM
Smokey. 17 Jun 10 - 10:41 PM
Bonzo3legs 18 Jun 10 - 06:19 AM
theleveller 18 Jun 10 - 06:50 AM
Bonzo3legs 18 Jun 10 - 07:06 AM
Backwoodsman 18 Jun 10 - 07:32 AM
Bonzo3legs 18 Jun 10 - 07:39 AM
Backwoodsman 18 Jun 10 - 08:32 AM
Bonzo3legs 18 Jun 10 - 09:29 AM
Bonzo3legs 18 Jun 10 - 09:30 AM
Backwoodsman 18 Jun 10 - 09:49 AM
Stu 18 Jun 10 - 10:34 AM
Bonzo3legs 18 Jun 10 - 11:12 AM
Bryn Pugh 18 Jun 10 - 11:19 AM
Bonzo3legs 18 Jun 10 - 11:57 AM
Stu 18 Jun 10 - 12:20 PM
John MacKenzie 18 Jun 10 - 12:29 PM
gnu 18 Jun 10 - 02:14 PM
McGrath of Harlow 18 Jun 10 - 06:26 PM
Smokey. 19 Jun 10 - 02:20 PM
gnu 19 Jun 10 - 02:25 PM
Smokey. 19 Jun 10 - 02:54 PM
Backwoodsman 20 Jun 10 - 02:23 AM
Smokey. 20 Jun 10 - 05:04 PM
John MacKenzie 20 Jun 10 - 05:22 PM
Smokey. 20 Jun 10 - 05:28 PM
gnu 20 Jun 10 - 05:51 PM
McGrath of Harlow 20 Jun 10 - 06:31 PM
GUEST,Tunesmith 21 Jun 10 - 04:03 AM
John MacKenzie 21 Jun 10 - 04:08 AM
Dave the Gnome 21 Jun 10 - 04:29 AM
bubblyrat 21 Jun 10 - 05:17 AM
Backwoodsman 21 Jun 10 - 07:49 AM
gnu 23 Sep 10 - 02:46 PM
Emma B 23 Sep 10 - 07:53 PM
Joe Offer 23 Sep 10 - 08:23 PM
Little Hawk 23 Sep 10 - 08:39 PM
Emma B 23 Sep 10 - 08:49 PM
Teribus 23 Sep 10 - 11:29 PM
theleveller 24 Sep 10 - 03:43 AM
Georgiansilver 24 Sep 10 - 04:06 AM
GUEST,Patsy 24 Sep 10 - 04:08 AM
Joe Offer 24 Sep 10 - 04:16 AM
theleveller 24 Sep 10 - 04:28 AM
GUEST,Patsy 24 Sep 10 - 04:43 AM
Georgiansilver 24 Sep 10 - 04:50 AM
theleveller 24 Sep 10 - 05:12 AM
Georgiansilver 24 Sep 10 - 08:07 AM
artbrooks 24 Sep 10 - 08:26 AM
theleveller 24 Sep 10 - 09:31 AM
theleveller 24 Sep 10 - 09:46 AM
Georgiansilver 24 Sep 10 - 01:44 PM
McGrath of Harlow 24 Sep 10 - 02:59 PM
GUEST,WHICH RESIDENCE?? 26 Oct 15 - 02:09 PM
Stilly River Sage 26 Oct 15 - 11:22 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:









Subject: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 08:12 AM

Whilst the majority of people in Britain are anticipating having to tighten their belts even further, the feckless and degenerate Windsors are whining about not having enough to live on and demanding an increase to their civil list payments of 88% - from 7.9 million a year to 14 million. Naturally, there is now a backlash from an increasing number of people who see the monarchy as a wasteful, anachronistic and unnecessary institution.

In a survey, 54% of people thought that the state-owned royal residences should be sold off to raise an estimated 2.2 billion to help towards the national debt.

http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1781621?UserKey

In addition, newly-elected Green Party MP, Caroline Lucas, is calling for round-the-clock police protection to be withdrawn from useless, drunken wastrels like Fergie and the princesses Beatrice and Eugenie. Security for the royal family costs the country a staggering 100 million a year (some estimates put it even higher). If they need protection for their unsavoury antics such as puking up outside expensive night clubs, they should pay for it themselves.

It would be much better just to abolish the whole institution of monarchy, which would save the country a fortune. I expect the usual pack of Windsor PR machine lies about the monarchy actually earning the country money and performing a useful function will be trotted out by the declining number of monarchy supporters, but these are easily refuted when the real facts and figures are examined.

In this day and age, we simply cannot afford to pay for an outmoded, undemocratic and socially divisive institution like the monarchy. Let's not stop at selling off their expensive residences, let's be rid of the pack of them once and for all.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Amergin
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 08:20 AM

You could turn the Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace into state ran hotels....that will get the debt lowered.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 08:27 AM

Dorney Wood and Chequers could also go. I'm sure that will be equally popular with our Socialist friends. Especially now that their New Labour buddies, have been evicted ;)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: gnu
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 08:28 AM

Hotels... good idea. And keep on the Royals as staff.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: SINSULL
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 08:28 AM

And the royal prince's wedding is rumored to cost $40,000,000. At least a bunch of people will be employed.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 08:32 AM

First verse of 'Free Beer for the all workers' Sung to the tune of John brown's Body.
'They're turning Buckingham Palace into a public lavatory ( *3)
And we'll all piss up the wall.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 08:39 AM

Can't we simply package both the royals and their pads as a job lot on e-bay?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bryn Pugh
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 09:14 AM

Agreed, CS, but who'd be daft enough to buy them ?

God help us - can you just see King Wingnut I ?

I voiced this opinion once before and nearly got the face chewed off me.

"They do a good job !", I was told.

Funny you don't see it on they cards at JobCentrePlus.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: MMario
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 09:25 AM

Getting rid of the monarchy might not solve the problems though; consider the US which provides security and expenses and builds libraries etc etc for officials and much of their families - and they add new ones every 8 years or less! YOur royals don't multiply at that rate....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 09:26 AM

It would be a shame to see such wonderful buildings vandalised, and I think that Ms Piggy and Phil the Greek and indeed Bigears are a lot more palatable and indeed valuable than many politicians, but the descendants of Diana the Martyr are a waste of space (indeed unpleasant in the case of Hewitt junior) while Naff-orf-Ann is an irrelevance and was plainly not good breeding stock - rather like the former Mrs Best (with the "Ginger Bush" necklace) and the Duke of Pork.

In principle the constitutional monarchy has often served the country well, with possibly Sticky Vicky and her German princeling being the best examples, along with Ms Piggy, but there are too many like Prince Michael and Princess Pushy.

But what kills off the idea of marginalising ALL the royals, for me, is the dreadful thought of having President Bliar or Cameron - or worse that evil bat the milk-snatcher: could you possibly imagine the airs and graces that they would have given themselves.

Royal Family? Lesser of two evils.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 09:27 AM

PS, the only people who would buy them would be Arab sheiks or Russian oligarchs, all of whom are far worse examples of theft from the people.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 09:43 AM

"Royal Family? Lesser of two evils. "

Hmmmm....at least the alternative would be an elected one and could be kicked out at the end of the elected term in the public saw fit.

Hey, the Windsors could start the Ex-Monarch Party or One-Used-To-Be-Queen Party and stand for election. Then we'd see who the British public wanted.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 09:51 AM

The only partialy sensible pro-monarchy argument I have ever heard is the one where they provide a lot of tourism. Now, whether that is right or wrong I cannot say but let us assume for a moment it is. We are obviously getting it wrong if we are spending money on a tiurist attraction without any real idea of the benefits gained. We could put it out to the civil service to do a costing excercise but that, at best, would take at least 23 years and cost 14 billion pounds. Much as I hate blatant capitalism there are organisations who are very good at it and ones who can run tourist attractions very well indeed, as well as having the money to buy them.

Disney. Yes, you did hear right. Let's sell the whole lot, lock stock and barrel, to Disney. They could run it as 'WindsorWorld' or some such. The younger royals could be dressed up in fairtale costume and be paraded out five times a day. The elders could be sat on elaborate thrones and shake hands with passing American and Japanese tourists while the consession sells them photos at 20 a shot. If any of them become too old or unloved they could be instantly replaced by Anastasia or Price Charming. Tour buses, in the form of red double-deckers, take people to and from the vast car parks and between attractions like Buck House and Lego Castle.

