Page 15 | The King rejects cut-price coronation in favour of ‘glorious’ pomp and pageantry

tatalan · 2022-12-22T11:56:46+00:00

Monarch wants to use ceremony to showcase ‘UK plc’ internationally, despite being deeply conscious of the cost of living crisis https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2022/12/21/king-rejects-cut-price-coronation-favour-glorious-pomp-pageantry/ How do you feel about this?

Oblomov23 · 15/04/2023 08:09

He's wanted this his whole life. I never believed the scaled down rumours. Not surprised.

Roussette · 15/04/2023 08:13

MarshaBradyo · 15/04/2023 08:06

Ok well keep going they might get there, or not.

I don’t need to follow it. It’ll surface in time if they find what they need.

According to the article they have established that 12 pieces of jewellery have been purloined for personal use. When they should be in the Royal Collection and owned by the people.
But they can hardly arrest them can they....

Let's hope they keep putting articles like this out so the public start to open their eyes

purpledalmation · 15/04/2023 08:15

What a non story. Expensive jewellery given as gifts to the queen, are held in her personal safe so that the family has easy access to them. Typical guardian language palace 'refusing' to comment. What do you think she did with them, pawn them?
I'd better hand over my engagement ring as it was gifted to me.

In short...jewellery in the custody of the royal family rather than in a different organisation?
If you want to look at genuinely dodgy organisations look at Archwell or read the reviews about Better Up. (Harry's affiliation)

purpledalmation · 15/04/2023 08:17

How are 11 pieces of valuable jewellery going to benefit me or anyone else? Regardless of where they are kept.

vera99 · 15/04/2023 08:19

Roussette · 15/04/2023 05:38

Exactly and it is obvious to me that we have posters who won't read the articles and just don't want to know. Let's look at one example...

Buckingham Palace is refusing to explain why 11 pieces of jewellery potentially worth £80m that were official gifts to the royal family are not held in a trove of national heritage.

The jewels, which have been worn by Queen Elizabeth II; Camilla, the Queen Consort, and Catherine, Princess of Wales, are not contained in the royal collection, the custodian of culturally significant items held in trust for the nation.

The pieces include a set of aquamarine jewellery, four brooches and six necklaces, including an extraordinary Cartier necklace of emerald- and brilliant-cut diamonds worth at least £40m given to the late Queen by an Indian prince.

At least four of the items were presented by heads of state. The palace’s policy states that “as a general rule” gifts to the sovereign from another monarch or head of state “automatically” become part of the royal collection, a body that manages items held by the sovereign in trust for the nation.

The Royal Collection Trust, which manages the collection, confirmed that it does not have custody of the 11 jewels.

A Buckingham Palace spokesperson declined multiple invitations to explain the current ownership of the 11 pieces. They suggested the royals do not regard the jewellery as their private property and that the items, which were given to the late queen between 1947 and 1979, “may” in the future be added to the royal collection."

So...all those with your fingers in your ears, do YOU think this is ok? The Queen had between 40 and 70 years to hand over jewels worth millions to be held by the people as part of the royal collection but no, they appear to have been claimed as private property.

Show quote history

Queen Mary was notorious for nicking stuff my mum had remembered the scandals as a child, so it was common knowledge amongst the hoi polloi in the days before social media and rabid tabloids. Chuck in what now appears to be the late Queen's penchant for brazenly 'suggesting' gifts like the German racehorse and now the stamps and the like it is becoming apparent the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Tory boy Andrew Castle on LBC now expressing boredom about the Coronation and calling it faintly ridiculous. This is how the world ends not with a bang but a whimper.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/11/collector-or-thief-inside-queen-marys-royal-collections

Collector or Thief? Inside Queen Mary’s Royal Collections

Queen Mary of Teck was such an avid collector there’s scarcely a piece of furniture in a royal residence that doesn’t have a label written in the old queen’s hand.

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/11/collector-or-thief-inside-queen-marys-royal-collections

Roussette · 15/04/2023 08:24

purpledalmation · 15/04/2023 08:17

How are 11 pieces of valuable jewellery going to benefit me or anyone else? Regardless of where they are kept.

A predictable response from you.

I picked one tiny part out of all the articles which you won't have read of course. The jewellery is the top of a very large iceberg

You might not care. Your prerogative. I very much do.

Roussette · 15/04/2023 08:24

Tip

Roussette · 15/04/2023 08:29

vera99. Ye gods if Andrew Castle is bored with it, they're in trouble.!

I hope the coronation isn't going the way of Trump rallies, anyone seen any adverts for it, with payment to attend?!

Before anyone jumps in, that was a joke. We have enough Royalists in the country to make it look like the masses are waving flags clapping and cheering.

vera99 · 15/04/2023 08:43

I know Roussette - a lot of Tories have abandoned the supposed 'woke' monarch and his 'Queen' they appear to want a W&K reboot soonest.
It's 3 weeks to go and apart from the H&M will they come or not drama that has consumed them for months-the tabloids that manufacture this excitement seem stumped for an angle that will fly. That said, like the London Olympics that many were uncertain about, once it got started it was a roaring success. If it chucks it down all day then that will be a dealbreaker for many. That and not seeing the anointing oil again in which god passes his baton to the monarch to reign by proxy. Derren Brown should tell us how it's done

Happyvalleyfan · 15/04/2023 08:45

In an alternate universe:
KC has a GoFundMe so all his serfs can fund the lavish coronation he so deserves as he’s waited so patiently for so long, without all those annoying republicans moaning about costs, food banks and austerity.

He gets ticketmaster to sell tickets for road side spaces for the serfs who want to wave at him and his lovely wife on route to his fancy hat wearing ceremony. This will also hopefully mean they can frisk the serfs - so no eggs or # notmyking placards.

