Is anyone else thinking the optics are off: royals in a golden coach whilst the UK is in a cost of living crisis?

[MsPinkMarshmallow]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11456933/Prince-Princess-Wales-greet-South-African-president.html

People are struggling to heat their homes, feed their kids and pay their mortgages but the royals are in the Mall in a golden carriage and giving state banquets.

Can't we just get rid of the lot of them?

the amount of money spent on them is dwarfed by the interest and tourism they bring to the UK. So overall we’d be worse off without them

I ask for the figures demonstrating this this every time on these threads but no-one has produced them to date.

They also do loads of work for charity

They might do lots of work for their own charities (arguable given the days and days of unaccounted for time in the Court Circular) but the vast majority (some 75% IIRC) of charities with royal patrons won't have seen 'their' royal's face darken the door in a year or more.

And that's to our advantage. We need everything we've got since our reputation abroad is significantly diminished.

You could Google this. It's all out there.

Where?

There are no facts and figures to show 'the money spent on them is dwarfed by the interest and tourism the bring to the UK'

So you think we should have sent an uber to meet the South African president, then stuck him in a travel lodge? Get Rishi to take him for a cheeky Nando’s then down the nags head for a couple of pints?

That does sound more fun than hanging out with Kate and Camilla balancing tiaras on their head, tbf.

Have you googled it?

Yes, get rid of them all, as long as it costs the tax payer much less! I mean "much less" as in £2.
,

@onlylarkin what are you on about ?
What you 'left ' was utterly irrelevant.

The US system is completely different to ours .

If ( and it is an 'if') we have a head of state , there is no reason at all that it wouldn't the similar to the Irish system .

Last time I checked, the Irish hasn’t had eight MPs killed, two representatives of its head of state shot at and one of their family members killed. The security concerns are not comparable.

@Novella4

You said "Are you seriously suggesting that a president ( if you have one - there is no law saying you must ) will cost anywhere near the 350 million annual cost of the royals ??"

I was simply showing you one possibility. The grass in not always greener.

Using different vehicles wouldn’t have made any cost savings - the coach exists, and whether it is used or not, the horses that pull it have to be fed, exercised and cared for. And one could argue that horse drawn vehicles are greener than a fleet of limousines.

When there are State visits, transportation has to be provided, so why not use resources that the country has already? You can’t expect Heads of State to arrive at Buckingham Palace by bus. And doesn’t it impress visiting dignitaries, when the red carpet is rolled out for them?

Yes.

And there is plenty of information out there to dispute what you say.

Do you know for instance how much they cost us as far as security? No. Thought not. That is kept under wraps. Thought to be many many millions paid out of the Treasury and seperate to the Sovereign Grant

Have a look at this with regard to tourism

www.republic.org.uk/jeremy/tourism

@Roussette

Have a look at this with regard to tourism

Presumably you were dismayed and aghast when Meghan claimed in court that her wedding provided a £1 BILLION boost to U.K. tourism

You could Google this. It's all out there.

I could.

But it's not me making the claims.

Presumably you were dismayed and aghast when Meghan claimed in court that her wedding provided a £1 BILLION boost to U.K. tourism

Did she provide stats backing it up?

Someone must be able to when this argumument gets trotted out every single time.

A couple of pints? In this financial climate?? Clearly the COL crisis doesn't apply to the likes of you! How out of touch could you be??

Presumably you were dismayed and aghast when Meghan claimed in court that her wedding provided a £1 BILLION boost to U.K. tourism

Correction: fake wedding because the meaningful one had happened three days earlier. This was just a payday opportunity for the royals and a charitable act to entertain the deluded, well-wishing plebs. 🙄

This was just a payday opportunity for the royals and a charitable act to entertain the deluded, well-wishing plebs. 🙄

Yep.

The plebs who paid for the knees-up.

@susan12345678

You sound jealous. It’s their money — they can spend it as they like. You don’t have to like it or dislike it. And you - nor I - have no idea of the energy saving features of their home.
Quick to criticise, slow to comprehend.

I can't be arsed to be 'dismayed and aghast' at anything on royal threads anymore and I'm quite happy to admit I think Meghan got that totally wrong so there you go.

Next H&M derailment? We've done the wedding 3 days before, I fancy avocados and bump touching personally! Any takers? 😂

That's because they're not that tricky to prove. If you doubt it do your research.

@Roussette it is to close to Christmas. People will be up in arms over how horrible they are to not spend Christmas with (his) family.

I would love to know what Harry thinks about American Thanksgiving this week though. Yummy!

So prove it.

It's not for the doubters to prove the claimers wrong.

I could say, Elvish isn't dead and was actually a singing Lizard and embezzled Skittles to fund the Russian Mafia from 1964-1968, at which point he moved to Cambodia and loves as a fisherman.

It's true.... Now off you go and find all the evidence to show that's not true.

@00100001 actually it's the opposite.