What is wrong with the idea? We get loads of dosh from the initial sale and plenty ongoing revenue from taxing the profits that are bound to be made. The only downside is that the corporation in question are not widely known for the fair treatment of staff. Well, considering who the senior staff could be, are we bothered?

:D (eG)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 09:54 AM

Don't get rid of them, but make them pay rent and do the yard work and cleaning like the rest of us have to. I can see Chucky now, whining that he ALWAYS has to cut the grass and why can't he just frolic with Camilla and it's William's job to take out the trash.

Besides, selling off the palaces would be like selling off the Vatican: who's got the necessary to buy 'em?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: MarkS
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 10:11 AM

Just how many residences do the royals have?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 10:17 AM

"The only partialy sensible pro-monarchy argument I have ever heard is the one where they provide a lot of tourism. Now, whether that is right or wrong I cannot say but let us assume for a moment it is."

I'm afraid it isn't - or no-one has ever been able to provide hard facts and figures that it is.

The only royal attraction that features on the top 20 of British tourist attractions is Windsor Castle and, at No.17 on the list, it is well below Windsor Legoland at No.7.

Like your suggestion, though :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Stu
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 10:33 AM

Blackpool provides lots of tourism but we don't have to pay for that. Sod them - they've got pots of cash and will be doing quite nicely and it would be a great day for this country if we final crawl out from a 1000 years under the Norman Yoke.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 10:41 AM

I wonder what your average American, or European tourist would make of tacky Blackpool.
I for one would be ashamed to have Blackpool thought of as representative of British culture.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 10:50 AM

Since, I am told, many people are not religious these days, getting rid of the monarchy would require a frightful revision of the National Anthem...

Perhaps the musically inclined here could suggest alternatives?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 11:03 AM

"I wonder what your average American, or European tourist would make of tacky Blackpool."

Probably the same as they'd make of Coney Island, Disneyland or Eurodisney.


"I for one would be ashamed to have Blackpool thought of as representative of British culture."

Sorry, but Blackpool Pleasure Beach is the No.1 British tourist attraction. You can gain consolation, however, from the fact that in second, third and fourth place are The National Gallery, British Museum and Tate Modern.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Howard Jones
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 12:30 PM

If we were to get rid of the monarchy they would be replaced by a Head of State. A President would not necessarily be cheaper than a monarch. According to The Intrepid blog the annual cost of operating the US Presidency is $1.5 billion pa. The Civil List currently running at £7.9m pa pales into insignificance.

The Civil List is paid to the Royal Family in return for its surrendering the income from the Crown Estate to the Treasury. Since the Treasury receives in the region of £226.5m pa from the Crown Estate and pays out around £8m for the Civil List it appears that the taxpayer has actually got something of a bargain.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Mingulay
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 12:30 PM

Please can I have the Buck House concession for Diana Burgers. I know she preferred hot dogs, but what the heck! I suppose we could call them Hewitt dogs?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 01:45 PM

Good Lordy!! What a load of bitter poppycock!

Do you lot not realise how *lucky* we are, as a nation, to have sucn incredible Royal Palaces???? Do you not understand the connection with so much history that lies within them???? Do you never feel elated when you walk around them? Marvel at the paintings, the furniture, the architecture, the beautiful gardens?   Do you never feel a sense of belonging to them all, to the roots of an institution that goes back so far?   

We are all able to visit these places, to walk around them, share in them, enjoy their gardens, their lakes, their history, whilst not actually having to live the closeted life inside them, as the Queen and her family do.

I think many of them should be left to work for themselves because of how they dare to behave at tax payers expense, yes...but to remove the institution of the Monarchy would be the biggest mistake ever made since Show of Hands management advised them to tell me to stop writing about them!!   (I'm still waiting for you guys to take up that banner, by the way!)

What do you want..Buckingham Palace as a hotel for the rich and famous? Windsor Castle as the same...so that the nation would never again be able to walk those halls, those gardens, get lost in their Royal Mazes, stand in rooms where Ann Boleyn and Henry VIII walked, loved, argued...

Have you never been to Hampton Court Palace?????? Have you never watched the 'live shows' they put on in the rooms, where Cardinal Wolsey is talking to Mistress Boleyn, ordering her to do as he says....Have you never felt the sense of anger and horror at the lives that were lived within those walls...Lives that are connected to us all through our own British 'Roots' (Someone send for Show of Hands IMMEDIATELY!)

Do not speak to me of folk music, of roots that go back throughout it, whilst wanting to destroy the roots of those you seem to despise!

Without Prince Charles so many people would not have their own business, via his Prince's Trust! He's over 60 other charities that he runs...

Princess Anne may be a battleaxe, but she goes out there and raises thousands of pounds for her own charities, mucking in with the peasants totally, never wanting airs and graces shown to her...but it's rarely reported...

Yes, there are a huge amount of Ninnies in the their family, as there are in many families...and those ones should pay for themselves, indeed, I think that many do now.

I didn't hear this kind of disparaging comment when the Socialist Government and all the other 'teams' were busy stealing money from their people, within the Houses of Parliament...?????????

The Royal Palaces are an absolute TREASURE!!   Most countries around the world would give their all to have our history, our palaces, our paintings, and all that lie within the walls of these amazing places!

You want The Tower of London turned into a Casino? You want Hampton Court to become a Warner Brothers Hotel?????????

Be PROUD of your Heritage! And that Heritage stretches from our Palaces to our Prisons and all points inbetween, encompassing ALL people, rich and poor...

The bitterness and nastiness that is in here, especially towards Diana and her sons, is dismaying, but not surprising.

Diana was the one who opened up the care of AIDS. She loved people, she comforted people, she brought love and emotion into the hearts of many, and that was returned to her a thousandfold when she died. Her sons had a terrible time, not least because of all the nasty stories that then followed about their beloved mother, stories from bitter, bitchy people who even to this day will not let her lie in peace...

BOTH her sons do much work to help others.....It is not their fault they were born into a family so many of you detest. Their lives were mapped out for them, in a way that I would hate. I would not swap places with them for all the Palaces in England...but I would not let their Palaces be taken over by the Mob, who would get their spiteful kicks from destroying THOUSANDS of years of magnificent history, no matter how beautiful or grim that history might be.

That history belongs to us all...

"Seed, bud, flower, fruit, never gonna grow without their roots..."

Palaces to Peasants are OUR Roots.

Get over it!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 01:50 PM

Lol! Lizzy where did you come from?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Paul Burke
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 01:52 PM

I think the royals should move to cheaper accommodation a little south of Croydon. We all love Purley kings and queens, gorblessem.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 02:02 PM

You're telling me that you want to destroy THIS?????   That you want to sell it off to people like Posh and Becks??????????????

A Short History of Hampton Court Palace


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 02:03 PM

Well, I have already answered most of the above points and questions. Not hotels or the haunts of the exclusive. DISNEY. Access to everyone and a healthy profit for the country besides. What we are all saying is STOP them being exclusive. Give them back to the people who lived, worked and died for them.

The only one I couldn't realy get my head round is how folk music - ie music of the people - owes anything to the posh bint at Buck house. Apart from it was her ancestors and their like that caused most of the poverty and degradation that sparked a lot of folk music. I suppose we should be grateful for that in the same was that slaves should be grateful to the plantation owners for all those good work songs!

DeG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 02:19 PM

Ainsley Harriot is descended from a Plantation Owner and a slave. So I guess that yes, sometimes, even the Plantation Owners have contributed to the good of the present day...

Don't be so bitter. And to talk of the Queen in that manner ain't nice. She may have her funny ways, be out of touch of real life, but she has given every single day of her life to her country, and you cannot fault her for that. No scandal, no retirement, and even now, I'm sure her work schedule is probably far greater than yours has ever been.

Her mother and father went out on the streets of London during the Blitz, often putting themselves in danger, because they wanted to connect to their people, to share with them, to try to inspire and help them.

They are not ALL bad people. They have lived their lives differently because of who they are, not because they have chosen that way of life....Some are dreadful, I agree, but not ALL.

