Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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 think Harry and Meghan are taking the piss?

999 replies

ohymygodbethenny · 25/06/2019 11:03

How are people not more outraged? And no, tourists do not visit the UK specifically because of the royal family.

"This year, 320,000 people were recorded as homeless in Britain"

OP posts:
dollyandshirl · 25/06/2019 20:51

@DisputedChair thank you for acknowledging my brilliant insight. catty much? groan.

Do you honestly believe that politicians interested in power would decline the role of head of state? I suppose its similar to, say, Labour socialites declining lordships. oh, wait...

ohhelpohnoitsa · 25/06/2019 21:06

I am not a royalist but found this statistic crazy -
over £2m (Charlotte) and £1.2m each (boys) per year are generated in our economy by the daughter and sons, of W&K. Any clothing they are seen in, toys they carry, equipment used etc can sell out within days. Clearly it's none of us buying these things but someone must be. Their indirect contribution to the economy has paid for the said renovations, in a round about way.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 25/06/2019 21:16

The Crown Estate ... pay for all the essentials and the royals pay for the extra fripperies

Remembering that this institution tried to dip into a hardship fund to heat their buildings, I'd just love to see any proof that the second bit of that is true ... only it won't be possible since the details will never be released

How very convenient

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11403544

Justanotherlurker · 25/06/2019 21:37

The Crown Estate properties are essentially ours, ie the taxpayers

essentially being the operative word, we get to pay for upkeep and in some distant future may be given the privileged to be treated like tourists and have pay to walk around the grounds.

dollyandshirl · 25/06/2019 21:41
  • socialists, not socialites. FFS Grin
AngeloMysterioso · 26/06/2019 00:18

The Crown Estate properties are essentially ours, ie the taxpayers

Yes but your average Joe taxpayer is never going to be able to use it, are they? Just the Royal Family. So while it may not actually be their privately owned property, it is in every way that matters.

Except, it seems, when it comes to stumping up the cost of renovations.

JaimeBronde · 26/06/2019 00:44

How can it be taxpayers money when the monarchy agreed to turn over the profits of the Crown Estates in exchange for an allowance?
Or as pp have pointed out the Queen gives the government 85% & she retains 15%.
Hardly any of us would be happy to give 85% of our income to the government.

Quick question to those in the know: Can The Crown Estate agreement ever be revoked & the Queen takes back all the profit & funds all royal stuff herself?

BrendasUmbrella · 26/06/2019 01:06

If you are a Daily Mail reader, you are supposed to be thinking they are taking the piss. That is what is being spoonfed to you. So well done for eating your din dins like a good girl/boy.

lyralalala · 26/06/2019 01:09

Quick question to those in the know: Can The Crown Estate agreement ever be revoked & the Queen takes back all the profit & funds all royal stuff herself?

Nobody quite knows what would happen if the monarchy was abolished or the likes. The Crown Estates aren’t owned the government, but the treasury gets the income - the are owned by the monarch, but not the Queen personally.

Republicans will tell you they obviously belong to the country and therefore all the revenue would go there. Monarchists will say they’d revert to the Queen as personal property. It’s never been challenged so no one really knows.

I suspect it would be a very long negotiation and court battle that would make it look like Brexit too 5 minutes to sort!

AmeriAnn · 26/06/2019 01:16

Tourists often times come to the UK for tradition and the RF are tradition. The divorced American actress is not anyones idea of tradition.

AngeloMysterioso · 26/06/2019 01:24

Hardly any of us would be happy to give 85% of our income to the government.

Honestly, I don’t think I’d care that much if I still had fucking millions left over, got to live in enormous houses with full staff catering to my every need and whim and very few practical cares to worry about.

mummmy2017 · 26/06/2019 01:39

The Queen had to sign a document to agree to continue to let the govenment manage the crown estates for her and to let the profit be used for the govenment, in exchange for an allowance. ...
So Charles could refuse and keep the money.

LaurieMarlow · 26/06/2019 02:42

So Charles could refuse and keep the money.

If he did this he’d be taking back responsibility for funding the institutions of the country (which George iii rescinded).

