Buckingham Palace to get £369million modernisation works

Well in fairness to Mr K he'd rather there was no national government and we'd be run purely from brussels and like others with that mindset I'll take the leap he is anti monarchy as well so shoving the queen into a bedsit to represent this country will be ok with him. There are a growing number of people with similar views and if we have such a group within the country can we really be surprised at low opinions of us from outside.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Osem

... yes and some folks were just born idiots.

Yes but don't let it hold you back

I'm not particularly anti-monarchist, but they do need to pay their. Asking the tax payer to pay when you've got 400 million tucked away and we have a massive defecit is a bit cheeky. Would you prefer your local hospital be kept open, or the Queen to get a house make over?

There are several palaces, some rarely used. She only stays one night a year in the Holyrood palace ! I'm not suggesting they get knocked down, give some to the National Trust and they/visitors can pay for the upkeep.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Well in fairness to Mr K he'd rather there was no national government and we'd be run purely from brussels and like others with that mindset I'll take the leap he is anti monarchy as well so shoving the queen into a bedsit to represent this country will be ok with him. There are a growing number of people with similar views and if we have such a group within the country can we really be surprised at low opinions of us from outside.

The sort of people who whine about the excesses of the monarchy but have little or nothing to say about the excesses of champagne socialists like Blair and all the others who don't mind riding the gravy train when it comes to their allowances, perks, expenses, grace and favour apartments etc.

Yeah the UK would be so much better if we had someone like Blair as head of state and I'm sure he'd be happy to do it all from the spartan comforts of a 2 up 2 down in Scunthorpe.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Mr K

There are several palaces, some rarely used. She only stays one night a year in the Holyrood palace ! I'm not suggesting they get knocked down, give some to the National Trust and they/visitors can pay for the upkeep.

Pity you don't do any research Mr K.

The Queen spends 1 week a year at Holyrood palace at the beginning of each summer, where she carries out a range of official engagements and ceremonies.

Prince Charles also spends a week a year carrying out official duties.

It is open to the public throughout the year.

Originally Posted by Osem

The sort of people who whine about the excesses of the monarchy but have little or nothing to say about the excesses of champagne socialists like Blair and all the others who don't mind riding the gravy train when it comes to their allowances, perks, expenses, grace and favour apartments etc.

Yeah the UK would be so much better if we had someone like Blair as head of state and I'm sure he'd be happy to do it all from the spartan comforts of a 2 up 2 down in Scunthorpe.

Originally Posted by Mr K

Yes but don't let it hold you back

I'm not particularly anti-monarchist, but they do need to pay their. Asking the tax payer to pay when you've got 400 million tucked away and we have a massive defecit is a bit cheeky. Would you prefer your local hospital be kept open, or the Queen to get a house make over?

There are several palaces, some rarely used. She only stays one night a year in the Holyrood palace ! I'm not suggesting they get knocked down, give some to the National Trust and they/visitors can pay for the upkeep.

You appear to have little or no understanding of how the Crown Estate works .The Crown Estate owns Buckingham Palace not the monarchy ,the Queen actually owns only 2 properties Sandringham and Balmoral The Queen is no more responsible for the repairs and upkeep of Buckingham Palace than the Prime Minister is responsible for repairs and upkeep of 10 Downing street

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by denphone

IMO the Monarchy is one of the greatest assets this country has as it brings far more into this country in terms of prestige and money into the UK economy then we actually spend on the Royal Family so in my opinion modernising Buckingham Palace will be money well spent IMO.

I've never really got this they bring money in via tourism etc, the palace of versailles or however it's spelt has more visitors a year iirc and there's nothing in it, certainly no kings or queens at any rate, it also irks me that we keep on being told what tremendous value for money they are, what even at 8 times the cost

https://republic.org.uk/what-we-want/royal-finances

I used to be quite a fan of them but tbh I see them these days as being at the top of a rather gashtly, corrupt class system

Originally Posted by Mr K

Yes but don't let it hold you back

I'm not particularly anti-monarchist, but they do need to pay their. Asking the tax payer to pay when you've got 400 million tucked away and we have a massive defecit is a bit cheeky. Would you prefer your local hospital be kept open, or the Queen to get a house make over?

There are several palaces, some rarely used. She only stays one night a year in the Holyrood palace ! I'm not suggesting they get knocked down, give some to the National Trust and they/visitors can pay for the upkeep.

