Prince Andrew Thread 3

[Roussette]

Here is the previous thread...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_royal_family/4443261-Prince-Andrew-Thread-2?watched=1&msgid=114083283#114083283

I'd like to read that article @Rousette, if you wouldn't mind c+p? I'm certainly not going to pay the Daily Torygraph for the pleasure of reading it!

Lady of the bedchamber and other the other lady in waiting “jobs” aren’t paid though. Butlers are paid obviously but not the friends who get the honorary jobs. Master of the jewel office doesn’t exist and falls under the job of the Governor of the Tower of London and isn’t paid for separately.

@KravMaga

It was just an example, that's all. I'm not going to spend hours quoting all the positions at the Palace which run into hundreds.
But thanks for putting me right

just what has to happen to demolish the lot, short of a military coup?

That would need an Act of Parliament, with or witout a referendum beforehand
It's not going to happen though - at least not yet - because the monarchy as an institution (as opposed to individuals) still enjoys something like 70% support. Never ask me why this is, but I guess that's the price of wishful thinking and an awful lot of blind faith on the part of their supporters

If Ireland became united, it won't be as a monarchy. In fact dumping the monarchy is probably a selling point in that argument, once you remember what "republican" actually means.

An independent Scotland would presumably have the option of dumping their monarch too ?

Leaving England, Wales, and the vestiges of Empire.

just what has to happen to demolish the lot, short of a military coup?

You can't get rid of the RF. The best you could do is to remove the monarch as head of state. The RF would still be there though, opening stuff etc.

Not necessarily. The Romanovs don't do a lot of ribbon-cutting anymore.

(I'm definitely not advocating what happened in the Ipatiev house, btw!)

The Royal Family has a lot of staff. They don't list all their staff anywhere for good reasons. But i was reading an old article about Kate and a travel tour and she had 4 staff just for her to help her dress, do hair and makeup and look after her clothes and generally assist her. These are her personal staff. By the time you include the army of staff to look after all their palaces and gardens, and the offices, nannies and security staff, you are talking about a small army.

you are talking about a small army

Worth remembering when using this common phrase that with the royals, we are really talking about a small army ....

Also whenever I've read breathless tales of how the royals cope, it's usually from the angle of "poor Kate, only has 200 staff ..."

You can't get rid of the RF.

Says who? I think it's more that nobody knows where to start.

The best you could do is to remove the monarch as head of state. The RF would still be there though, opening stuff etc.

Take the sov grant away and watch how soon the ribbon-cutting stops.

I read somewhere that it would take a decade to unravel and pick apart the end of the Monarchy. It would take legislation by Parliament and the Monarch her/himself signing that legislation.

It will be a long, slow painful process if ever anything were to happen and it won't be in my lifetime, nor my kids.

Barbados, I feel, has set a precedent for pulling out the C/wealth and there will be more, and those that stay will question whether that is the right thing. There was no referendum for Barbados, the Government just decided, and I never saw any opposition to that.

There's 15 countries with the Queen as Head of State, it's beyond me why the likes of Canada, New Zealand and Australia would want to continue that after the Queen dies. Jamaica too, and I think they are on the way to do what Barbados has done.

I have linked this before, and forgive me if you have read it, but it's fascinating. (I am just filling in time waiting for that flippin' verdict on PA's case)

www.businessinsider.com/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-ii-dies-king-charles-2018-6?r=US&IR=T

QE dying will be the most disruptive event for 70 years and will cost us billions, the article goes through it all.

@Roussette

I read somewhere that it would take a decade to unravel and pick apart the end of the Monarchy. It would take legislation by Parliament and the Monarch her/himself signing that legislation.

It will be a long, slow painful process if ever anything were to happen and it won't be in my lifetime, nor my kids.

Barbados, I feel, has set a precedent for pulling out the C/wealth and there will be more, and those that stay will question whether that is the right thing. There was no referendum for Barbados, the Government just decided, and I never saw any opposition to that.

There's 15 countries with the Queen as Head of State, it's beyond me why the likes of Canada, New Zealand and Australia would want to continue that after the Queen dies. Jamaica too, and I think they are on the way to do what Barbados has done.

I have linked this before, and forgive me if you have read it, but it's fascinating. (I am just filling in time waiting for that flippin' verdict on PA's case)

www.businessinsider.com/what-happens-when-queen-elizabeth-ii-dies-king-charles-2018-6?r=US&IR=T

QE dying will be the most disruptive event for 70 years and will cost us billions, the article goes through it all.

After Brexit you can never use the "it'll be too complicated*" excuse for not doing something every again.

*I seem to recall from history this is how slavery was allowed to continue so long ....

Serendipity you know I'm no Royalist! No excuse from me

Has Barbados pulled out of the Commonwealth? I thought that it was just that they had removed the monarch as head of state. I will Google :)

Ghislaine Maxwell related - It looks like the prosecution are getting jittery that it’s going to go to a retrial and are now offering a ‘deal’ to drop two charges of perjury so shortening her sentence. The outcome is still going to be ‘life’ or ‘life’ so unlikely the defence will go for that.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10389763/Prosecutors-Ghislaine-Maxwell-case-offer-DROP-perjury-charges-against-her.html

I was right It's still in the Commonwealth.
www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/barbados-elizabeth-british-empire-republic-180979147/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Barbados

@Justkeeppedaling

Has Barbados pulled out of the Commonwealth? I thought that it was just that they had removed the monarch as head of state. I will Google :)

I have a vague memory that membership of the commonwealth was "adjusted" to allow republics after the palace realised that more people would rather be a republic outside the commonwealth than a monarchy inside it.

You'll note the double standards that the people of the UK haven't been given the same choice.

Ahhh... they've removed QE2 as Head of State, that's it.

I have a vague memory that membership of the commonwealth was "adjusted" to allow republics

Yes, in 199, and that was considered the start of the modern Commonwealth.

Anyone country can apply and be accepted, no former links to the British Empire are. required (Mozambique, 1995)

I saw that @StormzyinaTCup it's not really an enticing deal is it seeing as it won't make much difference to her .

An independent Scotland would presumably have the option of dumping their monarch too ? Oh give it a rest.

it's beyond me why the likes of Canada, New Zealand and Australia would want to continue that after the Queen dies

Because it's cheaper to plunk a Governor-General in a fancy house than to pay for the whole presidential rigmarole.

I see why NZ keeps the Queen. I don't see why England does.

@derxa what are you actually on this thread for? You're obviously entitled to have a different viewpoint or opinion, but why not express that clearly without being so snarky?

[quote BIWI]@derxa what are you actually on this thread for? You're obviously entitled to have a different viewpoint or opinion, but why not express that clearly without being so snarky?[/quote]
Every time I read a post where someone is assuming that Scottish independence is a done deal I will repudiate it. NO NO NO And over 50% of Scots agree with me.