Besides, this thread is about the palaces, not the people who own them. Today we are all free, for a smallish fee, to look around all the Palaces. I'd not give that freedom up for anything.   

Thank GOD we still have our Palaces, and that they are so well and so lovingly cared for by people with an absolute passion for preserving the past, for those in the present.

Thank GOD that they've not been handed over to a bunch of blood baying Parliamentarians who'd cover it all in Graffiti and Grunge, just to vent their bitter spleens on all they consider to have wronged them, from past to present...

And, I have to say that when in The Sealed Knot, I was all treated with the utmost civility by the lads on the Royalist side, whilst the Parliamentarians were rude and crude, and one took the 'rape and pillaging' a little too seriously at the end of one battle, almost rendering me unconscious as he dived at me, bringing me down to the ground at the speed of sound...

Nope, give me a man with a feather in his hat and an outstretched velvet gloved hand, offered in help, any day. The bucket heads can go and sit by their fire and mutter their bitterness around the flames, whilst I dance at Court with my lace rippling over my bodice...as I trip from Kitchen Maid to Lady in the blink of an eye....


Oh..and if ever you're in Castle Drogo, take a look at Lutyens kitchen design, which was designed with the absolute ease of the staff in mind, the most beautiful kitchen, light, airy and a good place to work...I'd not mind working in there today, but then I'm happy amongst Princes or Peasants...

It is not the bank balance of the Prince or the Peasant that matters, but the Soul of the man within...

It's not just Kings and Queens who can be Bastards and Bitches you know, for the Wizards and Witches and Witchfinder Generals can have their off days too....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Paul Burke
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 03:12 PM

It is not the bank balance of the Prince or the Peasant that matters, but the Soul of the man within...


Ah. Souls.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 03:49 PM

"The Civil List is paid to the Royal Family in return for its surrendering the income from the Crown Estate to the Treasury. Since the Treasury receives in the region of £226.5m pa from the Crown Estate and pays out around £8m for the Civil List it appears that the taxpayer has actually got something of a bargain."

Not exactly. The Crown Estate does not belong to the monarch - it belongs to the country so, by giving back the income to the Treasury, George was actually only gving back what was ours anyway. The Windsors are now asking for 14 million a year - hardly a bargain to keep a bunch of useless drones in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

Our national heritage is not just in the buildings, it is in the freedom of thought and action that led to The Peasant's Revolt and ever other major insurrection of the people that has occured in this land - especially the thinking of The Levellers, The Diggers etc. as set out in the Agreement of the People and discussed in the Putney Debates and which stimulated the ideas of Paine, Rousseau, etc. which, of course led to the American Constitution...... That is the true heritage of this country - a heritage of ideas and ideals from people who refused to be bound by a bunch of in-bred idiots whose power rested on accident of birth.

In 1649 Parliament declared:
"the office of the king in this nation is unnecessary, burdensome and dangerous to the liberty, society and public interest of the people."

Today, more than ever, this holds true.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 05:46 PM

"Our national heritage is not just in the buildings, it is in the freedom of thought and action that led to The Peasant's Revolt and ever other major insurrection of the people that has occured in this land - especially the thinking of The Levellers, The Diggers etc. as set out in the Agreement of the People and discussed in the Putney Debates and which stimulated the ideas of Paine, Rousseau, etc. which, of course led to the American Constitution...... That is the true heritage of this country - a heritage of ideas and ideals from people who refused to be bound by a bunch of in-bred idiots whose power rested on accident of birth.

In 1649 Parliament declared:
"the office of the king in this nation is unnecessary, burdensome and dangerous to the liberty, society and public interest of the people."

Today, more than ever, this holds true."

Oliver Cromwell became far more dangerous to 'the liberty, society and public industry' of his people....

Our Heritage is ALL of our past, muddled together, a whole tapestry made woven with golden thread and golden corn, each created by the Princes and the Peasants.

You cannot wipe out our Royal Heritage, because in doing so, you wipe out so much of our history that nothing makes sense.

Today we have a population that knows not a great deal of our past, neither are they bovvered.....Their Kings and Queens are from Land of Chav, who can barely string two coherent words together, as they put their Royal signature on yet another 'Hello' magazine contract..

>>>"That is the true heritage of this country - a heritage of ideas and ideals from people who refused to be bound by a bunch of in-bred idiots whose power rested on accident of birth."<<<

The New Royals still are created from an accident of birth, but those children belong to the Beckhams, the Andres/Jordans....who parents are so bloody fik that the only names they know are the Designer ones on their underpants.

You may want these people as your new Royals, but personally, I'd prefer to discuss architecture with Prince Charles, talk to him about how he brought Organic Farming to the people of this country, long before it became the new cult. Listen to his passion about the people of his country, the food production, crops, houses, jobs, Prince's Trust....it's so much more refreshing than Queen Jordan flashing her rightroyal boobs in yer face, dontcha fink?


HERE is Your Prince, the one you'd probably take to the Guillotine if you could......

Prince Charles, talking about The Princes Trust and his 30 years of helping people who've never had help from their Parliament Politicians, whilst their Prince has stood firmly beside them...

Oh..and don't forget to listen to the trailer, where it says how his Trust has helped over HALF A MILLION PEOPLE

Charles, Prince of Wales and his wonderful Prince's Trust


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 05:47 PM

public 'interest'


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 05:49 PM

But if, Leveller, it leads to the American constitution, do you really want to go there?

Your argument about George giving the Crown Estate back is circular.   Its acquisition by the crown was legitimate according to the mores and laws of the times.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 14 Jun 10 - 06:14 PM

Below you can see Prince Charles visiting a centre for young people...It's his idea. He got the youngsters to design and create their own building. Pretty cool, huh, for a man that apparently is a waste of space, according to the media and some in here.

Part 1 - A Day In The Life

Don't get me wrong, I'm no ardent Royalist, but for too long the good work that many of them do has been overlooked, giving the impression that they do nothing all day long other than have the servants drop grapes into their mouths...

Princess Anne is President of the Save The Children Fund and now does a great deal for the Carers of this country, helping to raise awareness..

Here she is telling David Frost how she never realised her life was 'different' because to her, it was 'just life'...and it's interesting how she describes the servants, saying she looked upon them as people, with names, people whom she knew and to whom she said "Please" and "Thank You" all the time...

Princess Anne and David Frost - Youtube


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 03:40 AM

"Oliver Cromwell became far more dangerous to 'the liberty, society and public industry' of his people...."


Far more dangerous than whom? Charles I? I don't think so. I'm afraid your history is a little shaky. John Lilburne suffered under both and he certainly didn't want the return of the monarchy. Had the ideas of The Levellers been adopted instead of those of the Presbyterian landed squire class to which Cromwell belonged, things would have been far more equitable. Read 'The Agreement of the People' and 'England's New Chains Discovered'. And after the Restoration...hmmmmm. Try reading Skinner 'Liberty Before Liberalism' and Hill's 'Liberty Against the Law'...oh, and Cobbett's 'Rural Rides'. That will give you a far better insight into affairs as they really were before, during and after the Commonwealth.


"But if, Leveller, it leads to the American constitution, do you really want to go there?"

It's not the Constitution that's the problem (although, of course, we would need to frame our own), it's the interpretation and application which have allowed the greedy, self-seeking, bigotted and power-crazy to flourish unchecked.

"Your argument about George giving the Crown Estate back is circular."

Neverthless, the fact remains that the Crown Estate and its revenues do not belong to the monarch, as this, taken from the British Monarchy website, shows:

"The Crown Estate is not the personal property of the Monarch. It cannot be sold by the Monarch, nor do any profits from it go to the Sovereign.

The Crown Estate is managed by an independent organisation, headed by a Board, and any profits from the Estate is (sic!) paid every year to the Treasury for the benefit of all UK taxpayers. The Treasury is effectively the principle Government stakeholder and is kept informed of the estate's overall business plans and strategies.

The Estates portfolio has a value of over 7.3 billion,"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 03:46 AM

Red and Gold are royal colours,
Peasant colours are Green and Brown
Green is the corn in the Brown earth when it's growing
Red and Gold when the harvest is cut down.


