The Royal Family #15

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
Jane Tee said:
Literally driving along Notting hill gate to get to KP where homeless people sleep in doorways with their sleeping bags.
Lives in a palace with empty rooms.
Click to expand...

How many other people drive or walk past homeless people and have spare rooms at home? It's a bit of lazy comment to make.

As @hannah123 pointed out people give to food banks but still live their lives shopping at M&S and the like. No one is inviting starving families around for dinner.

As far as I'm concerned William is there to raise awareness not solve all the problems.,
 
thegirlscout said:
They don’t belong to the state, they belong to the crown estates. If they belonged to the state they would belong and be used by the British government.
Click to expand...
The Crown Estates effectively are owned by the State now in all but name, revenues of which go to fund the sovereign grant and Treasury. They are not personal property of the monarch and the monarch cannot make amendments to Crown Estate property without Parliament and Government's approval

FenellaTheWitch said:
How many other people drive or walk past homeless people and have spare rooms at home? It's a bit of lazy comment to make.

As @hannah123 pointed out people give to food banks but still live their lives shopping at M&S and the like. No one is inviting starving families around for dinner.

As far as I'm concerned William is there to raise awareness not solve all the problems.,
Click to expand...
Indeed and William is looking to be next King not a leftwing Labour MP, so there is no hypocrisy.
 
FenellaTheWitch said:
How many other people drive or walk past homeless people and have spare rooms at home? It's a bit of lazy comment to make.

As @hannah123 pointed out people give to food banks but still live their lives shopping at M&S and the like. No one is inviting starving families around for dinner.

As far as I'm concerned William is there to raise awareness not solve all the problems.,
Click to expand...

Exactly. A constitutional monarchy has to take care to appear politically neutral. I’m sure that members of the RF must have their own opinions, but they are not at liberty to make these known. Anyway, if the monarchy was disbanded, and the sovereign grant money was free to be spent elsewhere, I very much doubt that it would go to the people who need it most.
 
Boring Monday said:
I genuinely don’t think that even if the RF were to be abolished that the listed buildings that house the National Treasures the RF call one of their homes would ever be converted to a YMCA.
Click to expand...
I very much doubt it. But they may be used as museums/ visitors centres, raising money for their upkeep, and we may be able to see some of the priceless works of art and God knows what else that is hoarded by the Royals, for their eyes only, when it apparently belongs to us. I don't think the problem is for now, as Charles only has one working son, and he is heir to the throne. The question is whether we will be expected to pay for Williams 3 children to all have roles in the RF for life, therefore meaning its as bloated as ever, just one generation into Charles' much vaunted slimming down of the Monarchy.
 
LoopyLou47 said:
I very much doubt it. But they may be used as museums/ visitors centres, raising money for their upkeep, and we may be able to see some of the priceless works of art and God knows what else that is hoarded by the Royals, for their eyes only, when it apparently belongs to us. I don't think the problem is for now, as Charles only has one working son, and he is heir to the throne. The question is whether we will be expected to pay for Williams 3 children to all have roles in the RF for life, therefore meaning its as bloated as ever, just one generation into Charles' much vaunted slimming down of the Monarchy.
Click to expand...
I could quite easilly see Charlotte and Princess Royal being a working Royal … I suppose it depends how many they feel they need to run The Firm.

When the Princes Edward and Richard pass on, then the Dukedoms of Kent and Gloucester will lose their royal dukedom status and just pass to their heirs as bogstandard ‘ordinary’ ones. Princess Alexandra‘s children have no royal status. So that’s 3 part time slots empty. Princess Anne is in her 70’s. William could theoretically come to the throne with only Edward and Sophie filling Working Royal positions in which case it wouldn’t be a surprise to have his 3 doing at least some work.
 
anonymous1221 said:
Exactly. A constitutional monarchy has to take care to appear politically neutral. I’m sure that members of the RF must have their own opinions, but they are not at liberty to make these known. Anyway, if the monarchy was disbanded, and the sovereign grant money was free to be spent elsewhere, I very much doubt that it would go to the people who need it most.
Click to expand...
No, it would go to fund a President of course and their accommodation and security

