Royalty Thread#12 Tiaras, Palaces & Gilded Cages

Status
Not open for further replies.
www.instagram.com

The Prince and Princess of Wales on Instagram: "🏃‍♀️ Sprint training with young Para-athlete sprinter Emmanuel Oyinbo-Coker — today The Duchess of Cambridge joined a special @TeamSportsAid event dedicated to celebrating the role that parents and guar

356K likes, 2,522 comments - princeandprincessofwales on February 26, 2020: "🏃‍♀️ Sprint training with young Para-athlete sprinter Emmanuel Oyinbo-Coker — today The Duchess of Cambridge joined a special @TeamSportsAid event dedicated to celebrating the role that parents and guardians play in...
www.instagram.com www.instagram.com

whatkatewore.com

The Princess of Wales’ Easter Style Through the Years

With news that the Wales family is spending Easter at Anmer Hall and they will not be joining other royal family members for church at Windsor, I thought it worthwhile to bring back a post reviewing Easter ensembles worn by the Princess over the years. We start our look back with Easter Sunday...
whatkatewore.com whatkatewore.com
 
canbelto said:
No just that they probably practice smiling so that they don't show their bottom teeth or gums.
Click to expand...

Duchess Kate obviously didn't get that particular royal protocol memo: :p





Neither did Duchess Meghan:


 
Last edited:
I read this am that George's & Charlotte's school has had someone with coronavirus & the school is now shut down. You never know if this kind of report is true if you read it on the internet.
 
taf2002 said:
I read this am that George's & Charlotte's school has had someone with coronavirus & the school is now shut down. You never know if this kind of report is true if you read it on the internet.
Click to expand...

I don't believe anyone from the school has the coronavirus but several pupils and their families have self isolated as they went skiing in northern Italy during half term. It is not believed they include classmates of either George or Charlotte.
 
In other news, Canadian taxpayers finally get official confirmation on the issue of who is paying for security. (Spoiler alert - Canada was contributing, going back to last October, still is now, but won't be in the coming weeks.)

It's an interesting article, and happily very factual as all the info/statements/quotes are directly from the appropriate sources.
 
Jenny said:
In other news, Canadian taxpayers finally get official confirmation on the issue of who is paying for security. (Spoiler alert - Canada was contributing, going back to last October, still is now, but won't be in the coming weeks.)

It's an interesting article, and happily very factual as all the info/statements/quotes are directly from the appropriate sources.
Click to expand...

I am not surprised. Of course RCMP would have to work with UK‘s security.
 
Haven't read the article yet but I think as working members of the Royal Family visiting Commonwealth countries, it is standard for the Commonwealth country to pay.

I guess once they are no longer working members of the BRF, we are off the hook.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mag
Jenny said:
In other news, Canadian taxpayers finally get official confirmation on the issue of who is paying for security. (Spoiler alert - Canada was contributing, going back to last October, still is now, but won't be in the coming weeks.)

It's an interesting article, and happily very factual as all the info/statements/quotes are directly from the appropriate sources.
Click to expand...

Now the question remains as to who does pay for their security as they will no longer be senior royals and therefore no longer recognized as Internationally Protected Persons due to their change in status regardless of what they say on their website. I for one will be very po'ed if myself as a British taxpayer has to pay for their security when they have basically wanting to make as much money as possible after resigning from their jobs here in the UK and now living in another country. Questions have already been asked in Parliament and there seems to be serious misgivings from within the Met Police themselves as to the spiralling costs involved in following the Sussex's around the world as they start to 'enhance their brand' :rolleyes:

If they want independence they need to pay for their own security!!
 
I suspect that Harry and Meghan’s time in Canada will soon come to an end. They can’t have armed private security here and I will be shocked if the Met keeps providing it. I think that would not sit well with British tax payers who are being told to tighten their belts. I expect the high end of the estimated range is because of the travel. If they planned to just settle into a quiet life in Saanich, the costs would be substantially less.

I am happy to read that we will no longer be responsible for their security. Even what has been provided was very much a stretch of the Internationally Protected Person requirements. They were never here on official business. I get covering the royals for short vacations like when Charles took the boys to Whistler, but extended and ongoing unofficial stays need to be privately funded.
 
liv said:
Very glad that we won't have to pay for them anymore. Private citizens should pay for their own security.

I have the feeling end game is some gated celebrity neighbourhood in L.A. anyway.
Click to expand...

If they were to move to L.A. Then Harry would be taxed on his total inheritance.
 
Judy said:
If they were to move to L.A. Then Harry would be taxed on his total inheritance.
Click to expand...
Really? Not just the income he makes on it? How does that work? He inherited it years ago so it is not new this tax year.
 
liv said:
Very glad that we won't have to pay for them anymore. Private citizens should pay for their own security.

I have the feeling end game is some gated celebrity neighbourhood in L.A. anyway.
Click to expand...

