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

To think the royal family are a bloody embarrassment

999 replies

MariaAngustias · 12/09/2021 09:53

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.

OP posts:
Washeduponthebeach · 16/09/2021 20:27

@StoneofDestiny

And now Philips will is to be kept secret 'to preserve the dignity of the Queen'. You couldn't make it up. Another law for them that is not available to us.
Obviously something to hide then...
Lightisnotwhite · 16/09/2021 21:07

@TheKeatingFive

Anne Sacoolas killed someone and has hidden behind diplomatic immunity for a very long time. We don’t seem to care about that though.

I don’t think that’s okay either, but nice bit of whataboutery.

It doesn’t make any difference whatsoever to how our prince of the realms actions should be judged.

Stop trying to shut discussion down accusing people. “whataboutery”. Its not clever. It’s absolutely fine to say “what about” if the original point referred to was exclusivity.

And I don’t think anyone thinks royalty is superior to them. Especially in this age of billionaires, mega famous and people with genuinely fabulous lifestyles who do bugger all ( with no criticism unless they look fat or old)

Our monarchy do what its meant to most of the time. The Queen is nails. I know a fair few 90 year olds who play golf, do the garden, go on holiday. They are all people who’ve been busy all their lives. Good on them and her.

OhGiveUp · 16/09/2021 21:08

@Prh47bridge Ah right. Thank you. I was on the right track, but going in the wrong direction 🙂

prh47bridge · 16/09/2021 21:19

@StoneofDestiny

prh47Bridge

Thank you - I stand corrected. I doubt an average citizen would succeed. I guess he's left money to his mistress or just left so much money overall the Queen could be embarrassed. What else could offend her dignity?

Possibly but, as the BBC correctly reports, this has been the practice for all senior members of the Royal Family for over a century and the judge has not seen the will, so has no idea of its contents other than the date and the identity of the executor. What is different in this case is that the judge has set out a procedure whereby these wills could eventually be made public. Previously, royal wills were sealed indefinitely.
CathyorClaire · 16/09/2021 21:35

these wills could eventually be made public

This year, next year, some time, 90 years?

By the time this happens nobody will remember or care.

Another right royal result.

TheKeatingFive · 16/09/2021 21:57

Stop trying to shut discussion down accusing people. “whataboutery”. Its not clever. It’s absolutely fine to say “what about” if the original point referred to was exclusivity.

If you want to talk about Ann Sacoolas, go right ahead and start a thread.

Her being in the wrong doesn’t make Andrew any less in the wrong. It’s absolutely pathetic to keep bringing her up as a diversionary tactic.

TheKeatingFive · 16/09/2021 22:05

And I don’t think anyone thinks royalty is superior to them.

So what’s the justification for landing obscene levels of power and wealth into their laps then?

Blossomtoes · 16/09/2021 22:09

@TheKeatingFive

And I don’t think anyone thinks royalty is superior to them.

So what’s the justification for landing obscene levels of power and wealth into their laps then?

What power? They have no power at all. They’re figureheads.
TheKeatingFive · 16/09/2021 22:10

What power? They have no power at all. They’re figureheads.

🤦‍♀️

TheKeatingFive · 16/09/2021 22:10

What are you, twelve?

Blossomtoes · 16/09/2021 22:12

@TheKeatingFive

What are you, twelve?
Tell me what power they have.
TheKeatingFive · 16/09/2021 22:27

Tell me what power they have.

Try reading the thread. The queen has immunity from prosecution for starters. Exemption from freedom of information requests. Exemption from particular laws. That’s long before we get into her constitutional rights, should she ever choose to use them.

Plus the immense degrees of soft power. The Queen’s weekly audience with the head of state. How many global heads of state have they had access to between them all? How many leaders of industry and global bodies?

But there’s you asking ‘what power do they have’? The Windsor PR team are pushing against an open door with you. They must laugh their legs off when they see comments like yours.

ponyexpress22 · 16/09/2021 23:16

What power? They have no power at all. They’re figureheads.
The queen has much more power than you'd think.

StoneofDestiny · 16/09/2021 23:41

But there’s you asking ‘what power do they have’? The Windsor PR team are pushing against an open door with you. They must laugh their legs off when they see comments like yours

Exactly

  1. The Queen managed has avoided paying taxes for the majority of her life - only fairly recently has this changed. Imagine it - a multi millionaire not paying tax!
  2. The Queen and the Royals control a great deal of what goes into the media. They have a press office and decide what is published by offering 'bargaining' photo shoots to keep them at bay.
  3. The Queen gets to discuss political decision making every week with the PM - remember how rarely Johnson agrees to any interview on TV or even enter debates with other politicians? So we the voting public get nothing - the Queen gets a private meeting!
  4. The ability to smother scandals at the palace - no accountability. Is anybody really surprised that Andrew is being hidden away?
  5. Anybody ever wondered why Philip was never prosecuted or at least 'stood down' for his many offensive racist comments? Mere mortals are dropped like hot bricks when offensive comments are credited to them, even if they took place 20:plus years ago.
  6. Try getting a freedom of information request through the royal maze. No chance of getting a response.
  7. Politicians can and do get grilled on TV to account for their behaviours - royals do not. Yet they are living at our expense. Zero accountability
prh47bridge · 17/09/2021 00:09

The queen has immunity from prosecution for starters.

