Advanced search

To think if Kate & Wills want to live at Middleton Manor...

(151 Posts)
PeriodMath Thu 25-Jul-13 14:06:36

They should foot the £6000 a day bill for security and the £900 an hour helicopter circling overhead?

Shouldn't they be staying in a royal palace - isn't that the point of them? Big safe estates away from prying eyes?

DontmindifIdo Fri 26-Jul-13 20:06:08

fishybits - each new monarch has to sign it over to the government - the deal was the civil lisr in exchange for thye proffits from the crown estates, at the beginning, the monarch was the one 'making' on the deal, now the government is. Charles could decide not to sign it over when he becomes King, that would be interesting....

fishybits Fri 26-Jul-13 14:56:25

The Crown Estate is not owned by the Royal family. The profits go to the Government.

sue52 Fri 26-Jul-13 14:49:49

So if we get rid of the Royals can the country have the crown estate back? That will help make up for any income they generate.

AmandaCooper Fri 26-Jul-13 14:49:26

kim you can have a philosophical argument about how anyone can legitimately claim to own anything. Suffice to say they lawfully own it surely?

kim147 Fri 26-Jul-13 13:51:34

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Its ok you got your correction in quickly enough.

The Pedants revolt is standing down.

<<whispers>> I wrote advise instead of advice earlier but got away with it because I blamed my iPhone.

olidusUrsus Fri 26-Jul-13 13:16:24

Oh GOD, they're. Oh God oh God. Is that a cardinal MN sin!? Hides

ThreesyDoesIt Fri 26-Jul-13 13:16:06

I feel really soory for them being belittled and blasted for what is essentially a first time mum wanting to spend some time at her mum and dads after the birth of her baby, most of us know how daunting and tiring that time is. regardless of who she married, she is entitled to do this.

I am getting really fed up of seeing people on here bitching about them and their baby. usually the majority on here come across as lovely people who give fantastic advice, some of which Kate would probably find very helpful with being a first time mum, so I am very shock at some of the horrible comments I've read about them.

I am more than happy for my taxes paying to keep 2 of our future kings safe no matter the cost!!

olidusUrsus Fri 26-Jul-13 13:15:18

squoosh she's a bitch. I'm not the daughter from hell, I swear, I'm just not good enough for her psychological ishoos.

As someone else said on another thread, it's hardly as if their in a 3 bed semi squashed up against the pavement, twitching the curtains for fear of photographers pressing lenses against the letter box..

outtolunchagain Fri 26-Jul-13 12:53:34

The house is big enough for them to have their own wing and plenty of space and privacy , more importantly the Middleton family and Bucklebury residents have shown themselves over the last 10 years to be uber discrete and trustworthy and I suspect as far as William is concerned this is priceless .

.Rumour has it that he partly paid for the house anyway precisely to enable them to spend time out of London and for Kate to have an escape from the Royal life . Camilla still has her house in Wiltshire and spends a lot of time there for the same reason , Diana never had that option and he is aware that the goldfish bowl of KP didn't help matters .

mrsden Fri 26-Jul-13 12:47:38

It's not that usual for people to go and stay with their parents after giving birth. If you're lucky then your mum might come and stay with you for a few days. Couldn't her mum have gone to Anglesey? The address of their house there has never been published and is on a private estate so would be easier to secure.

I don't understand why people say they feel sorry for her. Their privacy is not breached very often and when it is a huge fuss is rightly made, for example the topless shots. Kate did 19 engagements while pregnant, that is not a heavy workload. No worries about money, multiple homes etc, its a nice life but they want us to think its awful and they're doing us the favour.

squoosh Fri 26-Jul-13 12:46:53

It's not as though they'll be on top of one another, quite easy to kick about your own wing without too much disturbance.

Olidus your Mum sounds horrible, poor you sad

MortifiedAdams Fri 26-Jul-13 12:34:57

Period the alternative is, essentially, to live with the In Laws. The Palace is Wills' family home (or one of).

MrRected Fri 26-Jul-13 12:09:59

The cost could be somewhat offset against the cost of a massively reduced household staff at KP. They aren't having a nanny. She wears high street labels. He drives himself.