Ralph McTell


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 04:17 AM

"Today we have a population that knows not a great deal of our past, neither are they bovvered"

A ludicrous generalisation. My younger son is doing a a History & Politics degree. He is certainly 'bovvered' and, at 19, I bet he knows a damn sight more about history than you do - or ever will. For someone who is so anti the educational system, you are pretty quick to arrogantly condemn people as 'fik'. That, I have to say, is an epithet that could just as easily be applied to you.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Stu
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 04:50 AM

"He got the youngsters to design and create their own building."

As long as it conforms to his own anachronistic and backward architectural viewpoint no doubt. Take a look at Poundbury; a chocolate-box Kinkade-like approximation of an rural idyll that only exists in the minds of those whose family never endured the rigours and hardships (let alone the back-breaking work) that ordinary people had to.

His intervention into the development at Chelsea Barracks was not only ill-judged (the man knows bugger all about architecture it seems) but also demonstrated his lack of accountability and his hatred of the democratic process. By going over the heads of all the public bodies appointed and personally appealing to the Qatari Royal Family, who subsequently pulled the plug because of his intervention it seems Charles has learnt sod all about where his place in society should be - his namesake Charles I suffered from similar delusions and whilst chopping the old scrote's head off is a bit much, he should have the humility and respect to keep his gob shut and let the planning process proceed unhindered.

The Royal Family might bring in the tourist dollars and certainly are a big part of the mucky myth of 'Britishness' that sells so well to foreign visitors but in reality their privileged upbringing has bog all to do with the ordinary working people of this country. Our history is far richer and represents a struggle against in spite of the values shown by Chaz et al.

Leveller has it spot on; The Levellers, The Diggers and people like Lillburne and Winstanley are the measure of the people these Islands can produce not the cosseted, wealthy blue-bloods who sit in their palaces and dabble in the affairs of honest, working people.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 06:21 AM

"A ludicrous generalisation. My younger son is doing a a History & Politics degree. He is certainly 'bovvered' and, at 19, I bet he knows a damn sight more about history than you do - or ever will. For someone who is so anti the educational system, you are pretty quick to arrogantly condemn people as 'fik'. That, I have to say, is an epithet that could just as easily be applied to you."

Nah, levells, you wanna come to Torquay! They don't give a bloody fig for history down here, most of the kids wouldn't know what a royal palace even is...

Just the other day I spoke to two people, on seperate occasions...one was a lovely young lad out on the streets promoting Amnesty International. He was *staggered* that so many people he'd spoken to i this town, particularly the young people, had never heard of Amnesty, nor wanted to know a thing about it.

The woman from Greenpeace said similar things, except that she'd got verbal abuse hurled at her as well.

Trust me, there are 'pockets' of this country where folks truly don't want to know anyfink about anyfink, unless it's yer football, yer drinkin' or yer new chav dog. Down in Torquay Chav Dogs rule, all dressed up in their studded collars to make 'em look even tougher...

Obviously I 'generalise' when I write. I thought you were edukated enuff to understand that.

It's interesting that everyone's now trying to deal with the mega alcohol problem this country has, when for so long you've been telling me that it doesn't even exist...

Hmmmmmmmmm........

Tell that to the Street Pastors down here, who every Saturday night go out onto the streets around the Harbour from midnight to 4am, to pick the kids off the floor, give them some donated warm cardis or jerseys to put on, to keep them warm, as they're almost suffering hypothermia, due to the amount of alcohol in their bodies..They ring their parents up, get them to come and take them home, so they don't get into some awful trouble.

The Street Pastors are a Christian Organisation, you know, those Evil Bastards that so many Mudcatters hate for daring to believe in God and trying to make the lives of others better, with their kindness and compassion..


Poundbury's a lovely place, imo...and Prince Charles knows a helluva lot about architecture and how bad architecture affects those who have to live inside it and around it. He could, of course, just sit on his throne all day long, but instead, he's chosen to try and make a difference in the lives of many...and he's succeeding in that.

The Divnie Right of Kings, is no less than the Divine Right of Folkies, who also assume that God is on their side, giving them the right to lop of the heads of anyone they disapprove off...

Ha!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 07:10 AM

"The Divnie Right of Kings, is no less than the Divine Right of Folkies, who also assume that God is on their side, giving them the right to lop of the heads of anyone they disapprove off..."

Not true. When did you last see a headless banjo or melodeon player? However, come the folk revolution..........


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Will Fly
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 08:46 AM

If we must have a monarchy, as opposed to an elected head of state, then why can't it be modelled, financially and philosophically, on the same basis as - say - the Dutch monarchy. The whole monarchy in that country is far more informal. Apart from the monarch, the monarch's consort and the heir-apparent - who are forbidden by law from having jobs, and whose stipends are index-linked to Civil Service salaries - the rest of the family have to work like anyone else, and no-one is tax exempt.

Monarchy Lite, eh? That's the ticket! Not the bloated sideshow we have in this country.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 09:23 AM

I wonder what the financial benefits would be if we abolished the entire monarchical system and sold off all the royal family's assets. Probably a damned sight more than could be acheived by hacking public services to pieces.

I wonder what the physical benefits to the populace would be, once we were able to stand up straight without the entire royal family on our backs.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 10:27 AM

and you cannot fault her for that.

Yes I can...

No scandal, no retirement,

Not having to abide by the same retirement rules as everyone else is a scandal in itself. But that aside some of the biggest scandals to ever hit the country have been instigated by the monarchy. I am sure I don't need to point them out.

and even now, I'm sure her work schedule is probably far greater than yours has ever been.

I have as much idea of her workload as someone who does not know me has of mine. One thing I am sure about though. She has never had to work because if she didn't the mortgage would not get paid, the children would go without clothes or she would starve. As I would. She has never been told to 'fix that problem or don't bother coming back', as I have. And she could step down whenever she wanted to. I will have to go on until I can afford not to.

Having said all that I have not once suggested that we abolish the monarchy. Far from it. I am just suggesting capitalising what we have by getting in a third party that can manage it far better than we ever could, without it being a drain on the country.

DeG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 03:50 PM

The Crown settled estated did belong to the Crown before the Crown settled them on trustees and now a trust corporation.

Poundbury is an admirable modern mirror to the benevolent estates of the past - Cadbury for example, and while not perfect is vastly better than the inner city estates (and wealthy gated ghettoes) that capitalism have given us.

On the Chelsea Barracks site, the only fault of Bigears is that he did not go far enough. All of the development proposals are vulgar vulgar vulgar. Architects are almost as insensitive to the broader environment as farmers.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Emma B
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 05:55 PM

'Occupied' Royal palaces and residences in the United Kingdom

Bagshot Park Balmoral Castle Birkhall Buckingham Palace Clarence House Gatcombe Park Highgrove House Hillsborough Castle Holyrood Palace St. James's Palace Kensington Palace Llwynywermod Royal Lodge Sandringham House Thatched House Lodge Windsor Castle

Thatched House Lodge sounds terribly quaint and English but is described as -

"A royal residence in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames in London, England.

The main house has six reception rooms, six bedrooms, and stands in four acres (16,000 m) of grounds.
The gardens include an eighteenth century two-room thatched summer house which gave the main house its name.

Since 1963 Thatched House Lodge has been the residence of Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy.
It was acquired by her late husband, Sir Angus Ogilvy, on a lease from Crown Estate Commissioners following their marriage

The house was used by various members of the Royal Household, including General Sir Edward Bowater, and General Lynedoch Gardiner, respectively Equerry to the Prince Consort and to Queen Victoria. Later Thatched House Lodge became the home of Wing Commander Sir Louis Greig (equerry to King George VI, when he was Duke of York), and then the Duke of Sutherland.
It was the London home of U.S. General during the Second World War"

Well hey! I've heard of Dwight D. Eisenhower! :)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Ed T
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 06:12 PM

Maybe, it's time to sell the Royals....But, didn't "Fergie" try to do that recently?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 06:18 PM

""the state-owned royal residences should be sold off to raise an estimated 2.2 billion to help towards the national debt.""

Yeah! That really makes sense.

First Brown the Prudent sells off the gold reserves which used to back up the value of the pound, and at the lowest gold price for half a century.

Second the bankers screw up the system and cause all this trouble.