As do almost all heads of state.

Exemption from freedom of information requests.

That is because she is not a public authority. She has the same exemption as you and I.

That’s long before we get into her constitutional rights, should she ever choose to use them.

She won't use them unless she wants to cause a constitutional crisis.

The Queen’s weekly audience with the head of state.

She is the head of state. I presume you mean her weekly audience with the Prime Minister.

occa · 17/09/2021 01:25

@Jaysmith71

The monarch can be tried by a special court established by Parliament.

There is no evidence or suggestion that Andrew has committed any criminal offence in any jurisdiction. The plaintiff alleges she was trafficked to the UK and the BVI, which would be a crime, but not on Andrew's part.

Minor point, but I think she's alleging UK, NY and Great St James, which is US Virgin Islands, not BVI.

Also there was a statement a while back in the thread that BVI law is British law, which isn't true, although the age of consent in BVI does happen to be 16, as in UK.

TrishM80 · 17/09/2021 01:49

I don't get the argument that's always trotted out about "the Royal family bring in (insert random number that someone's pulled out of their arse) billion pounds a year in tourism." What, is the Queen giving personalised tours of her palaces or something? What % of tourists ever even get a glimpse of any of the Royal Family?

Inkanta · 17/09/2021 03:01

Yes I do think we are seeing the beginning of the end of Monarchy and agree that Andrew demonstrates grandiose entitlement in thinking he can dodge papers being served. He is above the law and his team are there to get him out of this mess. Such superiority and entitlement and lack of empathy are not character traits we aspire to in this day and age.

TheKeatingFive · 17/09/2021 05:08

She won't use them unless she wants to cause a constitutional crisis.

I’m not sure of the point of your post. I was stating that yes, she has power. Are you denying that too?

Matilda82 · 17/09/2021 05:21

I just object to the idea we are meant to feel lesser to these people. I see people fawning over them on TV queuing to see a glimpse of one of them. It's pathetic in this day and age'
. I don't get the whole idea that the Queen works hard etc. She has everything done for her! How hard can it be to sit in a palace meeting people occassioanlly and having all your domestic chores done for you. Confused I have more respect for my 90 year old neighbour, widowed at 40, worked all her life and raised 5 kids in a 3 bed house.

Blossomtoes · 17/09/2021 05:30

@TheKeatingFive

Tell me what power they have.

Try reading the thread. The queen has immunity from prosecution for starters. Exemption from freedom of information requests. Exemption from particular laws. That’s long before we get into her constitutional rights, should she ever choose to use them.

Plus the immense degrees of soft power. The Queen’s weekly audience with the head of state. How many global heads of state have they had access to between them all? How many leaders of industry and global bodies?

But there’s you asking ‘what power do they have’? The Windsor PR team are pushing against an open door with you. They must laugh their legs off when they see comments like yours.

None of that is power. Rights and power are different. The Queen has so little power that she has to go along with the government of the day, even when its wishes are illegal. Remember Johnson prorogueing parliament?
XDownwiththissortofthingX · 17/09/2021 05:39

Every time someone brings up 'tourism' as a justification for the continued existence of unelected HoS, I just point to France. They did away with the parasites hundreds of years ago, and people still flock to see the palaces and so on.

Snowonthemountain · 17/09/2021 06:08

Johnson's suspension of parliament was unlawful and was deemed so by the supreme court.

Blossomtoes · 17/09/2021 06:09

@Snowonthemountain

Johnson's suspension of parliament was unlawful and was deemed so by the supreme court.
That’s what I just said!
Spiindoctor · 17/09/2021 06:33

I get the criticisms but if you take away the Royals are we to worship at the feet of the Kardashians, Beckhams, etc Whose photos will people buy a newspaper to look at?
Royals have problems and skeletons like most families. I would think if it is seriously slimmed down, which will probably happen, many Royals will skip very happily into anonymity. Who, unless there was money in it hich is why the Ks and Bs do it, would want all this attention?
The scrutiny of the media now makes life pretty miserable I should think. The Ks and Bs probably have security to keep everyone away and choose what the media knows. The Royals have to be out and seen, they don't have that option. I can't understand people's anger and envy. Imagine having your whole life picked apart, or how you'd feel if a close relative had their wole life picked apart, as in the Crown. I hope for their sakes they just step right back.