Where's Prince Philip then?

[cobbles]

Noticed the Queens family photo tonight for the Carol service. A few absences for the family photo.

Andrew and his missus
Harry and Meghan

The eyebrow raisers?

But most striking of all no Philip? Yes he doesn't do public engagements, but you think he could get his arse down to a church once or twice in December.

And no Timothy Lawrence.

None of the bairns in the photo's either.

 

[cobbles]

Outside Windsor.

 

[Sarah]

He, for some reason has made it through this year and is nearly 100. Are you suspicious?

 

[Toni]

My big question is: Where is this woman? Wasn´t she one of them...?

​

 

[Rove]

Outside Windsor.

There has been a lot of criticism of Netflix's season 4 of The Crown. But this latest picture from the Royal family reinforces my view of the disdain I now feel towards them. The photo is a PR disaster because of the absence of those we don't see; Prince Andrew, Harry and Meghan. This photo alone proves to me how the Royal family cares more about controlling the image and stands against everything Diana was attempting to change.

What does Prince Edward really do? There stands boring Kate. She has none of the flair Diana had and Prince William has become exactly what Diana was afraid of, he has entrenched himself into The Firm. Prince Charles and what's her name. There they both stand with a smug look on their faces. Princess Anne may as well have been excluded from the picture.

And there - in the centre of it all - cuts a lonely figure of The Queen, presiding over a family of misfits, riding on the coat tails of hard working taxpayers. I'm not sure how my cousins back in England feel but I wish our politicians here in Australia would grow a set and place Australia on a path to become a Republic.

 

[cobbles]

There has been a lot of criticism of Netflix's season 4 of The Crown. But this latest picture from the Royal family reinforces my view of the disdain I now feel towards them. The photo is a PR disaster because of the absence of those we don't see; Prince Andrew, Harry and Meghan. This photo alone proves to me how the Royal family cares more about controlling the image and stands against everything Diana was attempting to change.

What does Prince Edward really do? There stands boring Kate. She has none of the flair Diana had and Prince William has become exactly what Diana was afraid of, he has entrenched himself into The Firm. Prince Charles and what's her name. There they both stand with a smug look on their faces. Princess Anne may as well have been excluded from the picture.

And there - in the centre of it all - cuts a lonely figure of The Queen, presiding over a family of misfits, riding on the coat tails of hard working taxpayers. I'm not sure how my cousins back in England feel but I wish our politicians here in Australia would grow a set and place Australia on a path to become a Republic.

They're self funded. Get your facts right.

 

[Sarah]

Brilliant post @Rove but just to point out you have cousins in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales - she isn’t just the Queen of England (and I am no loyalist/unionist!)

 

[Angela Channing]

There has been a lot of criticism of Netflix's season 4 of The Crown. But this latest picture from the Royal family reinforces my view of the disdain I now feel towards them. The photo is a PR disaster because of the absence of those we don't see; Prince Andrew, Harry and Meghan. This photo alone proves to me how the Royal family cares more about controlling the image and stands against everything Diana was attempting to change.

What does Prince Edward really do? There stands boring Kate. She has none of the flair Diana had and Prince William has become exactly what Diana was afraid of, he has entrenched himself into The Firm. Prince Charles and what's her name. There they both stand with a smug look on their faces. Princess Anne may as well have been excluded from the picture.

And there - in the centre of it all - cuts a lonely figure of The Queen, presiding over a family of misfits, riding on the coat tails of hard working taxpayers. I'm not sure how my cousins back in England feel but I wish our politicians here in Australia would grow a set and place Australia on a path to become a Republic.

Great post!

I often wonder how other Commonwealth countries feel about Kate and William cheering on British sports teams when they play against their country. They never seem to remember they represent the Commonwealth not just the UK so it must be galling for other countries to see their future head of state willing their country to lose.

I really don't know why any other country would want them to represent them when their loyalties lie elsewhere. Barbados recently decided to drop the toxic Royals as their head of state and I was delighted when the Prime Minister of Jamaica said becoming a republic is a priority for his government. Australia needs to be next.

 

[Angela Channing]

They're self funded. Get your facts right.

They're not. If they were self funded why do we pay for their jollies overseas, their security, the upkeep of their multiple homes?

 

[Angela Channing]

My big question is: Where is this woman? Wasn´t she one of them...?

My question is where is this woman? Rose Hanbury, the Marchioness of Cholmondeley.

 

[cobbles]

They're not. If they were self funded why do we pay for their jollies overseas, their security, the upkeep of their multiple homes?

It changed in 2011, the Sovereign grant is tied to the income from The Crown Estate. Essentially the value of and income from the Crown Estate is used to set the amount that they get back from the tax-payer. There as good as self-funded, if not literally self-funded.