Third, some bright spark wants to destroy the one remaining steady moneyspinner, by selling off the tourist attractions which keep it alive. And, FYI, these residences do not belong to the Windsors, they are the property of the nation (that's us), yet, in addition to the civil list, the queen tops up the maintenance cost out of her own money, and pays millions in taxes.

I suspect that most of the people here who are constantly whingeing about the Monarchy would run a mile, if asked to work the hours that the queen does.

I can't believe that anybody would be stupid enough to want to replace our apolitical head of state with an elected political party hack. The whole point of a constitutional Monarch is that he/she is politically neutral.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Emma B
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 06:20 PM

Although there are beutiful historical buildings like Hampton Court Palace, a royal palace in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames in south west London; many are no longer occupied

Hampton Court has not been lived in by the British royal family since the 18th century; today, the palace is open to the public, and is a major tourist attraction.

It is cared for by an independent charity, Historic Royal Palaces which receives no funding from the Government or the Crown

However, the palace housed 50 'grace and favour' residences given to esteemed servants and subjects of the crown.
It was an elderly recipient of one such grace and favour apartment who caused a major fire, which spread to the King's Apartments in 1986.

I love this exchange in parliament in February 1968 by William Hamilton MP for Fife, West discussing expenditure on 'grace and favour' residences :)

"The Minister of Public Building and Works, who is the right hon. Member for Bermondsey (Mr. Mellish), has 140 of these houses in his charge: 57 at Hampton Court, 43 at Windsor Castle, 16 at Kensington Palace, eight at Marlborough House Mews, nine at St. James's Palace, three at Buckingham Palace, one at Kew Palace and one at Hyde Park. These residences are entirely at the disposal of Her Majesty the Queen.
They are granted to members of the Royal Family, to persons who have rendered special service to the Crown, and, at Hampton Court, to widows of men who have rendered special service to their country.
I could give some examples.
One was given to Sir Alan Lascelles, the Queen's former private secretary. At that time, he was a director of the Midland Bank.
I do not think that he is now, but I took the trouble to look at the figures and I found that, in 1967, the Midland Bank had 25 directors, with total emoluments of 160,000.
This was a fellow who was living rent free, at the taxpayers' expense.

There was a piece in the Daily Express at the time: At Hampton Court Palace, the Queen is running a rather superior widows' home, choosing the tenants herself from widows of men who distinguished themselves in some form of service for the country.
It then cites certain examples.
There is a Post Office engineer who managed to get one of these houses by falling in love with and marrying Princess Margaret's maid.

I was so intrigued and excited by this marvellous instrument for awarding rent-free houses to those who had rendered valuable service to the nation that I wrote to Her Majesty on 14th July, 1964.

I raised the matter with my constituency party and, with the permission of the people concerned, I gave to Her Majesty the Queen the names and addresses of two retired miners and their wives in my constituency.
I pointed out that they had been 50 years in the pits.
They had been in much greater danger than a lot of the military men who had got these houses.

Both couples were living on their pension. Each of them seemed to me to have a cast-iron case for retirement with rent-free leisure. I was full of expectation when I received a letter from the Palace, dated 17th Julyno delay in replying:

"Dear Mr. Hamilton,

"I am commanded by The Queen to thank you for your letter of 14th July on the subject of the allocation of Grace and Favour Houses.

Yours sincerely,

M. E. Adeane."

The Chairman Order. It is not in order to bring a communication from or on behalf of the Monarch into the debate. "


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 06:38 PM

""Blackpool Pleasure Beach is the No.1 British tourist attraction.

I reckon they've forgotten there's a difference between an attraction which pulls in large numbers of English Lager Lout day trippers and a real Tourist attraction which draws in US dollars, Japanese Yen, and a multitude of other foreign currencies amounting to many millions of pounds sterling every year.

If you find that difficult to believe, go look at Buck House at eleven am weekdays, Tower Hill, Hampton Court, or Windsor Castle, and count the obvious foreigners.

I simply don't believe that Americans and Japanese come halfway round the world to visit Blackpool, or Alton Towers, when they have far better in the United States and Japan, and with better weather too.

In point of fact, I don't think you would find many in either country who have ever heard of Blackpool Pleasure Beach.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 06:51 PM

""She has never had to work because if she didn't the mortgage would not get paid, the children would go without clothes or she would starve.""

Absolutely true!

And yet, purely out of a sense of duty she works a fourteen hours a day schedule, which would have seen many a CEO, twenty years her junior, off with a heart attack.

Would you do as much? I doubt it.

The Royals are arguably the greatest facilitators of trade agreement with foreign countries, simply because they can talk to anybody without any political dimension to the discussion.

The queen personally manages all the business of running the Royal estates, and she is notoriously frugal, as anyone in the know will confirm.

If you worked for a company which insisted on paying your expenses at rates which existed in 2004, and as a result you were effectively having to pay nearly half out of your own pocket, I suspect you might be asking for an increase.

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 07:13 PM

If there were to be a real change in how the country worked, with a move to a genuinely egalitarian society in which there would be no place for extremes of wealth or poverty, I can't see much room for a hereditary monarchy.

But if it's just to be the same old system, with fat cats ripping us all off, and a privileged minority running the place, whatever the political label, I can't see that getting rid of the monarchy would be anything other than a pretty meaningless bit of stage-dressing, which wouldn't change anything signifiacant.

In fact, if I look around at those (more or less) democratic countries which have retained their hereditary monarchs, and those which have dispensed with them, on the whole I tend to prefer the former.

I see the royals essentially as a variety of lottery winners, and see no reason to feel particularly hostile to them any more than I do to other lottery winners. Lottery of birth, National Lottery - what's the real difference?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Tug the Cox
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 08:00 PM

Look, we don't NEED 'em...which isn't to say that they don't try really hard to do their best...and have so little privacy that I would just hate to be one of 'em....BUT THEY ARE NOT NECESSARY.....and bloody expensive...and a distraction from what is important in politics. ( Good to see you back Lizzie, but you're backing the wrong horse this time xxx)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 08:40 PM

Privatising historic buildings isn't much better in principle than privatising the Gas Board or the railways was. If, in this fantasy revolution, the Royals are to be condemned to the dole queue, then the residences should be administered by the National Trust. Personally, I'd leave the major Royals as they are, and skin down the Civil Service.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Emma B
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 08:49 PM

In June last year it was reported that

"Palace officials have told the Treasury they need the dramatic rise to the 7.9m grant because they are exhausting their cash reserves and cannot make further cuts in spending
Richard Bacon, a Conservative MP and member of the public accounts committee, said: "If there is to be a quid pro quo, there must be far greater access to Buckingham Palace.
The White House also has a head of state and security concerns, but is open most of the year round."

The 7.9m annual grant covers the cost of the official royal household, from banquets and furnishings to housemaids and footmen.
Accounts to be published tomorrow reveal the monarchy costs more than 40m a year in public funds, excluding security costs, which are thought to be about 50m per year.
Apart from the civil list, the palace receives government "grants-in-aid" for maintenance of the palaces and travel.

The Queen also draws on personal income from the Duchy of Lancaster.
The Crown Estate last year made a profit of 211m.

About 70% of the civil list money goes towards salaries and pensions for staff. It also pays for official functions such as garden parties, receptions and official entertainments.

Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat MP, said: "It's hardly sensitive for one of the richest families in the country to be demanding millions of more pounds from the taxpayer when most people are struggling with household bills. I'm not convinced they have been prudent enough.
"If the royal family are convinced they are offering value for money, they should subject themselves to the freedom of information act like every other part of the public sector.
"Until there is that level of transparency, any rise should be resisted."

The palace has already appealed for an extra 4m a year from the culture, media and sport department to help pay for the maintenance of the occupied palaces, including Buckingham Palace and Windsor. They say there is 32m maintenance backlog.

The public accounts committee published a report last April which said that the royal palaces provided accommodation for 171 staff and pensioners.
An accountant to the privy purse, a press secretary and a Queen's page were among staff who enjoyed grace and favour homes on the royal estate when they retired."

Telegraph report


I think it is, at least, very disingenuous to conflate the likes of Windsor Palace, Clarence House etc with very limited opportunities for not inexpensive public visits, with the likes of Hampton Court or the Tower of London etc which are cared for by independent charities which receive NO funding from the Government or the Crown and pay their way as historical tourist attractions.

