Advanced search

To To be appalled at all the royal palaces.

(280 Posts)
purplehazed Mon 04-Jan-16 22:26:46

I've just watched Ant and Dec with Prince Charles. The sheer opulence of those numerous palaces. Just how many do they need? So so wrong imo.
Surely in these times of massive hardship for so many it is time they were scaled right back.

TheSecondViola Mon 04-Jan-16 22:35:56

And do what? Turn them into homeless hostels? Sell them to a russian oligarch or a saudi prince? Two are privately owned and the others are held in Sovereign Trust, so they can't be just sold off.
I don't think you've thought this through.

FuckyNell Mon 04-Jan-16 22:36:33


MuttonDressedAsMutton Mon 04-Jan-16 22:38:49

Yabu. I expect you'd like that nice Mr Corbyn to convert them all into hostels and rehab centres wouldn't you. You really ABU.

Oldsu Mon 04-Jan-16 22:39:47

Why??? you do realise that Kensington Palace, St James Palace Clarence House are not private residences they are the traditional homes of royalty, when Charles is King William will most likely live in Clarence House etc

What do you think will happen if they were scaled back, turned into council estates for the poor and needy - dream on they would be bought by uber rich foreigners.

WorraLiberty Mon 04-Jan-16 22:39:59

They should turn them into Aldis.

Starwarsorbaby Mon 04-Jan-16 22:40:24


WorraLiberty Mon 04-Jan-16 22:40:52

Or maybe a KFC?

There's enough land for a drive-thru.

Griphook Mon 04-Jan-16 22:41:26

As long as they can pay for them through sheer hard work 😉like the rest of us, it fine by me

manicinsomniac Mon 04-Jan-16 22:41:39


If you start there where do you stop?

Celebrities and the super rich who live in 2 bedroom mansions on acres of land?

Retired couples in 6 bedroom detached houses?

Affluent families with a guest room?

Anyone with a spare sofa bed?

Most people have more than they need. If we were going to be equal and share things then, in theory, that would be great but I don't think most of us would enjoy the subsequent changes to our own lifestyles.

purplehazed Mon 04-Jan-16 22:41:43

Ok, so we'll just let one family have them all. All that upkeep, for only short periods of the year. Outrageous.

purplehazed Mon 04-Jan-16 22:42:48

The difference being that celebs pay for them selves of course.

FlatOnTheHill Mon 04-Jan-16 22:43:13

And what do expect them to do with empty palaces. YABU
WorraLiberty I will second that grin

Ubik1 Mon 04-Jan-16 22:43:17

I'd open them up and let people enjoy visiting them, enjoy the grounds, maybe let people stay in them.

It's not such an outrageous idea, surely.

Oldsu Mon 04-Jan-16 22:44:29

Charles lives at Clarence House when he is in London and his Office is at St James Palace so hardly short periods

PaulAnkaTheDog Mon 04-Jan-16 22:44:46

So tell us your plans for them. Please.

Ubik1 Mon 04-Jan-16 22:45:11

KFC far too low rent.

A Nando's would be much better.

imwithspud Mon 04-Jan-16 22:45:49

YABU. Even if they were open to the public, it wouldn't exactly make much of a difference to the less fortunate.

TheSecondViola Mon 04-Jan-16 22:46:24

In 2014 visitors to Royal Palaces directly brought in 55 MILLION POUNDS, much of which is used to pay for the upkeep of the palaces and the treasures held in trust for the nation. Thats without the rest of the cash they bring the country as a whole.

Again, what do you propose to do with them, and how will you replace the tourism money they generate?

Ubik1 Mon 04-Jan-16 22:46:47

You could turn one of them into a real life hogwarts. With a nando's.

Dipankrispaneven Mon 04-Jan-16 22:47:20

A number of them are open to the public already, including Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace and Windsor Castle.

TheSecondViola Mon 04-Jan-16 22:47:53

I'd open them up and let people enjoy visiting them, enjoy the grounds

They do. They are. Buckingham, Windsor, Holyrood and Clarence House. All open to the public at times.

Ubik1 Mon 04-Jan-16 22:48:26

You can keep the royals in much -reduced splendour.

All the bling can go on display. The queen could show people round.

Viviennemary Mon 04-Jan-16 22:49:21

I disapprove of the whole concept of royalty. So I agree. France has no royal family but still has palaces for people to view. They could turn them into rest homes for fed up Mnetters.

purplehazed Mon 04-Jan-16 22:49:33

I actually believe that there would be more visitors if the palaces were empty. I don't believe for one minute the myth that the royals bring in tourists. Paris doesn't do too bad.

Join the discussion

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

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: