Queen consort Camilla

[Rove]

Here in Australia don't be surprised if - after the passing of the Queen - we become a Republic. It's out of respect to Her Majesty she is still our Head of State. I think you will find most Australians firmly believe we should cut the apron strings...and rightly so. Unlike the hysteria surrounding our last referendum led by politicians with no backbone it would only take a Prime Minister with dignity to signal to Aussies it's time to move on. But then of course the media sticks their ugly collective heads in, whipping up the debate to train our eyes towards the television.

 

[Angela Channing]

When was that decision taken?


Where does the figure of £350,000,000 per year come from? I've done a quick search and the most recent report compiled in 2019 gives the tax burden for the royal family £67m. A number of site reported the same figure. I searched, quickly mind, how much the contribute to the UK economy, and 2 sites are saying for 2017 the amount was £1.8bn.


Which one? Diana, Sarah or Sophie?

The cost of the Royal Family goes beyond what they get from the Sovereign Grant. The income from the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall goes directly to the Queen and Prince Charles respectively even though it belongs to the nation and is estimated to be worth around £100 million every year. The cost of their security is in addition to what they get from the Sovereign Grant and is estimated to be over £100 million per year. The cost of state buildings used by the Royals is estimated to cost the tax payer an additional £30 per year. Then there's cost to local councils when they visit there regions and the cost of pensions for the Royal Household which is not covered by the Sovereign Grant.

Meanwhile, there are people who are so poor have to use food banks to survive but they still have to pay taxes to support the lavish lifestyle of the Royals. It's a disgrace.

 

[Angela Channing]

When was that decision taken?

It they are not role models what is the point of their existence?

 

[Angela Channing]

Which one? Diana, Sarah or Sophie?

None of those women are going to be Queen. None of them lied to us when they got married that they weren't going to accept the title.

Charles and Camila are adulterers and liars. It's bad enough having that with our current Prime Minister so we shouldn't also have it with our head of state and his concubine.

 

[Angela Channing]

Here in Australia don't be surprised if - after the passing of the Queen - we become a Republic. It's out of respect to Her Majesty she is still our Head of State. I think you will find most Australians firmly believe we should cut the apron strings...and rightly so. Unlike the hysteria surrounding our last referendum led by politicians with no backbone it would only take a Prime Minister with dignity to signal to Aussies it's time to move on. But then of course the media sticks their ugly collective heads in, whipping up the debate to train our eyes towards the television.

Barbados recently dumped the Queen and I'm very hopeful that Jamaica will do the same too. The days of these outdated, overly expensive, undemocratic parasites lording over us are numbered.

 

[Toni]

None of those women are going to be Queen. None of them lied to us when they got married that they weren't going to accept the title.

Charles and Camila are adulterers and liars. It's bad enough having that with our current Prime Minister so we shouldn't also have it with our head of state and his concubine.

Mrs. Channing, I wonder if you are so well aware of everything because you had a secretary who once worked for Lady Di... Was she too gossipy?

 

[Biggie]

The cost of the Royal Family goes beyond what they get from the Sovereign Grant. The income from the Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall goes directly to the Queen and Prince Charles respectively even though it belongs to the nation and is estimated to be worth around £100 million every year. The cost of their security is in addition to what they get from the Sovereign Grant and is estimated to be over £100 million per year. The cost of state buildings used by the Royals is estimated to cost the tax payer an additional £30 per year. Then there's cost to local councils when they visit there regions and the cost of pensions for the Royal Household which is not covered by the Sovereign Grant.

Meanwhile, there are people who are so poor have to use food banks to survive but they still have to pay taxes to support the lavish lifestyle of the Royals. It's a disgrace.

So the scatter gun methodology has been used or so it would seem. Again I ask, what source are you quoting RE: £350 000 000 per year?

Their lives and all its trappings can be viewed as lavish, but a golden cage is still a cage. Those unfortunate people that have to use food banks.... how did that come about and why? What proactive steps are they taking to better their situation?

Everyone everywhere has been or is facing or will face difficulties.

 

[Angela Channing]

Mrs. Channing, I wonder if you are so well aware of everything because you had a secretary who once worked for Lady Di... Was she too gossipy?

No, my right hand man is of East Asian origin and back then The Queen only allowed white people to take official and office based roles at Buckingham Palace.

Buckingham Palace banned ethnic minorities from office roles, papers reveal

Exclusive: Documents also shed light on Queen’s ongoing exemption from race and sex discrimination laws

www.theguardian.com

 

[Angela Channing]

Again I ask, what source are you quoting RE: £350 000 000 per year?

You can read the report here:

Royal Expenses Report

Their lives and all its trappings can be viewed as lavish, but a golden cage is still a cage.

It's not a cage, they chose to be Royal. If they didn't like it, they could walk away like Prince Harry did.

how did that come about and why? What proactive steps are they taking to better their situation?