LoopyLou47 said:
I very much doubt it. But they may be used as museums/ visitors centres, raising money for their upkeep, and we may be able to see some of the priceless works of art and God knows what else that is hoarded by the Royals, for their eyes only, when it apparently belongs to us. I don't think the problem is for now, as Charles only has one working son, and he is heir to the throne. The question is whether we will be expected to pay for Williams 3 children to all have roles in the RF for life, therefore meaning its as bloated as ever, just one generation into Charles' much vaunted slimming down of the Monarchy.
Click to expand...
You can visit Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle as a tourist now and see the artworks there, same even goes for Sandringham
 
Last edited:
LoopyLou47 said:
I very much doubt it. But they may be used as museums/ visitors centres, raising money for their upkeep, and we may be able to see some of the priceless works of art and God knows what else that is hoarded by the Royals, for their eyes only, when it apparently belongs to us. I don't think the problem is for now, as Charles only has one working son, and he is heir to the throne. The question is whether we will be expected to pay for Williams 3 children to all have roles in the RF for life, therefore meaning its as bloated as ever, just one generation into Charles' much vaunted slimming down of the Monarchy.
Click to expand...
Most of them already do that to some extent. I mean you can visit Windsor, BP, The Gallery and what not. Not all of it, but even in a museum not everything is at display all the time.

I agree with @hannah123 his job is to raise awareness and not be the next saviour. Of course he his ridiculously privileged and we are quick to point out how the price of his tie probably sponsors an underprivileged child’s lunch for a year. But that’s easy. People with less, would have no problem finding things I could “easily cut back on”. And the whole sleeping rough stint - of course it was done by people that rolled up their brand new sleeping bag in the morning and went home for a nice cup of coffee. It was a publicity scheme. Should have no one participated? Same for environment. Aren’t we all for it? And don’t we all go for the convenient choice more often than not? I know I do. It would be not much harder to buy stuff with less packaging. I still don’t adhere to it as much as I could.

What is raising my eyebrows is when they act though as if their involvement is much more substantial than raising awareness through the popularity. At least homelessness is a long term interest and he actually does behind the scene work. Kate’s Early Year stuff either needs to leave the mere platitude level or they need to stop making her out to be so knowledgeable. Looking business to engagements does not equal professionalism.
 
LoopyLou47 said:
I very much doubt it. But they may be used as museums/ visitors centres, raising money for their upkeep, and we may be able to see some of the priceless works of art and God knows what else that is hoarded by the Royals, for their eyes only, when it apparently belongs to us. I don't think the problem is for now, as Charles only has one working son, and he is heir to the throne. The question is whether we will be expected to pay for Williams 3 children to all have roles in the RF for life, therefore meaning its as bloated as ever, just one generation into Charles' much vaunted slimming down of the Monarchy.
Click to expand...

You speak as though the RF have absolute control about what goes on with the palaces and what's inside them but they don't. Remember when William said he wanted to get rid of all ivory in the royal collection was was categorically told no because it wasn't his to get rid of?
 
Great_Kate said:
Most of them already do that to some extent. I mean you can visit Windsor, BP, The Gallery and what not. Not all of it, but even in a museum not everything is at display all the time.

I agree with @hannah123 his job is to raise awareness and not be the next saviour. Of course he his ridiculously privileged and we are quick to point out how the price of his tie probably sponsors an underprivileged child’s lunch for a year. But that’s easy. People with less, would have no problem finding things I could “easily cut back on”. And the whole sleeping rough stint - of course it was done by people that rolled up their brand new sleeping bag in the morning and went home for a nice cup of coffee. It was a publicity scheme. Should have no one participated? Same for environment. Aren’t we all for it? And don’t we all go for the convenient choice more often than not? I know I do. It would be not much harder to buy stuff with less packaging. I still don’t adhere to it as much as I could.

What is raising my eyebrows is when they act though as if their involvement is much more substantial than raising awareness through the popularity. At least homelessness is a long term interest and he actually does behind the scene work. Kate’s Early Year stuff either needs to leave the mere platitude level or they need to stop making her out to be so knowledgeable. Looking business to engagements does not equal professionalism.
Click to expand...
I agree. It’s great to raise awareness but sometimes practical solutions are needed and money given. I find it shameful and insulting that the Early Years project glosses over the fact that cuts have been made in that very area.

