Royalty Thread #11: Putting the "Fun" in Dysfunctional

[mag]

There is no evidence that the Sussexes expect that the Canadian government will pay for their security, at least I haven't seen it. They may have expected the RF to pay at first but that now seems unlikely.

I would say, given that the Canadian government was likely paying for it when they were here over Christmas, the fact that they did not mention on their very detailed website that they did not expect Canadian tax payers to foot the bill means either a) they didn’t think about it - an example of a lack of awareness about their privilege, or b) they didn’t want to cut off the option just in case Canada offered. IMHO, they would get a lot more respect if they just came out and said that they did not want the Canadian tax payer to pay, that they realize that would be unfair.

I agree that it seems unlikely the Queen will pay. I suspect Charles will.

 

[taf2002]

I would say, given that the Canadian government was likely paying for it when they were here over Christmas, the fact that they did not mention on their very detailed website that they did not expect Canadian tax payers to foot the bill means either a) they didn’t think about it - an example of a lack of awareness about their privilege, or b) they didn’t want to cut off the option just in case Canada offered. IMHO, they would get a lot more respect if they just came out and said that they did not want the Canadian tax payer to pay, that they realize that would be unfair.

I agree that it seems unlikely the Queen will pay. I suspect Charles will.

Why in the world would they out of the blue announce they don't expect it? Should they also announce they don't expect Canada to pay their mortgage or their groceries? IMO they would only say something if they did expect it. Security for a state visit is very different.

 

[mag]

Why in the world would they out of the blue announce they don't expect it? Should they also announce they don't expect Canada to pay their mortgage or their groceries? IMO they would only say something if they did expect it. Security for a state visit is very different.

Because it has been all over the news and social media here in Canada? Because they claim to want “financial independence?” Because government officials here and in Britain are wasting time trying to figure out what to do? Because when asked directly Trudeau will not say we are not paying.

At this point it seems clear that they would accept the Canadian taxpayer paying for it. They could tell the government they won’t accept that, ask Charles to pay, if he won’t, pay themselves. If H&M has told the Canadian government that they did not want to be supported by Canadian taxpayers (either by repaying the government for RCMP security, or hiring their own) when asked, Trudeau could put this to bed by saying that Canada will not be footing the bill.

H&M don’t need to announce to the public then can tell the Canadian government. The Canadian government doesn’t need to announce who is paying, they can just say we are not. It is really not that complicated unless there is still an expectation that taxpayers somewhere will foot the bill.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Why in the world would they out of the blue announce they don't expect it? Should they also announce they don't expect Canada to pay their mortgage or their groceries? IMO they would only say something if they did expect it. Security for a state visit is very different.

They would announce it because it is assumed that a host country would pay for security, and because Canada did before. The issue has been brought up often enough that they are either blissfully ignorant of the costs involved or arrogant enough not to care.

As far as Charles paying for it (which is really the people in his duchy paying for it) I suspect Her Majesty will put the kibosh on it.

 

[Winnipeg]

There is likely a clearly written policy about what is needed to qualify for tax money to fund security. If they are not royal or "designated" as having some form of international representation, then they would be normal and have to pay for security themselves which, would not or should not, be a big deal for them.

I am not sure though how they would deal with photographers when they are in public?

 

[Judy]

I would say, given that the Canadian government was likely paying for it when they were here over Christmas, the fact that they did not mention on their very detailed website that they did not expect Canadian tax payers to foot the bill means either a) they didn’t think about it - an example of a lack of awareness about their privilege, or b) they didn’t want to cut off the option just in case Canada offered. IMHO, they would get a lot more respect if they just came out and said that they did not want the Canadian tax payer to pay, that they realize that would be unfair.

I agree that it seems unlikely the Queen will pay. I suspect Charles will.

The Cdn govt wasn’t paying as it was still their U.K. security force. Trudeau has said that the Queen had not been in talks about it to him or I guess his people about it. I suspect they will pay for it.

 

[mag]

The Cdn govt wasn’t paying as it was still their U.K. security force. Trudeau has said that the Queen had not been in talks about it to him or I guess his people about it. I suspect they will pay for it.

I know their UK force is protecting them now, but there were Canadians involved when they were here at Christmas. At least that is what was reported by a local news agency. Do have a link to a statement by Trudeau? The last I read was basically a “nothing has been decided so no comment.”

 

[kittyjake5]

Well i think it the Queen's statement she said that it would become official in April that
Harry and Meghan are no longer working royals. Maybe their security is paid for by
the Firm until then (like a severance package) and then H&M are on their own as far as the
Firm is concerned.

 

[kittyjake5]

From the People article:

“They are enjoying living a quiet life,” an insider says of the couple. “They go for long walks, they do yoga, and Meghan cooks. They are real homebodies who love to
chill out with Archie and the dogs.”

They have a privileged life. How many of us would like to be chilling like that. I will keep that in mind as I board the commuter train
on my way to real work.

