Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to loathe the Royal Family

401 replies

InWinoVeritas · 21/04/2017 18:29

The way the media is so gushing about everything Wills, Kate and Harry do, just been watching the evening news, there is a story about Wills and Kate doing a radio broadcast, makes me want to vomit..
And the issues about mental health - really? Do we need Royal 'endorsement' just to get more funding?

OP posts:
justintimeforacuppa · 25/04/2017 21:04

Not cynicism, just bring realistic and seeing it for what it is.

justintimeforacuppa · 25/04/2017 21:05

being*

mellast · 25/04/2017 21:13

I'm pleased I'm not as cynical as you. And even if we became a republic tomorrow, they would still have "inherited fame" and opportunities the rest of us don't get. C'est la vie.

but we wouldn't be paying for them, would we? and they wouldn't have the PM's ear either.

it's not cynicism. it's not wanting to give an obscenely wealthy family any more wealth and power than we need to.

Chavelita · 26/04/2017 16:17

If I were more cynical than I am, I would find the fact that posts vehement in their defence of the Royals appear on the same site which frequently has posts sounding off about 'benefit scroungers' buying giant TVs funny. As it is, I just find it baffling.

ForalltheSaints · 26/04/2017 16:52

Fine to disagree with the institution, not to be rude about those in it and judge them by any standards other than those you would others.

CatWithKittens · 26/04/2017 16:58

"I'm just not seeing the bitterness and envy Nanny. Nor are most people criticising their grief, I don't see many personal attacks. It is monarchists who want them to be public figures after all, and ensured that when they were bereaved their grief had to be paraded in public."

The poster wrote this clearly is not reading the same thread as me. All I see is a large number of discontented, bitter and envious posters criticising something about which they really appear to know very little. I'm not quite sure what such people would say, for example, about the Prince's Trust, which does a vast amount of excellent work, the Duke of Edinburgh's Award, which has been an inspiration to so many young people over so many years, Prince Harry's Charity work in Lesotho and with injured servciemen but to me they speak of of the sort of public service which is rare in modern life. I wonder how many of those who "loathe" the Royal Family ever do anything for their fellows?

As for saying:
"I think letting them parade behind their mother's coffin so publicly was an awful thing to do to 2 teenage boys. And do you recall them being taken to church as normal, the very day after Diana's death? TBH I think it is the institution of monarchy that lacks decency."
Clearly the poster has forgotten or does not know that, as was made clear at the time, the Princes themselves chose to walk. Equally she does not appear to realise that to a Christian going to Church in that situation would be exactly as she describes it - normal and helpful.
It is a great shame some of the posters do not do a little growing up then look around the word and give thanks that we are not faced with the sort of choice of Head of State that other mature western democracies have had to make or are in the process of making this year.

NannyOggsKnickers · 26/04/2017 17:38

Cat Well said. I'm glad someone else could see it.

Tapandgo · 26/04/2017 20:23

All I see is a large number of discontented, bitter and envious posters criticising something about which they really appear to know very little.
I am assuming most posters on here know as much as you do about the royal family.
It is the institution of monarchy that is drawing the strongest criticism from some, and it is a legitimate aspiration to want a 21st Century democracy to be exactly that - free of anachronistic institutions that hold and exploit unearned power and privilege. (It is also legitimate to hold the opposite view). Ideally, the country should be able to choose what it wants.

mellast · 26/04/2017 21:15

I'm not quite sure what such people would say, for example, about the Prince's Trust, which does a vast amount of excellent work, the Duke of Edinburgh's Award, which has been an inspiration to so many young people over so many years, Prince Harry's Charity work in Lesotho and with injured servciemen but to me they speak of of the sort of public service which is rare in modern life. I wonder how many of those who "loathe" the Royal Family ever do anything for their fellows?

I'd say they have to be seen to do some good. what we could do, if we wanted, is cut out the middle family, and all the money from the civil list and the duchy of cornwall can go straight to those charities. That's a hell of a lot of money, without cream getting skimmed off the top first.

I'd also feel obligated to do a lot of good if the country was dumping a truckload of money into my living room everyday.

April229 · 26/04/2017 21:15

I think they bring in more revenue than you think and are cheaper than having a president as head of state, or do you think we should have no one?

mellast · 26/04/2017 21:16

I think they bring in more revenue than you think and are cheaper than having a president as head of state, or do you think we should have no one?

Perhaps we should have an open audit? I'd say their security, travel, days off in their honour cost quite a bit.

LaurieMarlow · 26/04/2017 21:26

They're certainly not cheaper than a presidency. There was a great article linked earlier than showed how staggeringly expensive they are compared to European presidencies and other monarchies. I can't remember the actual figures, but i think it was something like 60/70 times what the Irish presidency costs.

Chavelita · 26/04/2017 21:34

I've linked to the costs of European presidencies further up on the thread. Having the queen as head of state costs 27 times per annum than the presidency of Austria.