Kate does not need to get political but she does need to offer something of substance
 
Eugenie said:
I agree. It’s great to raise awareness but sometimes practical solutions are needed and money given. I find it shameful and insulting that the Early Years project glosses over the fact that cuts have been made in that very area.

Kate does not need to get political but she does need to offer something of substance
Click to expand...
Fair enough I didn't realise get been refused.
I think they've made a mistake with Early years with Kate. It is so tied up with lack of funding, and she hadn't come up with anything substantial, apart from that survey, which keeps being repeated over and over again, as if its something groundbreaking. She us just out of her depth talking to professionals in the field. They should have got her into some kind of school sports scheme similar to the DoE or something.
 
LoopyLou47 said:
Fair enough I didn't realise get been refused.
I think they've made a mistake with Early years with Kate. It is so tied up with lack of funding, and she hadn't come up with anything substantial, apart from that survey, which keeps being repeated over and over again, as if its something groundbreaking. She us just out of her depth talking to professionals in the field. They should have got her into some kind of school sports scheme similar to the DoE or something.
Click to expand...
She could of done a sports DOE type thing but for girls since girls are most likely to drop sports as they age.
 
thegirlscout said:
She could of done a sports DOE type thing but for girls since girls are most likely to drop sports as they age.
Click to expand...
I’ve always said that - some sort of award from say 11-15 as a DoE feeder. The Queen could even hand her Presidency of the Guides over to her, which would mean she could work with Sophie.

just thinking, yeah … she a mum with young children … give her that. jobs a good ‘un is terribly lazy.
 
thegirlscout said:
She could of done a sports DOE type thing but for girls since girls are most likely to drop sports as they age.
Click to expand...

This could be a good idea as Charlotte gets older as well so it doesn’t look like something she should have picked up years ago. William mentioned the other day that Charlotte likes watching the England womens football team, and it would be a good way to introduce Charlotte to more public life. Whether she will or won’t be a working royal, as the daughter and sister of a king she’ll be in public.
 
Can someone please explain where the stories of William’s affair started. I’ve not read about it anywhere else other than here and am interested to read what’s known
 
Libbylulu said:
Can someone please explain where the stories of William’s affair started. I’ve not read about it anywhere else other than here and am interested to read what’s known
Click to expand...
There are basically two alleged affairs. One is Becca, an ex, that might have overlapped with Kate. She is now a friend. Was often invited as the only girl. He went to her wedding one Easter which would have been Charlotte’s first. He got lots of criticism for it. Not sure if the job engagements he did in SA around the wedding were organised to ease the criticism or if that were always planned together and it just didn’t fit the tabloid’s narrative.

The other one is Rose. She and her husband are neighbours to them in Anmer iirc. And both couples are in the same circle of friends. She is the sane type as Cathrine (thin, dark hair). There was a tweet claiming the affair was basically common knowledge and led to analysing of her and Cathrine’s relationship that looked cooler off. The tweet was quickly deleted, both women still appear at the same things but the rumours won’t go. William allegedly got a super-injunction over it (why the RF wouldn’t do the same over Tampon Gate, Andrew and the Racist speculation makes this claim rather weak for me). But that wouldn’t hold off the foreign press, and they wouldn’t let such a story go. There are enough foreign tabloids that have massive interests in royals.

Don’t get me wrong. I can totally see Wiliam having a ONS but I think he is way to calculated to have an ongoing affair. There are those skiing party pictures. He doesn’t give me any passionate vibes. Additionally, if it really would be common knowledge someone would talk. Tabloid reporters would snoop and bribe and there would be more than just thud one tweet. There is also the possibility that he never cheated after marriage. Who knows.
 
LoopyLou47 said:
Fair enough I didn't realise get been refused.
I think they've made a mistake with Early years with Kate. It is so tied up with lack of funding, and she hadn't come up with anything substantial, apart from that survey, which keeps being repeated over and over again, as if its something groundbreaking. She us just out of her depth talking to professionals in the field. They should have got her into some kind of school sports scheme similar to the DoE or something.
Click to expand...
Yes actually not that fair to her. Sports would be a great area for her as she she looks at ease and engaged when taking part.

Kate is not Diana. I know her middle class credentials and upbringing make her more suitable for the role of consort but Diana was better suited to the role of caring royal - because she had that genuine empathy.
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top