NOBODY has suggested these should be 'sold off' whatever some posters would have you believe!

To return to the origins of this thread not some predictable out of the pram hyperbole

"The suggestion that the Queen should do her bit by selling off some of her properties, valued at 2.2billion, reared its head in a survey, which revealed that 54% of people supported the sale of royal RESIDENCES to reduce the deficit.

It comes at a time when the cost of providing armed police protection for VIPs, including minor royals, is also being questioned."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 15 Jun 10 - 09:06 PM

It would be interesting to know how much of their annual grant is providing jobs.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: GUEST,Rotter
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 01:25 AM

I love the smell of adolescent Republican bile in the morning - trying to turn us into an adolescent republican load of crap like America. Go Lizzie!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 03:23 AM

Lot of trimming in this thread!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 03:57 AM

Oh dear, Don, you've really fallen for the Windsor PR machine crap hook, line and sinker.

"selling off the tourist attractions which keep it alive"

Rubbish! York, the country's second most popular tourist city, has no 'royal' attractions . Come here any day throughout the year and you can hardly move for foreign tourists. Then there's Bath, Stonehenge, Trafalgar Square, the beautiful British countryside.... the list goes on an on. 'Visit Britain' hasn't even collated statistics on the monarchy as an attraction, which shows that it is not a key factor the the promotion of UK tourism. Suppose, for example, that Buckingham Palace was fully open to the public all year round, instead of just standing around outside - that would be far more of an attraction.

"I suspect that most of the people here who are constantly whingeing about the Monarchy would run a mile, if asked to work the hours that the queen does."

"she works a fourteen hours a day schedule"


What complete and utter drivel. Your evidence, please! To compare the royal lifestyle with that of police officers, nurses, doctors and many, many other hardworking people is totally absurd. The Windsors have no contracts of employment, no supervision, no appraisals. Quote from Mark Bolland, former press officer for Charlie: "the Windsors are very good at working 3 days a week, five months of a year and making it look as though they work hard."

If you're going to spout such crap, Don, perhaps you'd like to back it up with facts.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 04:34 AM

If you worked for a company which insisted on paying your expenses at rates which existed in 2004, and as a result you were effectively having to pay nearly half out of your own pocket, I suspect you might be asking for an increase.

Well, the only expense I claim is my car mileage. Which has been the same rate since it was first published by HMRC in 2002. But that aside...

If my pocket contained five quid I probably would. If it contained several million and was constantly topped up by interest on monies inherited from an ignominious past I would think twice about making it public.


DeG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Howard Jones
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 05:34 AM

14 million sounds like a lot of money (it is a lot of money) but as a proportion of total government spending of 631 billion in 2009 it is a drop in the ocean.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Gervase
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 06:07 AM

Look at the French. Since they got rid of their monarchy they've had no tourist income at all. And just look at their royal palaces, once-magnificent buildings which are now crumbling and off-limits to everyone, not just the peasantry - Versailles, The Tuileries, Fontainbleau, what is now the Louvre; I could go on.
Heaven forbid that Britain ever goes down that road...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 06:09 AM

Yea, but that's the French, Gervase. It's why we keen fighting them;-)

DeG


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Amergin
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 06:34 AM

The UK can always follow the esteemed traditions of the French....they got rid of their royalty in a very efficient manner.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: GUEST,Rotter
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 09:29 AM

By murdering them. Great mentality there mate. Trying to be funny? You need a brain for that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Emma B
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 10:05 AM

Last December it looked as though the royals would have to follow MPs in adapting to the new age of open, accountable government. Freedom of Information cases such as looking at MP's expenses had shifted the default position from automatic secrecy for the powerful to the belief that power must be open and accountable to the people.

The Independent newspaper had just won a three-year battle for the disclosure of public subsidies paid for the upkeep of royal palaces.

The information commissioner ruled in favour of the Independent, saying:
"Disclosure would enhance public awareness and understanding of the funding and accommodation arrangements of the royal household and this would be in the public interest." He went on: "The discussions relate to the spending of the Grant in Aid which is specifically in relation to the maintenance and upkeep of the Royal Household. In the commissioner's view, disclosure would not undermine the privacy of, nor the constitutional position of, the royal family

When some of the information was finally released in March 2010 the nature of the correspondence was much like that of MPs' expenses it showed the only "harm" was embarrassment.
The palace was shown to be lobbying for more money while at the same time providing rent-free accommodation (grace and favour) to a number of minor royals and courtiers

The Independent published some of this information on Wednesday, 31 March 2010

It also acquired information that there was a 40,000 overspend in the refurbishment of the kitchen and coffee room of Windsor Castle.
The kitchen is used to prepare hot drinks for the Queen and her household.
The workmen uncovered voids under the floors which might provide "rat runs".
The refurbishment of York House (St James's Palace) led to an overspend of 99,000.


The total cost to the public of keeping the monarchy increased by 1.5m to 41.5m in the 2008/9 financial year.
Of the 13.9m Civil List purse, nearly 10m went on staff salaries.
Housekeeping and furnishings cost 700,000 and ceremonial functions cost 400,000.
A further 1.1m was spent on catering and hospitality - within this, garden parties cost 600,000, while the cost of food and the royal kitchens came to 500,000

The cost of Royal travel, which is also paid by the taxpayer, increased by 300,000 from 6.2m to 6.5m

However, the 41m total does not include security provided by the police and Army or the ceremonial duties performed by the Armed Forces

Last year it was reported that
'A security review is under way over the cost of providing police protection for junior members of the royal family.
Scotland Yard officers have expressed concern over the bill, which experts estimate now costs 50m.'

For example
Princess Eugenie, the younger daughter of Prince Andrew, (described by the Daily Mail as a 'B list Royal') has two specialist officers constantly at her side; estimated to cost 250,000 a year - including salaries, accommodation, living and travel expenses
This will continue if she goes to study in the US as she has said she wishes to.
Her older sister, Beatrice, 21, also enjoys full-time protection. She is living in a four-bedroom apartment in the royal residence of St James's Palace while studying history at Goldsmiths, University of London.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 10:15 AM

How much does the USA spend on security for Pres. Obama and his family?
How much has the USA spent on security, years after they left office, for the Bush and Clinton families?
It's not the fault of the Royal Family, nor of elected leaders and their families, if terrorists and criminals wish to do them harm or use them as leverage for their nefarious ends.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: MMario
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 10:18 AM

13.9m Civil List purse, nearly 10m went on staff salaries


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Emma B
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 01:49 PM

Actually Backwoodsman the bulk of the estimated 50 million security bill is NOT the time spent shadowing young royals and driving them home from nightclubs , but the fixed costs of guarding the number of royal residences with armed officers around the clock

In fact, neither of Princess Anne's children get routine cover because their mother considers it a waste of public money.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Paul Burke
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 02:08 PM

We beat the French to it by over 150 years. It's a pity we let them back in.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 05:25 PM

From the original article:

Royal properties such as Balmoral should be sold to help pay back national debt, a study of British sentiment suggested today.

The survey showed most people 54% would back the sale of royal residences to tackle the country's deficit.

It found such a sell-off could generate more than 2.2billion. Experts said Buckingham Palace, was the Queen's most valuable property. Estimates suggested it could raise 1.5billion, if it was sold off.

Balmoral on Royal Deeside, a favourite residence of the Royal Family, was valued at 115million. Windsor Castle was valued at 390.9million; Sandringham 125million, and Clarence House at 70million.

Property analyst Nigel Lewis said: "Selling these properties might only be a drop in the ocean in terms of tackling our national debt, but clearly people have taken the view that every little bit helps.

"The Government keeps telling us that we need to make major cuts to reduce the deficit and nothing is sacrosanct, so perhaps it's not implausible that a couple of royal palaces could be sold off to the highest bidder."

He said there would be "no shortage of interest", adding: "Russian oligarchs and Middle Eastern sheiks wouldn't hesitate."



I'd rather see those assets remain within the British economy. Selling them off would be like throwing money down the drain in the long term. However, 54% isn't exactly an overwhelming majority.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 06:57 PM

Some more details of this great survey from the link given in this thread's opening post:

"FindaProperty.com consulted 500 people for the study earlier this month. It invites people to join debates on this on Twitter and on Facebook..."