:lol: Each individual British taxpayer's annual pay-out for the entire royal family is minimal. The collective tax money goes direct to Scotland Yard in any case, who are in charge of RPO assignments, work shifts, etc. :D

Pray tell, what is your own 'end game'? That's actually something you have a great deal more control over. Just sayin' :watch:
 
Lorac said:
Now the question remains as to who does pay for their security as they will no longer be senior royals and therefore no longer recognized as Internationally Protected Persons due to their change in status regardless of what they say on their website. I for one will be very po'ed if myself as a British taxpayer has to pay for their security when they have basically wanting to make as much money as possible after resigning from their jobs here in the UK and now living in another country. Questions have already been asked in Parliament and there seems to be serious misgivings from within the Met Police themselves as to the spiralling costs involved in following the Sussex's around the world as they start to 'enhance their brand' :rolleyes:

If they want independence they need to pay for their own security!!
Click to expand...

The Sussexes' royal wedding was estimated to bring between $700 million to $1.4 billion to the British economy. In addition, M&H in only two years of marriage and even prior to their marriage did a lot for Great Britain and the Commonwealth, not to mention all the money the U.K. and some Commonwealth media outlets have made, and continue to make off of them. :rolleyes:
www.travelandleisure.com

Celebrity Travel

There's something about the lives of superstars that keeps the world enraptured: where they go on vacation and their over-the-top honeymoons, the airport of their latest on-camera melt-down, what latest designer bag they toted on the way to that hot-hot-hot restaurant du jour. From their...
www.travelandleisure.com www.travelandleisure.com
www.cnbc.com

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's wedding is already proving to be a cash bonanza for some UK businesses

Business owners remain optimistic about the long-term effects of this month’s wedding, despite economic data that shows royal weddings do little for the U.K. economy.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
www.marketwatch.com

Royal wedding’s $1.4 billion economic impact: Here’s the boost by sector

Church bells will do their thing on Saturday in honor of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle — and the royal wedding already has got cash registers ringing in the...
www.marketwatch.com www.marketwatch.com
www.pbs.org

Why the royal wedding is a gift for the UK economy

Saturday's wedding between Prince Harry and American actress Meghan Markle has provided a much-needed boost for Britain’s economy during the uncertainty of its separation from the European Union. From those hawking commemorative knickknacks to the cucumber industry, special correspondent Malcolm...
www.pbs.org www.pbs.org

M&H's goal to become 'financially independent' is just that. The desire to fund their own life and their own charitable work rather than to be beholden to grumpy, b**chy British taxpayers like yourself. FYI: The Sussexes are both already wealthy. Their move is more about having the freedom to make their own decisions and to actually be able to do more in-depth work in Britain and around the world, without being constricted, isolated, and told to 'dim their light' within the confines of the royal firm's gilded cage! If all major British royals were actually interested in M&H remaining within the royal fold as productive and charismatic hard workers, then M&H would have been unlikely to have felt the move away and the step back is essential to their well-being and happiness as a family. Particularly if encouragement and support by all the major members of Harry's family would have included speaking up on behalf of his wife against the British tabloid media's scorched-earth character defamation, throughout Meghan's first pregnancy!

Apparently, Sussex critics and Meghan-haters weren't happy when M&H were working hard as major royals, and they aren't happy with recent developments either. Nor will any of your ilk ever be happy when it comes to the Sussexes simply living and breathing. :duh: Such hate and disdain is absolutely alarming, but also patently obvious.
 
Last edited:
aftershocks said:
:lol: Each individual British taxpayer's annual pay-out for the entire royal family is minimal. The collective tax money goes direct to Scotland Yard in any case, who are in charge of RPO assignments, work shifts, etc. :D
Click to expand...

This is not the point. You will see from my posting history that by and large I'm supportive of H&M. And you've raised lots of interesting points through this thread.

However, if estimates of a 20fold rise in their security bill as a resulting their choice to live overseas and their desire to travel globally (not always with the whole family in the first place) in order to do their new work is correct then it's not right for that to land on tax payers.

They have every right to make this choice and I wish them the very best but if £19m is going to be added to the UK tax bill (estimated rise from 1m to 20m security cost) then as a UK tax payer I want to see that going to healthcare or education. Or supporting the homeless and underemployed, addressing child poverty etc... Not the security of three individuals with huge personal wealth that the rest of us could never dream of. In fairness I suspect the estimates are somewhat inflated (to manage expectations of the tax payer) but it's also not difficult to imagine hugely increased costs with more international travel, multiple security teams and shift pattern considerations.

If they are no longer receiving funding from the SG that puts those costs I believe firmly in the tax payers laps as an additional tax burden. That's not right by any measure given the state of the country and the fact they are choosing not to live here and will no longer take on any official royal duties.