From Wiki -

Historically, Crown Estate properties were administered by the reigning monarch to help fund the business of governing the country. However, in 1760, George III surrendered control over the Estate's revenues to the Treasury,[5] thus relieving him of the responsibility of paying for the costs of the civil service, defence costs, the national debt, and his own personal debts. In return, he received an annual grant known as the Civil List. By tradition, each subsequent monarch agreed to this arrangement upon his or her accession. However, from 1 April 2012, under the terms of the Sovereign Grant Act 2011 (SSG), the Civil List was abolished and the monarch was thenceforth provided with a stable source of revenue indexed to a percentage of the Crown Estate's annual net revenue (currently set at 25%).[16] This was intended to provide a long-term solution and remove the politically sensitive issue of Parliament having to debate the Civil List allowance every ten years. Subsequently, the Sovereign Grant Act allows for all future monarchs to simply extend these provisions for their reigns by Order in Council.[3] The act does not imply any legal change in the nature of the estate's ownership, but is simply a benchmark by which the sovereign grant is set as a grant by Parliament.

I'm a diehard Republican by the way, so have no benefit to myself pointing this out.

 

[Angela Channing]

It changed in 2011, the Sovereign grant is tied to the income from The Crown Estate. Essentially the value of and income from the Crown Estate is used to set the amount that they get back from the tax-payer. There as good as self-funded, if not literally self-funded.

From Wiki -



I'm a diehard Republican by the way, so have no benefit to myself pointing this out.

That was because David Cameron wanted to legitimise the Royal Family and justify paying them millions while he was cutting support for disabled people.

Historically, the tax payer bailed out the Royal Family when they couldn't afford to keep up payments on their debts and liabilities in return for future revenues from the Crown Estate. So although Royalists like to present it as the Queen's money, the Sovereign Grant is actually our money that we are paying her.

Buckingham Palace is currently undergoing a £370 million renovation and the Queen isn't paying for that, we are. The security cost of the Royals doesn't come out of the Sovereign grant it comes from the taxes of hard working Britons.

 

[Rove]

They're self funded. Get your facts right.

Self funded? Are you kidding me? I'm not sure how the Royal family is funded in the United Kingdom but let me tell you every time they travel to Australia taxpayers here fund their extravagant day trips. I'd rather my tax dollars be better spent on essential services like Public Schools, Hospitals, employing more quality teachers, nurses.

 

[cobbles]

That was because David Cameron wanted to legitimise the Royal Family and justify paying them millions while he was cutting support for disabled people.

Historically, the tax payer bailed out the Royal Family when they couldn't afford to keep up payments on their debts and liabilities in return for future revenues from the Crown Estate. So although Royalists like to present it as the Queen's money, the Sovereign Grant is actually our money that we are paying her.

Buckingham Palace is currently undergoing a £370 million renovation and the Queen isn't paying for that, we are. The security cost of the Royals doesn't come out of the Sovereign grant it comes from the taxes of hard working Britons.

And how much do they contribute to the overall economy and in trickle down economics through tax and through tourism?

And actually she sort of is paying for it is at is coming out the sovereign grant, which has been adjusted upwards to account for it to 25% of the net revenue of the crown estate, from 15%.

I'd like to see them deposed for moral reasons, and the case for that is far stronger than the economic ones.

 

[Toni]

Oh come on, my British friends, compared to the Spanish society of royal thieves, your monarchy looks the Ingalls family...

"THE KING ENTERS REHAB:
-Hello, my name is Juan Carlos I of Spain,
and I´m a corrupt king.
- Welcome, Juan Carlos!!"​

 

[Angela Channing]

And how much do they contribute to the overall economy and in trickle down economics through tax and through tourism?

And actually she sort of is paying for it is at is coming out the sovereign grant, which has been adjusted upwards to account for it to 25% of the net revenue of the crown estate, from 15%.

I'd like to see them deposed for moral reasons, and the case for that is far stronger than the economic ones.

Imagine this scenario. I owe a shop that is about to go bankrupt so I go to you for a bail out and we agree that in exchange for taking on my debt, I will give you all future profits from the business. The deal also means that you have to take on all future liabilities so if the business burns down, you have to pay for it to be rebuilt and if the shop needs renovations you have to cover the costs. Additionally, you have to fund the expensive security system that I want for the shop. You also agree to to pay me a fixed amount each year to pay for staff to run the business, the stock the shop and to fund my lavish lifestyle. You call this payment The Civil List.

Years later, I want more money to all me to continue living in luxury so we renegotiate the deal. Instead of giving me a fixed sum, you will pay me a percentage of the shops profits, You call this new payment The Sovereign Grant.

Where in this arrangement am I funding myself? It seems to me that you are paying for everything.

I like to maintain that people come to my shop to see me when in reality they never see me and they come to see the shop itself and to buy the goods on sale. Occasionally, I may deign to give the punters an occasional wave to justify my existence.