General Chat

Just want to say, I think that £9000 was the amount it cost for Prince William to fly a helicopter somewhere, a stag do I think. However, it was counted as part of his miliatary training.
Lizx

I would imagine same amount of tourists that go other place in UK,such as ,Catherdals.Abby's they still pull in tourits by the droves and no one lives in them,,

BP would become just that, one of the many places open to paid public viewing.then it would become a monument of past history.it would still draw crowds as people would be intested to see where *they* once lived.,
Windsor Cs is a private residence of HRH<so maintianed by her I belive,

This country will always be a crowd puller because its steeped in such spendid history,lenght and breath,

How many of the thousand of the tourist ever get to see the Queen in a week?even if the flag is flying little chance anyone of them will ever get to see her.

Haven't read the whole thread, but I think that the upkeep of the palace etc. should come out of public coffers. The queen after all is just doing a job, and the house(s) she lives in is part of the job.

Yes, tourists will still go to the UK, but if there was no royalty and all the pomp and circumstance that goes with it, I'm sure the numbers would be down.

How many people flock to Canada hoping to get a glimpse of our Prime Minister? lol

The money the royals bring in via tourism, should help pay for the upkeep of the palace.

Deb (who has British citizenship)

Lily - I too liked Mo Mowlam. I thought she was a breath of fresh air in British politics. And the powers that be knew it also, and that was her downfall. Look what she did in Northern Ireland, in her short time there. Far more than all the others in all the time they were there. The Northern Irish appreciated her no nonsense approach and her earthiness, not the shilly shallying and hand wringing of the others

Anyway to get back on track,,,the houses in the Queens own personal possesion now are inherited properites from her own families wealth and as such will be handed down when the time comes,as will BP.which is not hers to own anyway.

What inherited personal wealth surley is just that personal family fortunes. would anyone like to be told,that the million you had been bequeathed by family be spent for the benifit of the country,?

The queen, our queen is what keeps us English, British. If we lost her or our royal family we would become a state. We seem to have lost most of what made us so great in the world and a monach seems all we have left.

I agree with you Kay. if the Queen and Co, were not there ( I wish no one any harm) the tourist would still come. they come to see the wonderful sights that Brittain has to offer. Not many tourist, or for that matter people in England ever see the Queen,and believe me, I wouldn't want her job.but there are so many persons without a home. so you would think that she would want to help with the cost of keeping the Palace, in good repair, by the way, I need a new roof, and being a pensioner, really dont know where I will get the money from.but cant see anyone helping me.

No................I think it did the family good to rethink their role in our lives and be more open.

I loved Mo Mowlan... : (

All great points....Do you think though that the Queen..her reputation..took a `bit of a knock`..with all the Princess Diana sagas? in the past?~

In my view, and it is only my view, the Queen is what makes Britain the envy of the world. Remember, she wasn't born to be Queen, and only came to be so by default, as you might say. Though never having been a big Prince Philip lover, in all honesty, if I ask myself why, I can't come up with a reasoned answer. But, he has stood by her, actually a few paces behind her, and supported her fully. Ask yourself, would your OH be as good at it as he has been at wife support.
As for their children, only Prince Andrew I really find as a financial offence. Now there is a guy that can spend the publics money, and those God awful daughters, do they take liberties.
What is our alternative. Another syhped up megalomaniac, like Mugabe. Remember the old adage, better the devil you know than the devil you don't. This is,of course, only my opinion.

But the Governments ..........all of them, have all made themselves a cosy club with gold-plated pensions and claims on their expenses for second homes, realtives receiving salaries for questionable jobs etc etc.

These politicians have made a choice to do the jobs they do...............the Queen had no choice and she has dedicated her life to the service of her country.

That is the difference, no matter what monies are involved.

I am proud to be English and the royal family are a part of my heritage that I am proud of.

I can't ever say I have been proud of any politicians.............except maybe Mo Mowlan, who I did admire greatly.

But we do pay for a double act,

One the Royals,and the other a Prime Minister.

Just so annoying that heads of other countires are treated to such indulgence of visits,while some in our own cant afford to be regular meat eaters.

The revenue brought into this country by Royalty doesnt by any means benifit us all by a short fall of few million heads,

~~I think there have been some really good points made..I wouldnt consider myself a Royalist..
The Queen and monachy are good for this country..for bringing in tourism..the charities they are involved in..I respected the Queen when she offered to pay taxes..(how many yrs ago now?)
Plus She was good during the wartime..for moral..~~

~~how much would a president cost..in comparison?..estimate wise?..~~

Oh Nooooooooooo.....................too horrible to think about

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.runs off to find a nice thread:))))))

I wonder, if the monarchy were abolished tomorrow and we were to have a president - who would be top contender for the job....?

No one springs to mind, but I can't think of a single politician I would like to see there.

If the flight cost that much it's still cheaper than the amounts spent by politicians.

What about Government ministers on their jaunts abroad..................or the Blairs when they took the Royal Flight over for holidays they didn't pay for.

The Royal family are, I think quite prudent in the amount they spend................the alternative doesn't bear thinking about.

There is no doubt she has had and does have a life of pure indulgence with no expense spared.but thats whats known as cutting your cloth to meet your means,,and boy she cuts the cloth mighty fine,,

my point is...that I think the Royal family could cut down their travelling costs..be a bit more considerate..that is all..no more no less...

I would imagine that at 82, the Queen would love to sit back and relax.......but she was born to be Queen and does her duty as such with remarkable energy and grace.

She has an enormous income with a huge amount of outgoings..............not her choice, but they go with her position.

The upkeep of Buckingham Palace is not her financial responsibilty.