Most of them are in work but are not paid enough but they still have to pay taxes on their poverty wages to fund the lavish lifestyles of the Royals. How can you justify that?

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Charles and Camila are adulterers and liars

Do you think they learned it from Diana?

 

[Karin Schill]

Oh come on that is uncalled for. What's this speaking ill of the dead?

Yes it's true that Princess Diana had affairs too. But I don't think she would have strayed from her marital vows if Prince Charles hadn't done so first. Let's face it, Prince Charles could never get over Camilla and things would have been completely different if he had been allowed to marry her from the beginning in the 1970s.

But he didn't and well Princess Diana should have become queen if he hadn't divorced her. She probably still would have been alive if he hadn't divorced her either. So considering the way Charles and Camilla ruined his marriage I don't think it's appropriate that Camilla gets the Queen Consort title even if she will be married to the King.

Besides if Prince Philip who was of a royal background got to settle for the title Prince when he was married to the Queen I think the same rules should apply to Camilla when Charles becomes King. Let her be Princess Camilla.

 

[Snarky Oracle!]

Prince Charles could never get over Camilla and things would have been completely different if he had been allowed to marry her from the beginning in the 1970s.

Yes, Hardly sounds like a concubine scenario to me.

 

[Rove]

lording over us are numbered.

Here in Oz I've never felt like The Queen or The Royal Family in general have lorded over me. It could be argued England over the years has lorded it over Oz but again I've never had that feeling during my adult life. Australia could so easily leave the Commonwealth with no hard feelings. Her Majesty has accepted Australia will one day leave the Commonwealth. The problem is those with a self interest agenda (Monarchists) or the media here in Australia will attempt to whip up feelings for or against becoming a Republic. The media here in Oz love to play people off against each other. It's a ploy they use to get more eyeballs to watch their appalling talking head shows or sell newspapers...and who buys them anymore?

For those in England it's your decision if you wish to maintain the status quo or become a Republic. I have no feelings one way or the other. What I do wish for is people take a chill pill and stop trying to turn this into a Camilla versus Diana war. Prince Charles did a tell all interview. Princess Diana did a tell all interview. One or both could have taken the moral high ground instead of turning their divorce into a PR war. Both ignored that old saying, "Never air your dirty laundry in public."

 

[Angela Channing]

Here in Oz I've never felt like The Queen or The Royal Family in general have lorded over me.

There is a difference though because Australia doesn't pay hundreds of millions of pounds to fund the Royals. In the UK, the poorest people in our society are taxed to pay for the Royals who are amongst the richest people in society. That is the very definition of lording it over us.

 

[9unfold]

Most of them are in work but are not paid enough

What's stopping them from getting a better job?

Making children to get a council house and benefits isn't actually work. Neither is spunking the benefits on tattoos and in Whetherspoons considered work.

These people take out more than they contribute in every conceivable way.

 

[Angela Channing]

What's stopping them from getting a better job

Most low paid jobs are key workers, eg. shop workers, carers, security guards, etc. but they are only paid minimum wage even though their work is essential. Meanwhile the Royal Family are paid a fortune for doing nothing useful.

These people take out more than they contribute in every conceivable way.

Just like the Royal Family.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Literally the entire history of royalty is rotten people doing rotten things.

That's fine as long as they do it with other royalty, not some reality TV star (they're OK for juicy tabloid affairs, but not for marriage).

We expect them to be good role models because without that what on earth is the point of them? They don't really do anything useful. People always say they attract tourists

I think it has more to do with appreciating and hanging onto European heritage, regardless of how meaningful it is. Nothing wrong with that, imo.

 

[Seaviewer]

Here in Australia don't be surprised if - after the passing of the Queen - we become a Republic. It's out of respect to Her Majesty she is still our Head of State. I think you will find most Australians firmly believe we should cut the apron strings...and rightly so. Unlike the hysteria surrounding our last referendum led by politicians with no backbone it would only take a Prime Minister with dignity to signal to Aussies it's time to move on. But then of course the media sticks their ugly collective heads in, whipping up the debate to train our eyes towards the television.

I wouldn't describe myself as a monarchist - more a status quo-ist - but I would not be surprised if King Charles is ultimately embraced - albeit reluctantly in some quarters.
By the time that the republicans have settled their own divisions on their preferred model and a referendum is finally held, any fear about Charles taking over will be moot.

 

[Angela Channing]

Breaking news: Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, has tested positive for adultery.

 

[Sarah]

When was that decision taken?


Where does the figure of £350,000,000 per year come from? I've done a quick search and the most recent report compiled in 2019 gives the tax burden for the royal family £67m. A number of site reported the same figure. I searched, quickly mind, how much the contribute to the UK economy, and 2 sites are saying for 2017 the amount was £1.8bn.


Which one? Diana, Sarah or Sophie?

Why are you making it about them and not focussing on the topic - or Charles, the adulterer and paedophile Andrew?