Due to all the potential moaning about coverage of coronation on various TV channels, KC arranges for Amazon to charge for downloads of the Coronation. Should make gazillions for his personal wealth.

Sorted - everyone happy 😃

purpledalmation · 15/04/2023 08:45

Typical lack of response regarding Harry and meghans dodgy archwell foundation and their retention of $9 million, using dodgy (but legal) moves to avoid paying taxes, the appalling track record on employee treatment at Better Up (not that Harry gives a shit as long as he can rake it in), the year they were head of the royal foundation (Uk) and 90% of the £750,000 raised went on 'expenses'. Offshore account to btw are legal, but very frowned upon.

The point being, rather than using clever accountants to avoid taxes, maybe pay the bloody things, and benefit 'ordinary' people?

Roussette · 15/04/2023 08:46

Great post haha Vera.
In desperation the Beeb announced the lineup for the concert yawn.
Gary "TaxAvoider" Barlow with Take That, Lionel Richie and two people I've never heard of!

Roussette · 15/04/2023 08:49

No idea what your ramble purple has to do with this thread and the Coronation

@Happyvalleyfan Spot on! When the Coronation was announced I suggested Pay Per View with all proceeds going to charity. Lots of posters agreed with me!

Puzzledandpissedoff · 15/04/2023 09:53

Exactly

BTW on the "jewellery collection" thing it's actually even worse than that, remembering that Charles/Fawcett were widely said to have sold gifts:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/nov/12/monarchy.jamiewilson

Aide who 'sold gifts' adds to royal woes

MP wants inquiry into activities of prince's assistant who came to be known as Fawcett the Fence.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/nov/12/monarchy.jamiewilson

PilshardPillToSwallow · 15/04/2023 10:02

@Serenster

I'm tempted to do that also.
There is a mn who lives extremely close to the mall and she was kindly giving us updates on crowds.

derxa · 15/04/2023 10:18

Roussette · 15/04/2023 08:46

Great post haha Vera.
In desperation the Beeb announced the lineup for the concert yawn.
Gary "TaxAvoider" Barlow with Take That, Lionel Richie and two people I've never heard of!

You've never heard of Katie Perry and Andrea Bocelli? 😂

Roussette · 15/04/2023 10:19

derxa · 15/04/2023 10:18

You've never heard of Katie Perry and Andrea Bocelli? 😂

Show quote history

Thank you, I forgot those, I was going from memory and not googling it, silly me, should've known I'd be picked up on that!
There were however two others I had never heard of.

Roussette · 15/04/2023 10:21

@Puzzledandpissedoff

Oh yes! He didn't earn the nickname 'Fawcett the Fence' for no reason

PilshardPillToSwallow · 15/04/2023 10:33

@Roussette

Fabulous article about the jewellery!
Before I read it I was going to comment that perhaps they see the jewels as their back up plan, sewn into garments and I see much of the collection was brought from deposed royals

Roussette · 15/04/2023 10:42

PilshardPillToSwallow · 15/04/2023 10:33

@Roussette

Fabulous article about the jewellery!
Before I read it I was going to comment that perhaps they see the jewels as their back up plan, sewn into garments and I see much of the collection was brought from deposed royals

It's fascinating isn't it? And a bit of a bummer to have this exposed. Nothing surprises me anymore, it really doesnt

CathyorClaire · 15/04/2023 11:19

Queen Mary was notorious for nicking stuff my mum had remembered the scandals as a child, so it was common knowledge amongst the hoi polloi in the days before social media and rabid tabloids. Chuck in what now appears to be the late Queen's penchant for brazenly 'suggesting' gifts like the German racehorse and now the stamps and the like it is becoming apparent the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Ha. 😁 My DM also talks about how Q Mary would brazenly walk into a host's room, admire some trinket and expect to be given it on the spot 😮

Can I add Charles and the three times resigned Fawcett the Fence to the tales of apples not falling far from the tree?

CathyorClaire · 15/04/2023 11:28

Typical lack of response regarding Harry and meghans dodgy archwell foundation and their retention of $9 million, using dodgy (but legal) moves to avoid paying taxes, the appalling track record on employee treatment at Better Up (not that Harry gives a shit as long as he can rake it in), the year they were head of the royal foundation (Uk) and 90% of the £750,000 raised went on 'expenses'.

Can I add the smoothed over transfer of substantial donated funds originating in the open to scrutiny Royal Foundation to the private company Travalyst controlled by Harry?

Nothing to see there apparently.

CathyorClaire · 15/04/2023 11:31

PS - I've been reading the Guardian articles (thanks for flagging them up, Rousette)

They are excellent but I keep getting side-tracked with more gob-smackers so haven't got to the jewellery yet. What I have seen though doesn't surprise me. I hope the Guardian keep going with this.

AskMeMore · 15/04/2023 11:36

@CathyorClaire I thought there was an official investigation happening?

Whaeanui · 15/04/2023 11:43

Can I add the smoothed over transfer of substantial donated funds originating in the open to scrutiny Royal Foundation to the private company Travalyst controlled by Harry?

Theres been a lot of misinformation regarding not for profits ( which is what Travalyst is ) and companies on two previous threads. Not quite sure why it’s being raised again on an unrelated thread. Retained revenue is standard for any foundation or charity, it’s fiscally irresponsible to clean your funds out every year, other high profile foundations have done the same. The splitting of the royal foundation funds was clearly because Harry was part of it and they agreed to transfer from one not for profit to another when he left it. The charity commission checked the transfer and everything was lawful. It wasn’t transferred to travalyst directly but to their former foundation they had to wind down and restart under Archewell because of the fuss over using the word ‘royal’ ( despite royal reporters using the word to make a buck ).