8% increase in Queen's allownace

Would T R U M P be eligible after his success as POTUS? After all, his mother was Scottish.

I did pick up a free one at the dentist yesterday, one of those 'County Life' magazines but haven't looked at it yet.

Wrong thread (I wondered where the post went)

I still think we have a little of the class system left and I think the monarchy perpetuate it! No one should be looked up too or down too unless have gained respect or lost respect. Snobbery has held us back. Especially not valuing the workers!

Why can't the palace repairs be paid for by opening to tourists all year round? As it is Chester zoo, Stonhenge to name a couple get far more tourists.

Don't forget Marie Antoinette was royalty before the French revolution ....the peasants revolted at the extravagance of a monarchy and she went to the Guillotine .....not suggesting that QE II should go to the guillotine and I cannot hear her exhorting her government to tell the poor to eat cake !

In the sense of the poor back then it meant no food, no work, no money and death through what are now treatable illnesses ..not hi tech TV's, latest iPhones whatever .....

I just hope those workmen that are going to do the renovation (for that is what it is !) are not going to be on zero hours contracts and having to go to a food bank in order to eat whilst also being entitled to in work benefits which would make a mockery of the whole thing !

And to agree with others ...WHY is the UK taxpayer funding all these hangers on > Isn't it time they got themselves a job and paid their way ......and those younger front line royals stopped whinging and remember that the Queen had to take on a role of responsibility and devote the rest of her life to duty when she was only in her 20's ! Not a job I would want ...even if the lifestyle that goes with it would be nice ,,,would love to travel but all mine is done via the TV ! (saves queuing at airports I suppose !)

I am not quite sure which 'hangers-on' are being funded. I'm sure I read recently that Andrew wanted a 'royal role' for Bea and Eugenie to 'help' HM, but that Charles turned that idea down firmly.

Only the Duke of Edinburgh receives any money from the Sovereign Grant now,presumably that will cease when he ceases duties in the autumn.
This Sovereign Grant is used to fund The Queen’s activities as Monarch, including the upkeep of royal residences, paying staff salaries and performing royal engagements. In addition to this, the Duke of Edinburgh is now the only member of the Royal Family to receive a parliamentary annuity – set at £359,000

All other members of the Royal Family’s engagements within the UK are funded by The Queen personally, from her personal income, from the Duchy of Lancaster (a privately owned estate). The Prince of Wales, meanwhile, is also funded from his own private estate (the Duchy of Cornwall) which is used to fund his domestic engagements, household and activities as well as those of his family (his wife, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry). Since 1993, The Queen and Prince of Wales have paid full income tax on their private income.

Work undertaken on behalf of the Government, such as overseas visits, are funded through special arrangements within the Sovereign Grant.

So there are a lot of myths flying around re funding, 'hangers-on' etc. In fact HM appears to be subsidising the royal duties from her own private income.

Besides, Prince Andrew , pays £20,000 a year for Eugenia and Beatrice's Buck House apartment from his own pocket. Must be hard for someone on the rich list.

Eugenie', of course.

The main family are an asset, they bring in all sort of revenue via tourism etc. And are useful on overseas trips selling brand U.K. Think the Queen is great. But do think the wider family should be made to stand on their own two feet.
Elegran's info was insteresting re the conversion of George's allowance to today's figures.
The Windsors is back on C4 on Friday. If you haven't seen it, it's a brilliant satire of the family.

I feel guilty now, should I be paying DD's rent?

EmilyHarburn I totally agree with you and I'm sick of all the monarchy bashing. As far as I'm concerned they bring in far more money than they cost. I would hate to have a president. What would be the point of a Prime Minister and President? Surely a president would have no function?

Or be far too powerful politically.

No thanks

I'm not bashing the monarchy. I'm simply suggesting that in this time of 'we're all in it together' the tenant of the largest social housing scheme in the UK pays towards it's upkeep as she doesn't actually pay any rent.

Charles benefits from the Duchies of Cornwall and the Queen benefits from the Duchy of Lancaster. Both estates make £millions a year for the respective owner. Charles and the Queen pay income tax but unlike us they decide what part of their income is taxable and therefore how much they pay.

The money the Queen gets from the Duchy is her private income and not part of the civil list.

Why is it that when anyone questions the payments made to the monarchy they are accused of monarchy bashing. If we pay so much money to this family then surely we have a right to question how it is spent.

What, 65p a week?

Peaseblossom I am interested in your statement that the royal family brings in more money. How exactly? Tourists get to see the Crown Jewels and palaces etc. but they would still exist even if HRH no longer did. I, and millions of others, go to lots of non monarchy places for holidays!

It would be perfectly possible to set up a republican Presidency with the remit/style we wanted..a bit like the mayors of smaller towns: a dignitary to be the public face but, as HRH does now on state occasions, remains politically neutral. Simply a figurehead, with a fixed budget!

Buckingham Palace belongs to the state not the Queen and as such needs to be kept in good repair. End of story

There is actually no evidence that the royal family bring in far more than they cost. Paris manages to get plenty of tourists sans monarch as do many other capitols and many attractions in this country bring in far more. Buckingham palace should at the very least be open to tourists for longer than a few select weeks so that it can earn its keep.

Ana I think it is 65p per annum each

Who would wear the Crown jewels then Penstemmon? What would be the point of keeping them?
If we get rid of the Monarchy we may as well flog them off to help pay off the national debt, can't have a President's wife wanting to wear a crown (much too heavy) or carrying an orb and sceptre etc etc.

The amount is irrelevant because it's multiplied by millions and therefore becomes a substantial amount of money.

We could still keep the Crown Jewels. People would still pay to see them just as they'd still pay to go into Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace. Maggie fenced of Number 10 but people still go to see Downing Street.

Jalima what if the President's husband wanted to war the crown and carry the orb and sceptre?