cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Community Veteran
Posts: 18,889
Thanks: 292
Registered: ‎12-08-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.


@7up wrote:

@artmo wrote:

1) Buckingham Palace is a Grade 1 listed building owned by the Crown and as such the maintenance falls to the government.



 

1) It's owned by the crown and so therefore the crown should be dealing with it. The monarchy are the only people in this country who seem to think they can impose their problems on someone else. That isn't normal behaviour to normal people so why should it be normal to them?



 

And who do you think the Crown is? It's the government that pays for Crown property maintenance. 10 Downing Street is a Crown property. Would you expect the incumbent to pay for maintenance?

 

 

Community Veteran
Posts: 14,439
Thanks: 728
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Well I'll just conveniently ignore your question just like you ignored 2 and 3 Tongue

I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 18,889
Thanks: 292
Registered: ‎12-08-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

point 2 follows on naturally from point 1.

on point 3 the Queen also made a personal donation AFAIR. And no I am sorry I don't know how much it wasWink

 

 

Community Veteran
Posts: 14,439
Thanks: 728
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Well as I understood it the Crown is the monarchy itself.

See, I can answer and ignore just like you matey Wink

I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Community Veteran
Posts: 38,460
Thanks: 1,031
Fixes: 62
Registered: ‎15-06-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Just to stick my oar in - and this is, unusually for me - from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

The Crown Estate is a collection of lands and holdings in the United Kingdom belonging to the British monarch as a corporation sole, making it the "Sovereign's public estate", which is neither government property nor part of the monarch's private estate.[1][2][3][4] As a result of this arrangement, the sovereign is not involved with the management or administration of the estate, exercising only very limited control of its affairs.[5] Instead, the estate's extensive portfolio is overseen by a semi-independent, incorporated public body headed by the Crown Estate Commissioners, who exercise "the powers of ownership" of the estate, although they are not "owners in their own right".[1] The revenues from these hereditary possessions have been placed by the monarch at the disposition of Her Majesty's Government and thus proceed directly to Her Majesty's Treasury for the benefit of the British nation.[1][6][7] The Crown Estate is formally accountable to the Parliament of the United Kingdom, where it is legally mandated to make an annual report to the sovereign, a copy of which is forwarded to the House of Commons.[5][8]

The Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom, holding property worth £12 billion,[9] with urban properties valued at £9.1 billion[10] representing the majority of the estate by value. These include a large number of properties in central London, but the estate also owns 792,000 ha of agricultural land and forest, more than half of the UK's foreshore, and retains various other traditional holdings and rights, including Ascot Racecourse and Windsor Great Park.[11] Naturally-occurring gold and silver in the UK, collectively known as "Mines Royal", are owned by The Crown Estate and leased to mining operators.[12][13]

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,[4] thus relieving him of the responsibility of personally paying for the costs of the civil service, defense 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 15%). 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.[2] The act does not imply any legal change on the nature of the estate's ownership, but is simply a benchmark by which the sovereign grant is set as a grant by Parliament.

This answers a few of the questions https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/our-business/faqs/

Luzern
All Star
Posts: 3,516
Thanks: 380
Fixes: 3
Registered: ‎31-07-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.


@billnotben wrote:

....

Whether we should have a monarchy has come up more than once in the past but when put bluntly Queen Thatcher or King Blair or stick with Queen Liz the answer has always been the same.


Our Brenda bashing republicans should be careful what they wish for. Presidents can make themselves presidents for life, given enough guile and national instability. This country worries me- for my kids and their kids, by its nastiness.

OMG, Grand Lord Fartage as President for Life.Roll eyes

No one has to agree with my opinion, but in the time I have left a miracle would be nice.
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,439
Thanks: 728
Fixes: 12
Registered: ‎01-08-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.


@Oldjim wrote:

Just to stick my oar in - and this is, unusually for me - from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

The Crown Estate is a collection of lands and holdings in the United Kingdom belonging to the British monarch as a corporation sole, making it the "Sovereign's public estate", which is neither government property nor part of the monarch's private estate.[1][2][3][4] As a result of this arrangement, the sovereign is not involved with the management or administration of the estate, exercising only very limited control of its affairs.[5] Instead, the estate's extensive portfolio is overseen by a semi-independent, incorporated public body headed by the Crown Estate Commissioners, who exercise "the powers of ownership" of the estate, although they are not "owners in their own right".[1] The revenues from these hereditary possessions have been placed by the monarch at the disposition of Her Majesty's Government and thus proceed directly to Her Majesty's Treasury for the benefit of the British nation.[1][6][7] The Crown Estate is formally accountable to the Parliament of the United Kingdom, where it is legally mandated to make an annual report to the sovereign, a copy of which is forwarded to the House of Commons.[5][8]

The Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom, holding property worth £12 billion,[9] with urban properties valued at £9.1 billion[10] representing the majority of the estate by value. These include a large number of properties in central London, but the estate also owns 792,000 ha of agricultural land and forest, more than half of the UK's foreshore, and retains various other traditional holdings and rights, including Ascot Racecourse and Windsor Great Park.[11] Naturally-occurring gold and silver in the UK, collectively known as "Mines Royal", are owned by The Crown Estate and leased to mining operators.[12][13]

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,[4] thus relieving him of the responsibility of personally paying for the costs of the civil service, defense 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 15%). 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.[2] The act does not imply any legal change on the nature of the estate's ownership, but is simply a benchmark by which the sovereign grant is set as a grant by Parliament.