I'm not really too impressed by that kind of "study".


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 16 Jun 10 - 07:36 PM

I think describing 54% as "most people" has got to be some sort of wind-up..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Paul Burke
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 01:18 PM

Adam?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: MMario
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 01:28 PM

Wow - 54% of 500 people...great national survey


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 02:05 PM

It's given the originators a bit of free advertising. I don't think it was ever meant to be taken too seriously.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 07:00 PM

Rather as if the posts in this thread were analysed, and used as evidence that an overwhelming majority of people in the UK were in favour of scrapping the monarchy.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Paul Burke
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 07:39 PM

Someone's deleted the harmless anonymous guest post I replied to. For reference purposes, my reply was to the question, "When Adam delved and Eve span, who was wrong when the tree fell in the forest?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 07:58 PM

I seem to remember the question was actually, "What do you know about crabs?"


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 08:16 PM

Same old same old Leveller.

Got no genuine answer, attack the poster.

Heard it all before.

Have fun
Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 08:24 PM

I suggest that instead of watching Big Brother, you try watching a documentary or two. You know, the ones where you learn something.

There have been several made by the BBC on the subject of the queen's daily schedule, and given the BBC's heavy leftward slant, I wouldn't think they were going out of there way to favour her.

There were a number of comments from the production team about being knackered trying to keep up with her.

Of course, I wouldn't expect you to believe any of that, after all, anyone who doesn't spend the day up to his elbows in dirt, and earns more than a dustman's wge is a lazy toff, isn't he?

Don T.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 10:41 PM

Apparently the treasury gets all the surplus income from the Crown Estate - 1.8 billion in the last ten years. They appear to give back more than they take, and that's without taking into account all the employment they provide or the huge tax bills they pay.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 06:19 AM

The usual suspects I see - who should now be preparing their spreadsheets to recalculate their Child Tax credits!!!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 06:50 AM

"Same old same old Leveller.

Got no genuine answer, attack the poster."


No, just attacking your profound and perennial ignorance and inclination to try to put across your opinions as facts. Easy target!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 07:06 AM

What do you propose instead of the monarchy? Let's see what kind of a fiasco you can dream up!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 07:32 AM

"Actually Backwoodsman the bulk of the estimated 50 million security bill is NOT the time spent shadowing young royals and driving them home from nightclubs , but the fixed costs of guarding the number of royal residences with armed officers around the clock

In fact, neither of Princess Anne's children get routine cover because their mother considers it a waste of public money."

The point I was trying to make, Emma, is that the bill for police protection would be at least as large, maybe considerably larger, if they were protecting a President and his family instead of the Royal family. If people imagine that, by doing away with the Royal family and becoming a Republic with a President and attendant entourage, we are going to save a shedload of money, they are guilty of some real serious self-deception.

There may be legitimate justifications for getting rid of Royalty, but I seriously doubt that 'Economy' would feature in the list.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 07:39 AM

I think that it's just the concept of a monarchy that gets up their lefty noses, the potentially higher cost of a presidency is simply ignored. They'll be wanting a revolution next and "to be free"!!!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 08:32 AM

Well Bonzo, I'd probably qualify as a 'Lefty' from your POV, (even though I'm not a natural Labour voter!) but I'd rather have the Windsors than the Bushes, Clintons, Reagans, Sarkozys and Merkels of this world.

Just imagine, 'President Brown' or, even worse, 'President Cameron' - For F**k's Sake beam me up, Scotty! :-) :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 09:29 AM

Absolutely!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 09:30 AM

And of course none of them can play polo!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 09:49 AM

You don't know that! :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Stu
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 10:34 AM

"What do you propose instead of the monarchy? Let's see what kind of a fiasco you can dream up!!"

Well, and elected president drawn from people not representing a political party, corporate interests or any religion. Cap the expenditure of the office and scrutinise every aspect of it's spending and fix the term of office to four years. Cut all ties with the Church to separate Church from State.

Keep the Commons, reform the Lords and make it elected from all tiers of society regardless of class, social or ethnic background, wealth etc.

Simple!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 11:12 AM

Exactly - a fiasco!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bryn Pugh
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 11:19 AM

Tune : John Brown's Body (or the Battle Hymn of the Republic - please yourself)

The queen can make a living in a care home wiping bums (tris)
When the Revolution's here.

Cho : Free beer for all the workers (tris)
When the Revolution's here.

Harry and Willy can sell their arses on the 'Dilly (tris)
When the Revolution's here. Cho.

We'll put Anne and Camilla in a Moss Side knocking shop (tris)
When the Revolution's here. Cho.

Phil the Greek can make his living serving doner kebabs (tris)
When the Revolution's here. Cho

Charlie the gardener must be made to shovel shit (tris)
When the Revolution's here/. Cho.

Baldy Eddie poncing as Malvolio in the play (tris)
When the Revolution's here. Cho.

Andy acting caddie to Col. Montgomerie (tris)
When the Revolution's here. (Cho.)

Beatrice and Eugenie serving ale in Student Bars (tris)
When the Revolution's here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 11:57 AM

Pathetic.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Stu
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:20 PM

"Exactly - a fiasco!"

You've got me there. No point in discussing the relative merits of an idea with this sort of insightful response.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:29 PM

Surely politicians are 'of the people'; aren't they?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: gnu
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 02:14 PM

That's about all they seem to have in common with 'the People' these days, G.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 06:26 PM

Surely the chorus still has to be "When the Red Revolution comes" - otherwise it doesn't scan?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 02:20 PM

Such details probably won't matter too much if the workers are all getting free beer, McG, although I'm not sure who's going to pay for it..


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: gnu
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 02:25 PM

I haven't seen Beth posting here lately. Has her favour for blues and folk music waned?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 02:54 PM

It's claimed that Princess Margaret had a Mellotron.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 02:23 AM

WTF is Beth?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:04 PM

'er Majesty?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:22 PM

'E means Madge


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Smokey.
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:28 PM

'Er wots on the stamps with the posh 'at.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: gnu
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:51 PM

Backwoodsman.

I call her Beth whenever we get together for gin and crumpets. Some of her best buds call her Liz, or Betty, or Two. But I am the the only one she lets call her Beth... besides Phil of course.

I always tease Phil when they drop by, out of Beth's earshot, fer sure eh. I say sommat like, "Best job in the world you lucky bugger. If you were King you would have to do a might more than just jump Beth." We always have a good laugh together over that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 06:31 PM

So if the monarchy was abolished what should the new name for the UK be?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:03 AM

The Louvre in Paris - a former royal palace - is one of the most visited buildings in the world. Why not turn Buckingham Palace into a world class art gallery/museum.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:08 AM

Do you know how much the present clutch of galleries are costing the UK tax payer?
While we're getting rid of the monarchy for reasons of a mass inferiority complex, among certain malcontents. Why don't we sell all the pictures and statues, that too would save money, and destroy our heritage.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 04:29 AM

Why don't we sell all the pictures and statues, that too would save money, and destroy our heritage.

Don't worry, John. The concept has been voiced and disputed for a long time and will contine to be so -

HMS Foudroyant

As I keep saying. It's not a question of getting rid. We want to keep the residencies and the royals. We just want to get the most out of them and ensure they make rather than waste money.

DISNEY!

Cheers

:D (eG)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: bubblyrat
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 05:17 AM

Interesting comments some of you have made !! Personally, I am pro-Royalist, although I must say that I feel that Their Highnesses OUGHT to be able to just flit between Windsor Castle and Buck House , or nip orf for weekends to stay with Anne or Charles, without incurring the added expense of maintaining Holyrood House,Sandringham, Balmoral, etc ., unless ,of course,they own them & pay for them from their own pocket.....The Castle of Mey ,if they MUST have a holiday home in Scotland, belonged to the Queen Mother anyway, didn't it ??
             Some of you have mentioned the way that Royalty behave in other countries, ie Holland.Well, I can't really see Elizabeth Regina or Philip of Macedonia cycling around Wapping dispensing general bonhomie and enquiring as to the well-being of Chalky, Smudger , and Fag-ash Lil, can you ?? No, I thought not.
                On the other hand,there are many,I suspect,of less noble birth,if not actually outright Plebs,who are on the fiddle,working a flanker, fraudulently claiming benefits,avoiding tax payments,and all the while having more than one residence,not to mention holiday homes & Pieds -a-Terres ,and generally being a curse to society & a drain on the National economy. So why not target these undesirables first,before getting bilious about Betty,furious with Phil,angry with Annie,or chokker with Charley ??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 07:49 AM

Gnu, you are obviously not acquainted with Her Majesty on a personal basis at all. Those of us who are, are fully aware that her nickname in the family is 'Lillibet'.

