Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think this is a complete joke and want to abolish the monarchy

181 replies

portugalq · 30/06/2022 11:28

The Royal Family cost taxpayers £102.4million last year.

As the nation struggled in the cost of living crisis, spending on the royals rose £15million – 17%.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/record-100m-taxpayer-payout-royal-27360820

OP posts:
Allergictoironing · 30/06/2022 13:06

Check out the history of the Crown Estates, and the Civil List. Back in 1760 the entire income from the crown estates (i.e. properties and assets owned by the Royal Family) was given up in return for what was then called the Civil List - now the Sovereign Grant.

The references to the value to the economy don't just include the substantial remainder of the Crown estates income which goes directly to the Treasury, it also includes things like accommodation for tourists brought by the Royal Family, and all the associated spending these tourists do whilst in the UK. So not a direct payment to tax payers in general, but supporting UK businesses.

LibrariesGiveUsPower · 30/06/2022 13:08

Florenz · 30/06/2022 12:27

Would you want Boris Johnson as our head of state, with his picture on bank notes and stamps etc?

America seems to manage fine

MsTSwift · 30/06/2022 13:09

Get rid palaces to national trust job done

Mamamia7962 · 30/06/2022 13:09

Soundofsilver - Ah yes the French and their good old revolution which was actually based on lies.

CalmDownKaren · 30/06/2022 13:13

The monarchy is outdated and archaic. People bang on about how hard the queen and the royals work ....umm dont we all??? Meeting with the prime minister once a week and waving on a walk around is NOT hard work. For her work efforts the queen has never had to cook, bathe or dress herself, budget, run a home. She hasn't even raised her own children.. We, the public paid for nannies. Leaves a lot of time for playing with the corgies and riding her horse doesnt it.

Cartoonmom · 30/06/2022 13:16

I've vacationed in the UK before and I don't think you need the RF to attract tourists. The history and buildings alone are enough, just like in France.

Luidaeg · 30/06/2022 13:19

Nesbo · 30/06/2022 11:46

I’m no royalist but for the figure to be meaningful you’d have to ask how much we’d be spending if we didn’t have the royal family. For example, I think we as a nation ought to hang on to Buckingham Palace rather than sell it to wealthy foreign interests, but that comes with cost of upkeep.

And if the royals are carrying out activities that would otherwise be done by a President or by diplomats then we’d still incur costs.

headline figures like this are just supposed to sound big so people can feel angry, but they are no more meaningful than the 350 million written on the side of a bus, they need to be properly interrogated. And even so the figure looks tiny compared to eg the billions we wasted on crappy PPE during the pandemic.

For example, I think we as a nation ought to hang on to Buckingham Palace rather than sell it to wealthy foreign interests, but that comes with cost of upkeep.

But why? It make no difference to me who owns it, I'll never see inside, I have no interest in seeing inside, and just think of the revenue it could generate as a hotel?

AgathaMystery · 30/06/2022 13:19

soundofsilver · 30/06/2022 11:57

Get rid. The argument that they bring in tourism is a load of rubbish. France brings in more tourists than the uk and what did they do to their royal family?!
Open up all their houses to the public for tourists.

Amen!

FoiledByTheInsect · 30/06/2022 13:20

LibrariesGiveUsPower · 30/06/2022 13:05

£102 million is a drop in the bucket. That’s a really small sum.

They bring in billions in revenue.

Those tenuously-linked unverified claims amount to millions, certainly not billions, see CounsellorTroi's link upthread. And then those supposed "millions" in revenue are hilariously based on the "Kate effect", the "George effect" and the "Charlotte effect". If they balanced those media fabrications factors against the "Nonce effect", the "Cash for honours effect" and the other effects of the UK being an international laughing stock, they'd probably find the liabilities side is a lot heavier than the assets side.

Pedallleur · 30/06/2022 13:20

Who believes this 'they bring in billions'? No one sees the RF unless members are at specific events. Queen hasnt been out much in the last 3 years. Cant see her at Sandringham/Windsor/Balmoral. Others just turn out when necessary. I can go and see the Mona Lisa everyday. Tourists get to see Trooping the Colour, Guard Changing etc. All those happen anyway.

Tolstory · 30/06/2022 13:22

Mamamia7962 · 30/06/2022 13:09

Soundofsilver - Ah yes the French and their good old revolution which was actually based on lies.

Possibly full of lies (current UK government is shining example) but post Revolution, weak chinned Bourbons are no longer swanning around state funded chateaux, nor dipping into the country's coffers ad lib - and have to pay for transport/new roof/weddings et al, just like everyone else

ComtesseDeSpair · 30/06/2022 13:24

AgathaMystery · 30/06/2022 13:19

Amen!