 

[Judy]

I know their UK force is protecting them now, but there were Canadians involved when they were here at Christmas. At least that is what was reported by a local news agency. Do have a link to a statement by Trudeau? The last I read was basically a “nothing has been decided so no comment.”

The RCMP unit probably touched base with their security I would think.

here’s the last I read on it. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tr...-harry-meghan-security-costs-canada-1.5434579

 

[Peaches LaTour]

Speaking of tiaras, the Queen's Brazilian Aquamarine Tiara is very colorful:

Tiara Thursday: The Brazilian Aquamarine Parure Tiara

The Brazilian Aquamarine Parure Tiara For her coronation in 1953, the Queen received a gift of a necklace and earrings from the Presiden...

orderofsplendor.blogspot.com

The Brazilian Aquamarine Tiara

The Brazilian Aquamarine Tiara (Photo: Stephen Hird/WPA Pool/Getty Images) Most of the sparkling tiaras worn by Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom were legacies from queens and princesses past, but a few of them have

www.thecourtjeweller.com

I Want It !!!!!!! Drool.

 

[mag]

From the article linked by @Judy


“"I have not spoken to Her Majesty directly. Discussions continue to be ongoing and I have no updates at this moment," Trudeau said.

Speaking at the federal cabinet retreat in Winnipeg today, Public Safety Minister Bill Blair said the government has not yet conducted a security "assessment" to learn what might be required to protect the two while they're living in Canada.

He said Harry and Meghan are not receiving protection from Canadian security personnel. Canada is not paying for the guards spotted alongside the two in B.C., Blair said.”

So Trudeau may not have spoken directly to the Queen (shocking!) but work between Canada and Britain is clearly ongoing. So what that tells me is if Canada agrees, H&M would accept the support of the Canadian taxpayer.

 

[overedge]

As far as Charles paying for it (which is really the people in his duchy paying for it) I suspect Her Majesty will put the kibosh on it.

The Queen doesn't control how the Duchy spends its money.

ETA: Canada paid for H&M's security when they were in the country doing royal duties. They're not doing royal duties now.

 

[mag]

Fluff article on William and Kate’s visit to Wales.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.hellomagazine.com/royalty/2020020584280/princess-charlotte-taking-after-kate-middleton-prince-william-reveals/%3fviewas=amp

 

[taf2002]

Because it has been all over the news and social media here in Canada? Because they claim to want “financial independence?” Because government officials here and in Britain are wasting time trying to figure out what to do? Because when asked directly Trudeau will not say we are not paying.

Then that's on Trudeau. H&M have no control over Trudeau & what he announces. But let's expect the worst of H&M. Why not wait until it actually happens?

From the People article:

“They are enjoying living a quiet life,” an insider says of the couple. “They go for long walks, they do yoga, and Meghan cooks. They are real homebodies who love to
chill out with Archie and the dogs.”

They have a privileged life. How many of us would like to be chilling like that. I will keep that in mind as I board the commuter train
on my way to real work.

Are you this angry at all rich people or just at H&M? Yes, they have a privileged life. So what? Lots of people do who didn't work for it. BTW Meghan did work for her money until she married.

 

[mag]

@taf2002 I can’t figure out if you are trying not to understand or really don’t understand what is being said. With respect to the payments for security, H&M could absolutely make it clear to the Canadian government that they don’t want handouts from Canadian taxpayers. If they don’t want handouts, they should make that known to the government so that civil servants in both side is the Atlantic don’t continue to waste time and money negotiating. Why allow that pointless work to continue if you plan to say no thanks to the handout when it is offered? The only reason to let the negotiations continue is that you are okay being subsidized by Canadian taxpayers. Being okay with that shows a disrespect for Canadians and a total lack of awareness your own privilege.

As far as @kittyjake5 post goes, H&M are not just any rich people. They are two people living in the lap of luxury while waiting around to see if hard working Canadians will subsidize their lifestyle. That sort of thing gets commented on all the time. Just read all the comments about when rich politicians give themselves tax breaks.

 

[overedge]

Interesting story here about H&M's neigbourhood and how the locals are dealing with the UK paparazzi

Harry and Meghan’s new Victorian life: How Vancouver Islanders are getting along with their royal neighbours

Since the Sussexes came, British Columbians have been bemused by the added attention, irritated by the visiting paparazzi and generally inclined to leave the family alone

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[MacMadame]

So what that tells me is if Canada agrees, H&M would accept the support of the Canadian taxpayer.

It tells you that because you already believe it. I don't think logically follows. There are many details that need to be worked out on this front besides who pays for what. Plus, we don't actually know what is being said by Harry & Meghan or their representatives. Just because they haven't issued a press release announcing that they aren't expecting Canada to pay for their security doesn't mean they are expecting it.

 

[kittyjake5]

@taf2002 No I am not angry. My post was said in jest. You are the one who sounds angry.

 

[taf2002]

There are reports that H&M may be planning to spend the summer in California so of course they expect the US gov't to pay for their security. After all they haven't said they don't expect it so that means they do. /sarcasm There is a lot of negative speculation right now. I guess I just have a wait-n-see attitude. I don't understand getting so angry about something that hasn't happened yet.