It's not what they wanted and it's a shame there wasn't a compromise to be found but like all the rest of us they are making choices based on what they hope will make them happy. They could have back peddled and stayed "in the fold" if they didn't like the exit package.

I'm increasingly perturbed by this "financially independent" commentary. Harry reportedly inherited £30m. He is already financially independent. Even if they spent £10m on a house... he's earning more in interest at rock bottom rates than I'll likely earn in a life time! Being "financially independent" means living within your means. Enough already. Time for Harry to take responsibility for his "financial independence" and Meghan (with her own wealth) to do her part - so the rest of us aren't footing their bills.

We all have our personal lines and as UK tax payers we have a right to draw our own. You are right that the individual contribution to the royal is low but there are lots of places where that cumulative sum could be put to use helping those with greater needs. And that's a statement on the royals in general not H&M.

And your attack on Lorac because they drew a line on where they don't want their taxes spent is laughable and unduly rude.

@Zemgirl can you offer a cute pic of a non Brit royal child? I need something lighter than distribution of my taxes to kick off the rest of the day!!!
 
Last edited:
I will just reiterate that I did wish Harry and Meghan all the best moving forward however their utter disdain and disrespect for the Queen and the good will of the GBP who did initial support them throughout this entire debacle of their own making has used up much of those good wishes.

Call me names if you want aftershocks but that doesn't alter the truth that Harry and Meghan have acted absolutely awfully and don't deserve anymore of my goodwill or others. And for your information all royal weddings bring many millions into the economy not just the wedding of Harry and Meghan.

And if you must insist on repeating the oft stated argument by Sussex Stans on social media that the British Media had a 'scorched earth' reporting policy to Meghan from the start but especially during her pregnancy I suggest you show us some definitive proof on that argument instead of just stating it.
 
Last edited:
mella said:
@Zemgirl can you offer a cute pic of a non Brit royal child? I need something lighter than distribution of my taxes to kick off the rest of the day!!!
Click to expand...
How about the Dragon Prince of Bhutan, who recently turned four?
royalcentral.co.uk

Crown Prince of Bhutan celebrates his 4th birthday - Royal Central

Yesterday, the Crown Prince of Bhutan, Jigme Namgyel Wangchuck (also called the Druk Gyalsey or Dragon Prince), celebrated his 4th birthday. To coincide with his birthday, his father, King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck attended the...
royalcentral.co.uk royalcentral.co.uk
 
Here's what I don't understand. It's clear that the UK won't be paying H&M's security costs. Now Canada has said the same. But ppl keep reiterating (in a mean way) that they don't want their taxes going to the money-hungry Susseses for security. If I've seen a post about that I've seen at least 40 or 50.

Have you gotten the memo that they won't be?

I'm not worried if H&M move to the US that I will be asked to pay. That will not be my 1st thought. I think I'll wait till something happens before I go on & on & on about the subject.
 
taf2002 said:
Here's what I don't understand. It's clear that the UK won't be paying H&M's security costs. Now Canada has said the same. But ppl keep reiterating (in a mean way) that they don't want their taxes going to the money-hungry Susseses for security. If I've seen a post about that I've seen at least 40 or 50.

Have you gotten the memo that they won't be?

I'm not worried if H&M move to the US that I will be asked to pay. That will not be my 1st thought. I think I'll wait till something happens before I go on & on & on about the subject.
Click to expand...

You are free to wait all you like. My preference is always to deal with something before it actually happens. As someone who has been involved with Canadian politics for decades, I can assure you that that outcry about this affected the decision made by the Canadian government. Trudeau, whom I generally support, I believe would have happily approved the continued payment for all or part of the security costs had the public not made their feelings known.

As for Harry and Meghan, the are not refugees. They have a beautiful secure home in Britain, they are not being persecuted or driven out. They have the absolute right to move if they choose. But this is a choice, just like it was a choice to search out and read the negative tabloid press. Choices have consequences. They are adults and can deal with the consequences without expecting subsidies from people who make less in a year than H&M spend in a week.
 
taf2002 said:
Here's what I don't understand. It's clear that the UK won't be paying H&M's security costs. Now Canada has said the same. But ppl keep reiterating (in a mean way) that they don't want their taxes going to the money-hungry Susseses for security. If I've seen a post about that I've seen at least 40 or 50.

Have you gotten the memo that they won't be?

I'm not worried if H&M move to the US that I will be asked to pay. That will not be my 1st thought. I think I'll wait till something happens before I go on & on & on about the subject.
Click to expand...

Where has it been made clear that the UK won't be paying Harry and Meghan's security costs? That's not what has been said at all - in fact the Met Police have already stated they are concerned with the spiralling costs associated with protecting the couple so therefore the UK is paying for their security as it presently stands. If you have an article that states differently please point me in its direction.
 
Option 1. I believe that BRF will pay for H&M security from their own private funds and revisit that issue in 12 months. Option 2. H&M will pay for their own scaled down security. Simple.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information