Significant parts of the royal palaces are open to the public, if you’d like to visit. The RF’s own private homes are not - and thinking they should be is essentially the same as thinking anybody who receives benefits and therefore has their home and lifestyle paid for by the taxpayer should allow the public entry on demand.

Pyewhacket · 30/06/2022 13:28

breadandmillk · 30/06/2022 12:39

Inflammatory headlines, as usual!

Surely you shouldn't make a judgement on Royal Family 'cost' of £104 million by simply looking at the Sovereign Grant. That's not the complete picture.

You must also consider the financial benefit to taxpayers from the Crown Estate, which made £312 million profit in 2021 - which is paid straight to the Exchequer ( minus the 15 - 25% retained for the Sovereign Grant ).

BBC explanation here: Where does the Queen get her money?

And both Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle are open to the public.

Pedallleur · 30/06/2022 13:29

People mention the Crown estates but the Duchies of Lancaster/Cornwall are the Queen/Prince Charles personal estates. Cornwall was £20 million last year. Rents are controlled by Charles via Queens Consent. He is the largest private estates owner in the UK. We have no idea of the RF worth - its not public. But think of what Highgrove/Gatcombe Park/balmoral/Sandringham and other homes are worth and what they cost to run. No doubt their will be family works of art. Racehorses cost money (sport of Kings). The RF know they are on a winner (not just a horse!)

Florenz · 30/06/2022 13:31

How much a year do politicians cost us?

Tolstory · 30/06/2022 13:32

Florenz · 30/06/2022 13:31

How much a year do politicians cost us?

Politicians are elected...

DoncasterHombre · 30/06/2022 13:35

MsFogi · 30/06/2022 12:29

Yep - I'd be sacking the lot of them and requisitioning their land/castles/bank balances etc and applying the proceeds to the national debt/NHS/education etc (if I was feeling generous I may give them each a small house in a random part of the country to live in).

Fan of 'The Queen & I" by Sue Townsend, per chance? 😁

The can all go get in the bin! And the cap doffing, forelock tugging sycophants that enjoy bowing and scraping to them can go do the same.

luckylavender · 30/06/2022 13:38

UsernameIsCopied · 30/06/2022 12:00

Just think of how much money Buckingham Palace would bring if it were opened up to the public. The crowds in Versailles for example are huge, it would be the same in the UK.

Buckingham Palace is open to the public. But it's not in the same league as the Château de Versailles.

Funkyblues101 · 30/06/2022 13:39

Tourists do not travel to the UK with a hope of glimpsing the Queen. They come to see the buildings, the pomp and history. They would still see all that if we had an elected figurehead president as Germany and Estonia do. We do not need a royal family or an American/french-style president.

FoiledByTheInsect · 30/06/2022 13:40

ComtesseDeSpair · 30/06/2022 13:24

Significant parts of the royal palaces are open to the public, if you’d like to visit. The RF’s own private homes are not - and thinking they should be is essentially the same as thinking anybody who receives benefits and therefore has their home and lifestyle paid for by the taxpayer should allow the public entry on demand.

No excuse in 2022 for not means-testing and sanctioning the RF like any other recipients of public funds. If you've got 20 mansions, ill-gotten estates, duchies etc you fund your own sleazy lifestyle. Truth is nobody's got a clue where to start unravelling it all, so on and on it goes.

anniegun · 30/06/2022 13:42

Whereismumhiding4 · 30/06/2022 11:50

"According to Brand Financee, a brand valuation consultancy, the capital value of the British Monarchy as a business is estimated at an enormous £67.5 billion. In 2017 alone, the annual contribution to the economy was £1.766 billion (Brand Finance)). These huge figures evidently bring a vast sum into the UK economy. This is done through a number of ways."

medium.com/illumination/how-much-money-does-the-royal-family-earn-the-uk-economy-5f41239c8957

Many other financial institutions say similar

That £102 million cost is a drop in the ocean to the billions of money that our Royal Family raise and attract into the country. Let alone the taxes Queen pays herself and amount of people they employ

Brand finance report estimates that the overall uplift of Royal family to the tourism sector is £550m, making the contribution to tourism, including merchandise sales, the largest of the benefits generated by the monarchy.

France has a far bigger tourist industry than the UK and they have no Royal Family

SisterSatan · 30/06/2022 13:42

bUt ThEy BrInG iN tOuRiSm

🙄

Celia24 · 30/06/2022 13:47

Time for the monarchy to go. Totally outdated.

Cartoonmom · 30/06/2022 13:51

@luckylavender - yes I agree. From a tourist's perspective it's a better experience when it's not also someone's residence.

UWhatNow · 30/06/2022 13:51

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.