This answers a few of the questions https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/our-business/faqs/


So what you're saying is that @artmo is wrong then yes? Ok glad we got that sorted Funny

Given that this huge repair cost has just come about, it makes me wonder when the wikipedia page was last updated "in advance" in readiness for this huge cost.

I need a new signature... i'm bored of the old one!
Midnight_Caller
Rising Star
Posts: 4,143
Thanks: 7
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎15-04-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Yes End Of

Minivanman
Seasoned Hero
Posts: 6,016
Thanks: 1,595
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎04-11-2014

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

"Did you not see the picture at the top of the article you posted from the Guardian rag?"

Not sure why you are referring the Guardian as the rag as it far from that, well not yet anyway @artmo but whatever..... so yes, of course I saw the picture which is why I said maybe he turned up later. When I watched the interview there was only Marr and McDonnell. With regards to those numerous opinion polls supporting the retention of the British Monarchy don't tell me, they were conducted on behalf of the Daily Mail. Perhaps you can give me the link because you have me intrigued.

I guess support royalty is very much like having a belief in the resurrection or climate change denialist where no matter the weight of evidence to the contrary people will believe in it regardless.

PS. Been a Guardian reader for years but at the moment it's getting right up my nose with it's articles against Brexit ad nauseam. Want an über liberal view of the world from a once decent paper fast going down the plughole? There you have it.  

 

I know where I am, I've been lost here before.
Minivanman
Seasoned Hero
Posts: 6,016
Thanks: 1,595
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎04-11-2014

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Prince Harry to pick up the tab for entire cost of his "formal but fun" 15 day Caribbean trip.

"Blazing sunshine and a red carpet lined with potted palms greeted Prince Harry as he arrives in Antigua on a Caribbean tour billed as formal but fun"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38046645

In your dreams. 

 

I know where I am, I've been lost here before.
nadger
Rising Star
Posts: 4,498
Thanks: 46
Registered: ‎13-04-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

Yet another royal bashing thread Sad

Highlighted
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 18,588
Thanks: 2,888
Fixes: 238
Registered: ‎06-04-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

I just wonder what will happen if the monarchy gets abolished and all their assets have been sold off and tourism starts to fall?

 

There are members of the royal family that I am not too keen on but bear in mind that they were born into that life whether they wanted it or not and as privileged as we think they are I bet there may be times when they would swap with us ordinary folk for some peace and quiet.

 

What ever life we are born to (and it's been bloody hard for me at times) we have to make the most of it and I don't begrudge those luckier than me their good fortune be it monitory or health.

Forum Moderator and Customer
Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear, not absence of fear - Mark Twain
He who feared he would not succeed sat still

Minivanman
Seasoned Hero
Posts: 6,016
Thanks: 1,595
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎04-11-2014

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

I don't begrudge it either Mav, but what I do begrudge is having to pay for it.

And what about those that did walk away from it like Edward VIII yet still had money paid to him out of the public purse? Like the poor, the royalist will always be with us I guess but to my mind and to the mind of many others they are an anachronism at our continued expense...... which bring us back to Buckingham Palace Wink

As for tourism, that is a weak argument if I may say so from those that have no real defence. 

I know where I am, I've been lost here before.
nadger
Rising Star
Posts: 4,498
Thanks: 46
Registered: ‎13-04-2007

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.

I doubt that the royals cost to me per year would buy me a coffee in Starbucks - I'd rather have them Smiley

 

At 81 I'm a lot younger than the Queen or Prince Phillip - I chose to work until I was 70 and then retire - not a choice that they've had. Personally I favour the Dutch system where monarch can retire.

 

When I last saw a list of richest women in UK the Queen's personal wealth was less than J.K.Rowling.

 

 

 

Community Veteran
Posts: 5,618
Thanks: 629
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎21-03-2011

Re: Should the Royals pay for Palace renovation.


@Minivanman wrote:

I don't begrudge it either Mav, but what I do begrudge is having to pay for it.

 

The point is you and other members of the public are not paying for it. The income of the Crown estates was hijacked by the Treasury and a small fraction was returned to the Queen. Time to fix up the Palaces so they don't go to ruin.

Now Zen, but a +Net residue.