Fuxfurforall · 26/04/2017 21:47

They are funded by the Crown Estate anyway ( the Queen's property portfolio) She doesn't necessarily bankroll them all. Most of them have their own incomes now. The civil list is long gone and the main royal residences open up as tourist attractions. I too would be interested in seeing a balance sheet, but much of their value is with charity patronage and promoting the UK around the world. I like the fact that they raise awareness of issues which touch many of our own lives

Chavelita · 26/04/2017 22:39

A lot of people seem not to grasp that the Crown Estate doesn't belong to the monarch -- it's state-owned, like the Duchies Of Cornwall and Lancaster, whose revenue also goes straight to the royal family . The Treasury since 2013 pays out a percentage of its surplus revenue from the CE as a replacement for the civil list.

But it's nonsense to suggest the monarchy is anywhere close to self-funding. Their security bill is paid for by the metropolitan police, royal visits by local councils, and unlike any other state budget, the sovereign grant is protected in case revenues from the CE fall, and despite the sovereign grant being supposed to be more transparent than the civil list (which wasn't allowed to be audited), still isn't subject to the same tax laws as any other public bodies.

It's fairly astonishing more people aren't angry in an age when public services, including the metropolitan police and the local councils who fund so many royal activities, are being cut. Even the Public Affairs select committee criticised the royal household for mismanagement of funds.

www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/public-accounts-committee/news/sovereign-grant-report/

justintimeforacuppa · 27/04/2017 01:44

Absolutely obscene what they take from the tax payer.

spinassienne · 27/04/2017 08:29

the sort of public service which is rare in modern life

Oh FFS. I'm sure I could find it in myself to cut a few ribbons / jet off to Botswana on a charity mission if I were being bankrolled by taxpayers to the tune of millions. And yes, I've done plenty of volunteering in my time, thank you. As do millions of other people across the UK.

LaurieMarlow · 27/04/2017 08:35

The crown estate doesn't belong to family Windsor, it's state money that's allocated to fund the royal family.

The ignorance around that is astounding.

justintimeforacuppa · 27/04/2017 09:56

Laurie i agree, its such a common fallacy but so very convenient for the royals that we think that.Since the queen stopped getting money from the civil list people wrongly think the royal family support themselves, hence the common "they don't cost us anything" nonsense. The revenue from the crown estates gives them a huge income, but it isn't theirs to keep, it belongs to the nation.

mellast · 27/04/2017 10:29

I like the fact that they raise awareness of issues which touch many of our own lives

I think everyone likes that fact. The question isn't whether or not they do some good, but is it worth the money we give them?

mellast · 27/04/2017 10:31

I think they bring in more revenue than you think and are cheaper than having a president as head of state, or do you think we should have no one?

it's this attitude that I find very odd. Every other organisation has to prove their worth. It's shouldn't be the public's job to show they are not worth it. They should have to show they are worth the money.

Julia2016 · 27/04/2017 10:53

But Mellast (I agree with you by the way), isn't part of their argument for being where they are that they are Royal/have blue blood/are above ordinary folk. Don't they believe they have a divine right to be where they are. Doesn't the queen believe she was put where she is by god also. So why should they prove their worth?

mellast · 27/04/2017 11:05

They may believe that (I sort of doubt they do, but I don't have access to their thoughts), but I don't. What surprises me is that there are tax payers in Britain who believe that. Surely, it should be we the people who decide how worthy they are, not them.

CatWithKittens · 27/04/2017 11:06

"A lot of people seem not to grasp that the Crown Estate doesn't belong to the monarch -- it's state-owned, like the Duchies Of Cornwall and Lancaster, whose revenue also goes straight to the royal family ."

That is simply incorrect, in almost every way - look at the Crown estate website which says:
"Since 1760, the net income of The Crown Estate has been surrendered to the Exchequer by the Monarch under successive Civil List Acts, passed at the beginning of each reign.
"The Crown Estate is though owned by the Monarch in right of the Crown. This means that the Queen owns it by virtue of holding the position of reigning Monarch, for as long as she is on the throne, as will her successor. Responsibility for managing The Crown Estate is trusted to us, under the Crown Estate Act, and the Queen is not involved in management decisions.
"By contrast, the Queen also has private assets, which include Balmoral and Sandringham, and are hers to deal with as she chooses. But by no means all of what is commonly called Crown Land or Crown Property forms part of The Crown Estate."

So many people commenting on here seem to ignore the basic facts in order to support their "loathing" and their rather sad jealousies and petty envies.

Chavelita · 27/04/2017 11:24

So many people commenting on here seem to ignore the basic facts in order to support their "loathing" and their rather sad jealousies and petty envies.

Cat, I really wonder what thread you are reading, because what I'm seeing is a set of reasoned arguments for why the monarchy is an expensive anachronism in an age of austerity, and some perfectly understandable incredulity that more people don't seem angry about this.

I also think you are misunderstanding the relationship between the Crown and the nation -- from a Freedom of Information request replied to by the Crown Estate:

The estate is held by the Queen ‘in right of the Crown’ and not otherwise.

www.thecrownestate.co.uk/crown_es...

The Crown Estate is therefore owned by the state and not by the Queen in a private capacity.