To be edging towards an anti-Monarchy position purely because of the Cambridges?

[Buxhoeveden]

As a couple they are starting to grate.

Is it too early to focus on them?

I'm a republican and the fondness or even ambivalence towards the royal family as a whole baffles me. I truly believe we cannot ever even begin to build an equal society with an institution like the royal family in place. I appreciate ditching them would not solve such problems in one fell swoop, but I find them hugely symbolic of the rampant unequal nature of British society and if we as a country are serious about tackling it then the royal family needs to go.

Yes apparently they do and as they pay tax which helps cover their grant and they pay more in tax then they cost so they are self sufficient

Well he isn't paid for itGriphook and I imagine the air ambulance service in East Anglia find it useful having a fully trained pilot to get critically ill people to hospital. The patients he flies probably don't mind either.

they would probably find it more useful to have consistency, and someone availble to work more hours, investing training and time with someone who will stand the test of time.

That's my point it agains comes down to them only doing things they are interested in.

Personally I think the 'job' is another attempt at trying to make them look 'normal' while in reality they are entitled and privileged.

Exactly how are they not English? The Queen is half British by descent, William's mother was definitely British.

Regardless of bloodlines imagine the same comment made about a baby born in the UK whose grandparents immigrated from the West India in the 50s. Would they be British or West Indian. Or would the commenter just be accused of racism?

I thought it was 65p

highly unlikely given their security bill that we pay for

Regardless I do not want to pay towards the keep of some ridiculously over privileged family

I think the Cambridges have badly misjudged their role and shifted the monarchy away from the idea of public service that the Queen has been so committed to. Basically, they have defined themselves as celebrities. They use Mario Testino to take family pictures, and invite Brad and Angelina over for tea. On their Canadian tour, they tagged on a visit to LA to meet lots of Hollywood celebs. Holidays are in Mustique, where other celebs hang out. Kate is known for what she wears and how skinny she is rather than what she does (I doubt many people could name one of her charities, whereas Diana had made significant impact at a younger age through her charitable endeavours). There are very few of these charity appearances anyway - they are cynically timed to take place for two or three days in a row immediately before or after one of their holidays to deflect criticism. Most of their appearances in public involve movie premieres, gala dinners and top sporting events.

To now complain that they are treated like celebrities, and issue thinly-veiled threats to shoot photographers is a bit rich when they have carved this role out for themselves. Their idea of being a royal seems very different to the "hard-working royal" model carved out by the Queen, Princess Anne, and even Charles and Camilla. It's clear they have no intention of fulfilling that kind of role.

Re. the Middletons - I was in a pub a few months ago and Kate's parents were also in there. Her mother spent the whole time boasting about Kate's new Norfolk house and garden. The father sat there and said nothing.

And Sansarya if we didn't have a monarchy we'd spend the same on security for any elected head of state. We're still paying to protect Tony Blair. U.S. Presidents are protected for life by their secret service after leaving office.

what's even worse than seeing Kate in the media... is seeing her sister and brother quite obviously hangers on... in fact I'm relieved to see less coverage (I think) of bloody Pippa in the media.

Zara also makes much of her 'normal-ness' when in fact she isn't really - she just doesn't have a title. She makes money from her name and the fact she's not a proper royal but an alternative one - e.g. one not with a title.

don't get me started on the ugly sisters either - Bea and Eugenie. I used to work in UKTI at chairman level (short term temp) to do with exporting and importing British business in and out of UK and we had to deal with Randy Andy's PAs/secretaries - we heard on the grapevine he wasn't their favourite person and hard work. anything that involved him had to 'keep him happy' at all costs.

It's refreshing to see so much support for your hereditary betters and such strong will to keep them in the manner to which they're accustomed. Tally ho, chapesses!

We dont really pay anything the queens private income is more thn enough to cover her costs and she pays tax on it. Plus she owns the land your living on. We pay for this land in tax from which she gets 15% and the government the rest. The tax she pays would be more than that 15%. Being annoyed at giving money to the royals is the same as being annoyed to pay ypur landlord.

Don't they also get the net income from the Duchies or Lancaster and Cornwall? Those aren't part of the Crown Estate so they get millions there and unlike the Crown Estates, the public don't benefit from it.

William chose the job - the job didn't choose him. Do you think a vacancy came up, he applied for it, went through an interview process with many others, and was offered it based on merit? I don't think so...he can fly helicopters, he wanted an opportunity to practise his hobby, the Air Ambulance was close to home, they give him a few shifts...and the 'he's just like us, he's got a job' fools some people into thinking they're just like any other normal young couple.

The Queen owns the land we are living on

Well if there was ever an argument to support a republic that would be high up on the list why

The public shouldnt have to benefit from their income were not entitled to it same as were not entitled to anyones elses income. Feel lucky the public benefit from the income from the crown estates the royals didnt have to give us that money

I like the royal family, and generally don't really get annoyed by anything the do, our country has a rich history including a royal family and I like that.

But when they left hospital with Charlotte, and all those people had camped for days (weeks?)... They could have at least muttered something to the waiting press and 'fans'. It would have taken seconds. For some reason, that really annoyed me.

The Duchess of Cambridge is currently on maternity leave. Her public appearances are in a private capacity (maternity leave doesn't mean she isn't allowed out of the house). She can go to Wimbledon all she likes. She is not on royal duty and is not "giving back" at present.

Feel lucky Give over.

I doubt many people could name one of her charities, whereas Diana had made significant impact at a younger age through her charitable endeavours

That's a very good point. Diana had her faults but you can't deny that she supported "unfashionable" charities like AIDS ones and campaigned against land mines. Kate's chosen charities are much "safer", although this might be a directive from the top rather than her personally. It does seem that she's having every inch of her personality squeezed out of her and being shoehorned into some sort of Stepford Royal image. Even her fashion choices, although never edgy, used to be much more interesting and these days are very conservative indeed.

Republic wouldnt be any better the govenment would still own the land. You do realise you dont own anything. When you buy things it is a borrowing agreement and someone can claim any property back at any moment. Even your own children your only agreeing to care for and they can be taken to. Those in power whether its royals or elective heads of state will always ultimately own what you have

LittleBear don't you know any of your history - they are mostly German... even though born here! Princess Di was more English than the Queen is.

The public shouldnt have to benefit from their income were not entitled to it same as were not entitled to anyones elses income. Feel lucky the public benefit from the income from the crown estates the royals didnt have to give us that money

The income is from the Duchies. If anyone dies intestate then their property and money reverts to the duchy. How is that fair?

The Duchess of Cambridge is currently on maternity leave

Maternity leave from what, exactly?

The difference is the principle - elected heads of state are elected and can be removed at any time. The royals are considered above the rest of society simply by being born (or getting married). No thanks.

Because they never really owned the property to begin with the state and crown does same way they own all the property

To be fair may be royals should be determined the way pur family earned its title in the firat place through battle maybe then we would have more respect especially if you could still become royal by simply killing and claiming the throne but thats why they have security so i guess the royals earned their place