To think that when more people than ever are having to use

[lottieandmia]

The Royal Family should pay for their own fucking renovations on the palace. It makes me so mad, we supposedly have a deficit so bad that disabled people are being declared fit for work 10 days before they die from their condition.

Something is very wrong. Don't tell me they bring in loads of revenue from tourism. Think about the cost of security and police protection they already have that is funded by the tax payer.

Why not sell Kensington Palace and turn it into luxury apartments (they would go for serious money!) that would raise most, perhaps all, the amount needed. Either move the royals currently living there into cheaper accommodation or one of the other palaces or (for minor royals) make them pay their own way. A few rooms at Ken Palace could be kept for visitors for posterity. I don't think the country would lose anything substantial culturally if we did this.

I didn't know we were paying for past presidents of France!
You probaby aren't, then, Crunched: I definitely am: off to vote now to try and keep the Poison Dwarf from making a come-back next year.

Kensington Palace has quite a few people already living in it though.

"Does it belong to the Queen as part of her personal estate, or does it belong to the nation and is used by the monarch as an official residence?"

Belongs to the nation, and much if it is offices.

'Don't they have a large art collection, which could be put on display, and could raise money?'

Yes, they're out out on loan for display regularly. But not at profit because they're already owned by the nation.

"It doesn't need to be a workplace for the monarch nor an official building for their events because there's no need for a monarchy."

Yes, there are other models for arranging a society, but this is the one we have. And for as long as there is a monarch, there is need for a workplace just like any head of state.

"Why not sell Kensington Palace and turn it into luxury apartments (they would go for serious money!)"

It already is luxury apartments! with pretty normal market rents. The Monarch paying from own pocket, not official funds any top ups required for the tenants to afford it. Which seems a bit left hand - right hand, but transfers a fair amount from personal to official funds.

"If it's in such a state, knock it down."

Splendid idea, I think it's ugly. How much would a rebuild of something more modern cost though? (more, probably)

And I think the lead needs to be taken by Parliament. Because the estimated cost of fixing that isn't like this - a rounding error on the NHS budget, it's about 3 years worth (if higher estimates are nor scaremongering)

A rebuild would probably produce something equally ugly. Isn't there a case for knocking down the front because that was added on as an extra? Then develop some up to date offices in the grounds somewhere?

I guess the Queen didn't 'choose' to live in a huge residence with dozens of rooms and out buildings, so we really can't expect her to pay for the renovations and repairs needed. Not sure many tourists would choose to go and see her in a detached four bedroomed house in Windsor. I lived in an old cottage, which needed lots of maintenance and I moved out, but the queen doesn't have that luxury unfortunately. TBH, I despair more at the amount of money we have for the NHS where a lot of it is wasted on beaucracy and management, when it should be used for what it's there for; making people well.

No she didn't, Live. However she didn't choose to hand it back either, did she.
People don't choose to be poor or unemployed either,
Not passing judgement has to work both ways
You can't have 1 rule for the super rich abs another for the poor.

It's always amused me how people are so bitter about the Queen.
She has had her life mapped out for her since her uncle abdicated. She doesn't get to wake up and say "fuck it Phil, let's call in sick, I can't be arsed to open that hospital"
If she was an ordinary person, she could have retired decades ago.
I certainly wouldn't want to swap my very ordinary life for hers. At least if I have a headache or a cold I can choose to stay at home rather than smile and wave to hundreds of people that are there just to see me.
I would never pay for repairs to my workplace. Why should she? Just because she's wealthy? That doesn't really work does it?

Poor old queen. She has lots of houses but isn't allowed to live in them as she has to live in Buckingham Palace.

I'm sure she'd rather stay at Balmoral or Sandringham.

She has had her life mapped out for her since her uncle abdicated. She doesn't get to wake up and say "fuck it Phil, let's call in sick, I can't be arsed to open that hospital"

Only up to a point - she could have chosen a more low key role like the Dutch and Scandinavian monarchy. Shock horror, she could even abdicate as did Queens Juliana and Beatrix, and enable their daughter/son to take over in mid life, whereas Charles is now pushing 70 and still waiting for the job.

I'm not bitter about the Queen. It's the cost, the endless extended family and the privilege they attract. I don't want to metaphorically "doff my cap" to anyone. It's the gap between rich and poor. The poverty that exists in our country and how they think we're so easily appeased by a royal event/wedding/birth/christening when we have people dying for want of drugs and as I said before, people living on the streets. The endless amount of cash they cost us (and yes, we've all heard the line that they generate so much in terms of tourism). Really? Anyone ever seen a cost effectiveness spreadsheet? WHAT is Princess Beatrice? (I could list others). Nope, sorry, I think with all that's going on in the U.K. and the sorry state of our services, forking our all that cash is despicable.