We also know that HM is an avid Mudcat-Lurker (although Royal Protocol and UK constitutional rules prevent her from posting, as the ruler is required to have no official opinions), and that she removes from her Birthday Honours List all members who make wild and erroneous claims of being a family friend. So that's bye-bye to your hopes of becoming Lord Gnu of Mudcat! :-) :-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: gnu
Date: 23 Sep 10 - 02:46 PM

Lil'bet, as I call her when we chat, Backwoodsman, is in a coin crunch.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Emma B
Date: 23 Sep 10 - 07:53 PM

It seems this winter may see a few two or three corgi nights!

Queen tried to use state poverty fund to heat Buckingham Palace

The Queen asked ministers for a poverty handout to help heat her palaces but was rebuffed because they feared it would be a public relations disaster, documents disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act reveal.

Royal aides were told that the 60m worth of energy-saving grants were aimed at families on low incomes and if the money was given to Buckingham Palace instead of housing associations or hospitals it could lead to "adverse publicity" for the Queen and the Government."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Sep 10 - 08:23 PM

Well, I was certainly glad that Queen Elizabeth was in residence at Buckingham Palace when I went to visit. The Tower of London was nice, but it was a disappointment that Anne Boleyn was no longer there.... I didn't even bother to pay the admission and go inside. Same with St. Paul's.

Think twice before you force the Windsors to vacate their palaces. Their presence is a terrific tourist attraction. After all, what would the Vatican be worth if the Pope didn't live there?

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Sep 10 - 08:39 PM

Perhaps Penelope Rutledge could buy those palaces and bail the Royals out of this sticky wicket they are presently in.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Emma B
Date: 23 Sep 10 - 08:49 PM

"After all, what would the Vatican be worth if the Pope didn't live there?"

A museum and art gallery?

Well it was when I visited - I have no idea if the Pope was in residence or not

I thought that Buckingham Palace's 19 state rooms, ballroom and gardens were only open to paying visitors while the Queen is not in residence but making her annual visit to Balmoral.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Teribus
Date: 23 Sep 10 - 11:29 PM

The Queen actually owns Sandringham (1862) and Balmoral (1852), both were bought by Queen Victoria and Prince Albert. Upkeep for both is met by the Royal Family themselves. Castle of May was privately owned by the Queen Mother and was left to Prince Charles in her Will. So deduct those from the list of money earners they do not enter the equation.

I love the way "socialists" have this uncontrolled desire to tell people what THEY have to do, yet somehow the same strictures conveniently do not apply to themselves.

Places such as Windsor Castle, Buckingham Palace and Holyrood are all "Official" Residences owned by the Government (Crown Estate) and are therefore are not options for disposal as your "President" would have to "officially" live somewhere and "officially" entertain somewhere.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: BS: Queen asked for anti-poverty grant
From: theleveller
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 03:43 AM

It appears that, in 1994, Liz Windsor, self-styled queen of Britain, asked for a 60m anti-poverty grant to heat her palaces. Luckily she was refused.

Queen seeks anti-poverty grant.


Bloody hell, that woman has the cheek of the devil (which is where she should go to if she isn't warm enough)!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Queen asked for anti-poverty grant
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 04:06 AM

Where does the expression 'self styled queen of Britain' come from??? Who made you judge and jury over British Monarchy. They have their uses or they wouldn't still exist. Guess you are just making another effort to inflame!!! You failed.......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Queen asked for anti-poverty grant
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 04:08 AM

My elderly father would have a few words to say about that (not printable).


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Joe Offer
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 04:16 AM

Threads combined. No need for two currently active threads on the royal residences.

-Joe-


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 04:28 AM

"Guess you are just making another effort to inflame!!!"

No, just having an opinion on this anachronistic institution. Fortunately, we are now able to do that in this country without being sent to the Tower (a position for which many thousands died). As for the monarchy having their uses, I can't find one.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 04:43 AM

In a time where everyone has had to tighten belts, for her to have so many homes is obscene and it can't be cheap for the day to day running and maintenance of these places let alone paying for all of the staff working in the homes. To hear that Liz is bleating poverty takes the cake. Do what the rest of us would have to do, sell up. Sorry I have no sympathy some ordinary folks are going through bad times themselves.

She could turn one of her properties into a 'fest'site get Richard Branson involved, I am sure performers Shirley Bassie, Ozzie, Macca and the Quo would oblige.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 04:50 AM

>>>>>>As for the monarchy having their uses, I can't find one.<<<<<< Leveller... perhaps a quick look back over Lizzies earlier posts to the thread might give you some idea of what at least some of the Monarchy do....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 05:12 AM

Georgiansilver....perhaps a quick look back over my previous posts will tell you my answer to that. It would appear that you are being deliberately obtuse. I am bringing to people's attention another reason why we should be rid of this greedy, expensive and unrepresentative institution. If you feel so strongly about it, maybe you'd like to send a donation to help Liz Windsor keep warm - a thick pair of sock perhaps?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 08:07 AM

I did say, perhaps a quick look back over Lizzies earlier posts...... but I guess your opinion supercedes the need for that eh??


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: artbrooks
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 08:26 AM

We seem to be arguing over very old news. This all happened in 2005.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 09:31 AM

"I did say, perhaps a quick look back over Lizzies earlier posts...... but I guess your opinion supercedes the need for that eh?? "

You're completely dodging the issue of this thread which was combined into an older one by Joe. Do you believe that the queen was right to apply for assistance from a fund designed to stop poverty-stricken people from dying of hypothermia? A straight 'yes' or 'no' will do. Is that really too scary for you?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: theleveller
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 09:46 AM

Art, this is current news because the info has just been released.

Interesting comments about this and other issues including the subject of freedom of information and the monarchy here:

Republic Facebook


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 01:44 PM

theleveller... I am not dodging any issues. Were I in a position to know the Queens finances, I feel I might be able to make an adequate assessment. You are declaring that the Royals are a waste of time, have no uses.... but had you read Lizzies posts... you might see that she describes some of them adequately. Have you read Lizzies posts?? Is it you who is dodging the issue??? Are you so entrenched in your own opinion that you cannot tolerate anything outside it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Sep 10 - 02:59 PM

Once we've got rid of the fat cats who have wrecked the economy, and continue to rip us all off, it might make sense to turn our attention to royalty.

Doing it the other way round doesn't really seem to work too well in achieving a society without a grotesque distribution of wealth and power.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: GUEST,WHICH RESIDENCE??
Date: 26 Oct 15 - 02:09 PM

What residence in particular are you referencing in your bombastic rally cry? To clarify Balmoral Castle & Estate along with the Sandringham House Estate are PRIVATELY OWNED BY HER MAJESTY. If you have your eyes fixed on any of the other main Royal Homes you'd best confirm the legality of ownership before taking offers. 1992 was the year of the Windsor Castle fire however it was also the year when a major legal anomaly was settled. That being who owns what, Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, Frogmore, St James Palace, Kensington Palace, Clarence House form a small part of the 'Crown Estate' portfolio which is legally owned by the Sovereign of the United Kingdom "in right of the Crown". Now 1992 was useful as it demonstrated that the holdings are in no way public owned, should the mechanisms of Government elect to remove the Sovereign thereby removing 'The Crown' the Crown Estates in their entirety are no longer 'held in trust' instead, as confirmed by the Government & Judiciary, they become the personal property of the Head of the Dynasty, at the moment Her Majesty The Queen.

So please elaborate, excluding current personal holdings & Crown Estate holdings which become personal property should the Crown be overthrown, what properties you want to sell.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Time to sell the royal residences
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 26 Oct 15 - 11:22 PM

That's a passionate response to a five-year-old thread. . .


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 2 December 11:44 AM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright 1998 by the Mudcat Caf Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.