The original purpose of the Crown Estates were to fund the country not the monarchy specifically so while no one knows exactly what would happen if the monarchy ceased to be I can see no reason why a private individual would have any rights over them.

NasiGoreng · 26/06/2019 06:45

Royals spending millions on renovations because living in a massive apartment in a massive palace with others is too cosy for their liking, doctors voting not to charge NHS tourists with cost up to 2BN a year, billionaires screwing over peoples pensions etc. etc. Meanwhile in MN land middle income people are not doing their fair share and should be paying MORE tax.

Jux · 26/06/2019 06:48

By custom and practise, perhaps, LaurieMarlow?

LaurieMarlow · 26/06/2019 07:03

By custom and practise

I don’t get what you mean by this

NatureWillDeleteTheEvidence · 26/06/2019 07:07

How can it be taxpayers money when the monarchy agreed to turn over the profits of the Crown Estates in exchange for an allowance?

Because all the land and property in that portfolio was robbed from us years ago (norman conquest if not before). Monarchs and their retinues are a bunch of chancers living on the profit of historical aggression towards us peasants. She's paying 85% tax on money stolen from us. It's a start.

That said id rather it was swilling around in the economy in artisan renovator's hands than squirreled away offshore or some shit.

PineappleFwitters · 26/06/2019 07:15

Tourists often times come to the UK for tradition and the RF are tradition. The divorced American actress is not anyones idea of tradition.

In case you hadn't noticed @AmeriAnn, 3 out of the queen's 4 children are divorced too...

LaurieMarlow · 26/06/2019 07:17

It’s not accurate to call the crown estates ‘tax payers money’. However they are public funds not private wealth.

CoffeeToffeeFudge · 26/06/2019 07:40

Yes, the DM is being deliberately provocative calling it “tax payers money”. It’s not. But it’s not Harry & Meghan’s money either & that’s the real bone of contention for me.

They haven’t been given Frogmore Cottage - they don’t own it. They’ll have a very, very long lease on it which they’ll have to pay for. They are effectively tenants and The Crown Estate is their landlord. William & Kate are in the same boat with KP, except Royal Palaces is their landlord.

Like all landlords, TCE has responsibility for the integrity of the building and making/keeping it habitable. So it’s right that they fork out for renovations - but the amount is absurd. They’ve clearly demanded the very best knowing damn well they don’t have to pay for it.

Probably the same goes for William & Kate at KP. Anmer Hall is different because the Queen actually owns that so it was all privately funded.

I don’t have a problem with Harry and his family being housed in a royal home on a royal estate. He is one of the biggest terrorist targets on the planet - keeping him safe costs money we shouldn’t begrudge.

But over £3m on a house only big enough to provide 5 bedrooms smacks of obscene entitlement.

Mrsjayy · 26/06/2019 08:38

If you are a Daily Mail reader, you are supposed to be thinking they are taking the piss. That is what is being spoonfed to you. So well done for eating your din dins like a good girl/boy.

What ya on about it was on the news all channels not everybody heads straight to the Daily Mail in the morning

Alsohuman · 26/06/2019 08:43

It’s a listed building. As the owner of one, I know all too well that any work costs several times more than if it was a 1960s semi. Most of the work was apparently long over due maintenance on the fabric of the building.

This money has come from the State Grant, if it hadn’t been spent on Frogmore Cottage it would have been spent on the Royal family in some other way, it certainly wouldn’t have gone back to the Treasury. But don’t let the facts get in the way of the frothing.

mummmy2017 · 26/06/2019 08:48

Maybe you have not noticed the shoddy journalist who stir this up every time anything royal with a cost comes up.
Weddings. Funerals. Houses...
Every household in the UK costs more than it gives in taxes...
Somehow we are not treat as Harry and Megan are.
The charities they are patrons of gain from this, they do bring in trade... As well as tourism ... We don't... Would anyone wish to travel to Jackson Close to see Kevin's house.. no

PineappleFwitters · 26/06/2019 08:53

Tourists would still come to the U.K. if we didn't have a monarchy. It hasn't stopped them visiting Versailles or the Schonbrunn Palace!

mummmy2017 · 26/06/2019 08:56

That last big french royal wedding...Wow it was amazing .. not