Imagine if they weren't protected and something went wrong. There would be an outcry.

olidusUrsus Fri 26-Jul-13 12:04:25

I wanted to, but me and my mother don't get on and she wouldn't allow it. OH were going through a rough patch, my dad let me home for a few weeks but after that mum starting demanding that I "Get. Out."

PostBellumBugsy Fri 26-Jul-13 12:01:58

periodmath - not a chance!!!!!! Would rather have performed my own C-section - but then I was returning to my own private home without the world watching every twitch of the curtains or visitor through my front door. Plus parents lived far away and all post-natal care was based around where I lived.
Could be wrong, but I think nowadays it is more usual for Mums to go and stay with daughters than the other way around.

PeriodMath Fri 26-Jul-13 11:49:31

How many on here went to stay with their parents after the birth of their first child?

Just interested to know if this is the norm.

thegreylady Fri 26-Jul-13 10:20:47

Leave them alone. It is what it is. I thought Diana was a simpering twit but most people think she was on the verge of sainthood. I think the Middletons are behaving as well as they can given the situation. K and W seem like a pleasant and privileged young couple. It is not their fault they need security it is the fault of the times we live in.

Damnautocorrect Fri 26-Jul-13 10:03:42

I don't begrudge them a penny for security, or for removal of asbestos from kp.
You can't help who you fall in love with, and you can't help who your daughter marries!

SusanneLinder Fri 26-Jul-13 09:48:55

I am not a royalist, however I found this interesting fact:
Source FAQ's

*The Crown Estate, which manages on behalf of the monarch property and land owned by the Crown including Regent Street in London and Britain's coastline, is worth around £8.6 billion and generates £252 million (2011/12) in income a year. This income is handed back to the Government as payment in return for the £36 million per year (in 2012 down 12% from £41 million in 2008) cost of running the monarchy.

This arrangement dates from 1760 when George III gave up the right to the income from the Crown's estates in return for a Civil List paid to members of the Royal Family. In 2013 this changed to a Sovereign Support Grant based on 15% of the income from the Crown Estate. This means that for the year from April 2014 the grant will be £37.9 miilion towards the cost of the Royal household, their travel, attending formal functions and repairs to buildings including Kensington Palace which will be the new home of William and Catherine. *

I would say that the government more than gets enough money from the Royal Family than they actually give back

kim147 Fri 26-Jul-13 09:31:37

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

jamdonut Fri 26-Jul-13 09:18:11

"countless other threads"...oh sorry..I didn't go looking.hmm

Chatteringarses Fri 26-Jul-13 09:08:11

No actually Football clubs only cover the costs for security inside their ground! We taxpayers pay for ALL of the heavy policing required in the surrounding streets, on public transport, at all major railway stations etc which is a much, much larger undertaking than staffing inside the stadium. In bigger club matches that involves police helicopters for EVERY game.

Given the unbelievable wealth of many football clubs (which puts the Middleton millions completely in the shade) I think it's revolting that all taxpayers have to pay to be protected from football violence when clubs are so rich. Why don't clubs have to cover the actual costs?

Sure it is costing us for Kate to visit her mum after having a baby- but as said upthread- it costs to have a Royal family. It's not free for us even if they stayed at home. And It's completely mean to say she shouldn't be able to stay at home with her mum when she's just had a baby FGS! I can't imagine it's anything over than incredibly stressful and boring being attached to the Royals so lets give the girl a break. Plus I bet the Royals generate far more in visiting tourist pounds for the UK economy than say, first division football clubs do. Royals in this day and age can't get away with behaving like overpaid angry toddlers any more so Kate and Wills are going to be much better role models than some footballers we could name!

TiggyD Fri 26-Jul-13 09:08:11

If any person in the country is at risk of attack I would want the police to protect them.
The royals should be treated like any other people, not singled out for special treatment because of an 'accident of birth'. ie The police should protect them too.

William held the baby because he second in line to the throne, the baby is his, and the photographers would have wanted a shot of that. Not to mention the fact that his wife had just given birth, was probably sore, and would have found holding the baby difficult, I certainly did after mine.

He was taking over because Catherine was presumably very tired, emotional and stressed with all the people there. He has had a lifetime of this. She hasn't.

Can't believe its even questioned to be honest.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now