No I am not angry. My post was said in jest. Are you angry?

I'm not angry either, just a little tired of all this negativity. But were you jesting? Didn't seem like it.

 

[kittyjake5]

@taf2002 Well there you go we can agree that we are both not angry.

 

[MacMadame]

@taf2002 Well there you go we can agree that we are both not angry.

I don't agree!

(Yes, I'm definitely kidding.)

 

[mag]

There are reports that H&M may be planning to spend the summer in California so of course they expect the US gov't to pay for their security. After all they haven't said they don't expect it so that means they do. /sarcasm There is a lot of negative speculation right now. I guess I just have a wait-n-see attitude. I don't understand getting so angry about something that hasn't happened yet.

Maybe because once the decision is made it will be too late to do anything about it? It is no different than if there was a government proposal to fund something else I thought we shouldn’t be paying for. That is how it works in a democracy. People speak out, they discuss, in all sorts of forums. People disagree and they learn. There have been a number of posts about H&M on this forum that have changed the way I think about things.

And yes, I get the sarcasm in your comment about the US paying, but once again you are perpetuating the idea that H&M have to make a public announcement when that is simply not the case. And perhaps, since the last information in the link above, H&M have said something through governmental channels. Or perhaps that is the reason for the move to LA where private security can carry firearms. We may never know.

 

[antmanb]

 

[Judy]

Maybe because once the decision is made it will be too late to do anything about it? It is no different than if there was a government proposal to fund something else I thought we shouldn’t be paying for. That is how it works in a democracy. People speak out, they discuss, in all sorts of forums. People disagree and they learn. There have been a number of posts about H&M on this forum that have changed the way I think about things.

And yes, I get the sarcasm in your comment about the US paying, but once again you are perpetuating the idea that H&M have to make a public announcement when that is simply not the case. And perhaps, since the last information in the link above, H&M have said something through governmental channels. Or perhaps that is the reason for the move to LA where private security can carry firearms. We may never know.

I doubt they would announce anything but if it happened then Trudeau would have to disclose. Let’s wait and see.

 

[overedge]

I've mentioned before that Private Eye magazine in the UK has an occasional column on the royals, written by a contributor called "Flunky" who seems to have good connections inside the Palace.

I got the issue in which Flunky discusses the H&M "Megxit" situation. S/he says that "it was perceived" as a snub that the Sussexes weren't in the family photos on the Queen's desk during her Xmas speech (s/he doesn't say whose perception this was).

Flunky also says that security was extra tight during the meeting the Queen called at Sandringham. It was unusual that the time/date were made public, but no one heard what went on in the meeting itself.

However, Meghan was supposed to call in to the meeting, and this was cancelled on short notice because no one in the Palace had any guarantee of who was in the room at her end, or whether the call would be recorded. Apparently there are tapes that Diana made of key meetings she was involved with, that might have some quite damaging information, and no one in the family knows where the tapes are. Some people thought they might be in the stuff that Paul Burrell took with him, but they weren't (at least they weren't in the stuff that was seized and inventoried). The Palace staff wanted to avoid that kind of leak. So Meghan wasn't part of the meeting.

Flunky also says that when Charles retires William will be in control of the Duchy of Cornwall income, and seems to imply that William might not be inclined to continue whatever support Charles is giving H&M from the Duchy money.

 

[Vagabond]

Flunky also says that when Charles retires William will be in control of the Duchy of Cornwall income, and seems to imply that William might not be inclined to continue whatever support Charles is giving H&M from the Duchy money.

Barring something highly unexpected, Charles will not "retire" as Duke of Cornwall. He will either ascend to the throne or (less likely) predecease his mother.

 

[Colleen]

Interesting that they might spend summer in LA - and winter here in BC? I'd do it the other way around ... get away from the rain for a bit.

It's cool that there's been little media attention on them lately - at least here in BC. I hope they're enjoying some peace. I'm one of those Canadian taxpayers who wouldn't be happy about funding their security but am waiting to hear what the arrangements are before getting too excited about it. With being on the island, and the general lack of attention on them, maybe they aren't feeling the need for armed security 24/7. At least I hope they aren't.

 

[overedge]

Barring something highly unexpected, Charles will not "retire" as Duke of Cornwall. He will either ascend to the throne or (less likely) predecease his mother.

I'll have to go back and look at the article. Perhaps they meant "retire" as referring to either of those possibilities.

 

[Judy]

Interesting that they might spend summer in LA - and winter here in BC? I'd do it the other way around ... get away from the rain for a bit.

It's cool that there's been little media attention on them lately - at least here in BC. I hope they're enjoying some peace. I'm one of those Canadian taxpayers who wouldn't be happy about funding their security but am waiting to hear what the arrangements are before getting too excited about it. With being on the island, and the general lack of attention on them, maybe they aren't feeling the need for armed security 24/7. At least I hope they aren't.

I think the L.A. thing is still speculation though. Yes Canadians wouldn’t be happy.