To think the royal family are a bloody embarrassment

[MariaAngustias]

Just that - why are we paying for this bunch when we could be spending the money on essential services? Let the Queen continue then after her just get rid of the whole bloody lot of them. We have and alleged paedo, a whinging multi millionaire in his 30's moaning constantly, an allegedly corrupt heir to the throne meeting dodgy russians for money....... just go, enough. Seriously - this is all Jeremy Kyle for poshos.

I think the book "And what do you do" by Norman Baker might just make people change their minds about having a royal family

The first review is similar to all the others.

5.0 out of 5 starsVerified Purchase
A brilliant and overdue exposure of the royal family.

Unputdownable.
Every pro-royalist argument is neatly demolished. It shows us what the monarchy really is about: free-loaders; parasites; freebie holidays lovers; hypocrites of the highest order, including the Queen, who by the way has shares in Brighthouse; a firm that exploits the poor in society; the myth that they bring in 'loads of money' proves to be just that, a myth peddled by the Firm.
In fact the annual third of a billion pounds allocated to them (not including security costs which are kept secret-why is that?!) should be rerouted to the ailing NHS, not to the Queen, who is fabuously wealthy. Even their wills remain secret (again-why?)
As head of state she is useless. The institution is undemocratic and riddled with corruption. How can one respect such a family?
They have no place in 21th century Britain.

Plus the money from things like palace gift shops / crown estate fees (from visitors) they actually generate way more than they cost, contributing billions to the economy through tourists etc
This argument re. tourism is very flawed. It attributes all royal-related tourism to the fact that was have a living monarch (i.e. - if we didnt still have a queen, nobody would visit Buckingham Palace).

This conveniently overlooks that palaces and alike in countries that have long since disposed of their monarchs often remain major tourist attractions. The Palace of Versailles being an obvious one.

@Sloth66

Why do people resort to the tired old argument that the only alternative to this dismal family is an unpopular politician?

Look at Ireland, they’ve had some great presidents. With of course the bonus that they can be voted out, unlike our unelected, unaccountable democratic RF.

Are we expected seriously to respect and look up to these individuals? Cheating Charles, a weak and devious man and his mistress/ wife?

Odious Andrew, who tells us he has nothing to hide,yet who is currently hiding on a 50,000 acre estate to avoid being served with court papers?
What is the point of the RF? They serve their own interests, and they have teams of people working for them to do so.

Absolutely. An elected HoS has a largely ceremonial role and little or no political power in the Irish system, so it’s in no way appealing to career politicians, and pegging the salary to the top of the civil service pay grade means no ones in it for the cash. Plus, even if an ‘unpopular politician’ goes forward as a candidate, you’re in no way obliged to vote for them. You don’t need a politician of any stripe. You could have someone widely-respected with a long record of public service. And if you’re not happy, you get someone else after their term.

It’s a better system than a supposedly divinely-appointed bloodline which grows sometimes up dutiful types, playboys, Nazi sympathisers etc.

In Ireland, all you have to be is over 35 and a citizen.

Bloody hell. The pro Royalty brigade are getting their arses ‘royally’ slapped (pun intended!).

Come the revolution my friends !

@Paquerette

Do you have any insight into why your posts are being removed?

@MrsCatE

Bloody hell. The pro Royalty brigade are getting their arses ‘royally’ slapped (pun intended!).

Come the revolution my friends !

Royalists always get their arses slapped on these threads. MN, unlike the general population, is overwhelmingly republican. It means nothing.

I’d say the opposite: MN is bizarrely royalist (cool peeps here aside) unlike the general population who are completely uninterested.

You’re reading very different threads to me @TatianaBis.

Am I? Kate n Wills: general fawning, Meghan n Harry: traitors!

In Ireland, all you have to be is over 35 and a citizen.

We can only dream.....

. The thing is too, they aren't like celebrities in Ireland. I haven't got a clue who the president's wife is, kids, brothers, bloody cousins etc. Also no lavish palaces and castles dotted all round the countryside, and all those other homes that the queen seems able to draw out of a hat and bestow on any of her offspring.

@Sagaz

Yeh, but part of that process is co-operating with police/FBI

You can't hide behind ''Innocent til proven guilty!'' if you refuse to engage in the process that could determine your guilt or innocence.

No you are innocent until proved guilty. If the police come and arrest you and you don't co-operate the legal system still says you are innocent until proven guilty. If we are going to ignore that then there is no point having a legal system is there.

Yabu

It’s been proved beyond doubt that the Queen has been lobbying politically:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth

And Prince Charles is well known for it, too.

They don’t even keep up their end of the bargain. Get rid.

@Blossomtoes
I accept that there’s only a minority in the UK who actively want to take the steps necessary to do away with them. But I wouldn’t confuse that with there being a majority who would actively mourn the dissolution of the monarchy. IMO, most people tolerate them and focus their energy elsewhere. There’s nowhere the love that, for example, the toadying BBC likes to suggest exists in its royal coverage. Once the Queen goes they’ll be on very thin ice.

Countries with monarchies are less corrupt

Lots of countries with monarchies are extremely corrupt. Take Saudi Arabia.

I guess the monarchy didn't spend much on official duties last year. So are we expecting a rebate on that?

No you are innocent until proved guilty. If the police come and arrest you and you don't co-operate the legal system still says you are innocent until proven guilty. If we are going to ignore that then there is no point having a legal system is there.

Presumed innocent until proven guilty is simply a legal principle within criminal trials to the effect that the burden of proof rests with the prosecution.

It doesn’t mean the general public can’t speculate wildly on whatever they like. I am free to say I believe Virginia and I don’t believe Andrew.

Not in covid times
When we have our taxes deducted from our hard earned money part of that pays for the royals and all the hangers on
Slim it right down we really don’t need all of them

Compare that with the cowardly Windsor as he lies, sweats, dodges and evades

That's a filthy lie. Prince Andrew doesn't sweat.

They may be, but they don't receive any public funding, so I'm not bothered about them.

Beatrice and Eugenie had protection paid for by the taxpayer for years; not to mention the security cost of whichever one had the huge wedding.

YANBU the Andrew thing has changed my views. I think once the Queen has died they should be disbanded.

@KeflavikAirport

They may be, but they don't receive any public funding, so I'm not bothered about them.

Beatrice and Eugenie had protection paid for by the taxpayer for years; not to mention the security cost of whichever one had the huge wedding.

They lost publicly funded security the best part of a decade ago, though I agree they should never have had it.

The security for Eugenie's wedding was mostly due to the fact that queen was present - Eugenie herself no longer gets taxpayer funded protection.

@MrsCatE

Bloody hell. The pro Royalty brigade are getting their arses ‘royally’ slapped (pun intended!).

Come the revolution my friends !

If they are I can’t say I’ve felt it.

She’s the only one with the balls to object

There's another potential lawsuit from an alleged victim who claims he groped her using a Spitting Image puppet. Previously out of time but now awaiting the signing into US law of the Adult Survivors Act which gives her a year from it becoming law.

Yes you’re right Johanna Sjoberg - he did it to both her and Guiffre who were together.

She has given decades of faultless public service

Only interrupted by successful lobbying on her own behalf for exemptions from anything and everything that doesn't suit.

I didn't realise that Jimmy Saville was a member of the Royal Family

Of course he wasn't but his activities were a very open secret at the time. It stretches credulity to think someone on Charles' staff wouldn't have advised against - for instance- asking JS for marriage guidance or accepting invitations to cosy dinners at his private residence.

But Charles always escapes squeaky clean with a disingenuous bound. See latest cash for honors claims which have his valet falling on his rubber sword for the third time