Most of the buildings you're referring to belong to the Crown, and therefore to the nation, not to the Windsor family. The family's personal wealth allows them to own and maintain Balmoral, for example. However when it comes to maintenance of the crown estate, of which Buckingham Palace is part, the queen is not able to make those decisions herself because since 1760 the estate's income has been surrendered to the treasury, under control of the government. The settlement currently grants back 15% of that income to pay for the Queen's expenses. Obviously, exceptional expenditure such as a once-in-a-lifetime major renovation of the most famous residence in Britain can't be budgeted for out of that.

Incidentally she stays at Holyroodhouse for a week, not a day; it is occasionally used as a base for other royals with Scottish engagements and the rest of the time it is open to the ticket-buying public.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I've never really got this they bring money in via tourism etc, the palace of versailles or however it's spelt has more visitors a year iirc and there's nothing in it, certainly no kings or queens at any rate, it also irks me that we keep on being told what tremendous value for money they are, what even at 8 times the cost

https://republic.org.uk/what-we-want/royal-finances

I used to be quite a fan of them but tbh I see them these days as being at the top of a rather gashtly, corrupt class system

Because even in this day and age people will travel around the world to see a glimpse of a real live queen or princess .We have one of the oldest Monarchies in the world and people do come here in their millions to see where they live ,you only have to walk down around Buckingham Palace any day of the week to see the amount of foreign tourists and they don't just stop there ,most travel around the country spending money as they go

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by martyh

Because even in this day and age people will travel around the world to see a glimpse of a real live queen or princess .We have one of the oldest Monarchies in the world and people do come here in their millions to see where they live ,you only have to walk down around Buckingham Palace any day of the week to see the amount of foreign tourists and they don't just stop there ,most travel around the country spending money as they go

You don't think they'd come anyway just like they do in France if she wasn't there, most people are sane enough to realise they won't catch that glimpse imo and don't come on the off chance of it

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

You don't think they'd come anyway just like they do in France if she wasn't there, most people are sane enough to realise they won't catch that glimpse imo and don't come on the off chance of it

A lot of tourists come specifically to see the royal residencies ,removing them will remove a reason to come here,they are very important to tourism in the UK ,denying that is quite frankly ridiculous

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Sounds like she needs to downsize? How many bathrooms does an old lady need ..

More importantly, how many times does she need to empty her window vac ???

Originally Posted by martyh

Because even in this day and age people will travel around the world to see a glimpse of a real live queen or princess .We have one of the oldest Monarchies in the world and people do come here in their millions to see where they live ,you only have to walk down around Buckingham Palace any day of the week to see the amount of foreign tourists and they don't just stop there ,most travel around the country spending money as they go

Not just that but it's a great thing to wheel out for visiting Heads of State and other important people. I think we underestimate the appeal of a visit with the Queen at Buckingham Palace to people outside the UK. Trump wanted May to pass on his regards to the Queen when they talked (although given it's Trump it's not entirely clear he knows the Queen is more of a symbolic position). Obama and especially Michelle Obama seemed to be quite fond of their visit. The Queen's visit to Ireland was very successful too.
The Royal Wedding was a big event for international news networks, took front pages across the world.

In purely pragmatic terms they're just good and useful ambassadors for Britain and have a level of status that can't be matched by Prime Ministers. Not to mention the fact they're not political means they can transcend that and represent the country in a way divorced from it's current political representation.

Originally Posted by Damien

Not just that but it's a great thing to wheel out for visiting Heads of State and other important people. I think we underestimate the appeal of a visit with the Queen at Buckingham Palace to people outside the UK. Trump wanted May to pass on his regards to the Queen when they talked (although given it's Trump it's not entirely clear he knows the Queen is more of a symbolic position). Obama and especially Michelle Obama seemed to be quite fond of their visit. The Queen's visit to Ireland was very successful too.
The Royal Wedding was a big event for international news networks, took front pages across the world.

In purely pragmatic terms they're just good and useful ambassadors for Britain and have a level of status that can't be matched by Prime Ministers. Not to mention the fact they're not political means they can transcend that and represent the country in a way divorced from it's current political representation.

Even more important in these days of Brexit and a renewed commonwealth imo

Even Republic France has maintained Versailles long after they removed their monarch..