Abdication?

I like the Queen and Prince Philip. I like the idea of 'The Queen'.

I don't like the hangers on.
I think a lot of people feel the same so when we see news items telling what who is wearing what and how much it cost, when people are struggling to live and feed their families more than ever, it stings a bit.

That's when people start saying abolish the lot of them.

Just the monarch for me, with a lot less pomp please.

Thanks Elegran. All the properties, whether owned by the Crown Estate or the Queen, provide all year round employment and in some cases this will be in remote areas where job opportunities are thin on the ground.

Some of the so called 'hangers on' are, like the Queen, direct descendants of George V and their grace and favour appartments in Kensington Palace are similar to tied properties albeit on a grander scale. They all performed official duties in the past but are now 'pensioned off'

The younger Royals who are not part of the 'senior team' are expected to support themselves.

I think my 56p is well spent.

I agree, but they do pay for their own outfits, and it's not their fault if the press pick up every last detail and bandy it around. Blame the press not the people being talked about?! On the other hand a lot of the public love to see and gossip about every aspect of royal life including and perhaps particularly, clothing!! So maybe the public are partly to blame?!!!

What work does Andrew and his daughters do? As the daughters live in St James Palace they have been pensioned off?

At least one of Andrew's daughters, lives and works in New York, not St James's Palace.

She may workl there but she has a flat in St James

We have twenty six windsors plus children who live in state owned buildings, most also own one or more country houses, we pay for protection for homes and family but the costs will not be made public

Well if it comes out of my 56p I don't mind.

I don't think you can buy a Cornetto for that.

But it isn't one 56p is it? And I would want my 56p to go to a person who hasn't a roof over their head, different values I suppose

different values I suppose

I'm not going to rise to that, anniebach

Quite funny actually.

merlotgran. I too am perfectly happy for it to come out of my 56p! I think Princess Eugenie works for a London Art Gallery, She got a perfectly respectable degree from Newcastle University, and has worked ever since as I understand it. As you said her sister works in New York, she also a degree from London University, if anyone's interested?!! Prince Andrew was a career Naval Officer and was on active service in the Falklands, retiring from active service in 2001, which is perfectly usual for service personnel. With a very senior rank he has no doubt retired on a very substantial pension as all service personnel do, my DH did the same, but not with such an exalted rank!! What he's done since is his business ditto my DH, and I have no problem with it.

The Danish Queen Margarethe has stopped all payments to her family excepting Frederick the Crown Prince and Fredericks eldest child. All other sons and grandchildren get nothing- that is from taxes.

Are you Danish MargaretX? If so, would you prefer it if Denmark were to become a republic? This is a genuine question and I am genuinely interested.

The Australians would love to have Princess Mary over there!

She is always in the magazines in Australia, much as Catherine et al are here.

And I would want my 56p to go to a person who hasn't a roof over their head, different values I suppose
Well, I think I can afford another 56p to go to the homeless, I would have to put it in a charity box as a non-tax payer.

So the budget we should expect - X millions given to the queen will be matched for housing for the homeless ?

Don't forget HM has to pay her staff out of those millions.
Will the homeless have to pay the house builders out of my 56p?

And no, I am not heartless, this is getting daft.

I just think a president and first lady etc etc will cost more.
In fact, I am willing to bet 56p on it.

Out of interest I conducted an informal survey on the Royal Family amongst a group of people I know.

I asked:

Would you keep the Royal Family as they are?
Would you keep them, but in a pared-back form?
Would you get rid?

Out of a group of ten, only one person would keep them as they are; seven would pare them back and two would get rid altogether.

The Group comprised one pensioner, four middle-aged people and five youngsters (school age).

" . . . the richest hereditary peer in the UK is the Duke of Westminster, who owns large tracts of land in London. He is worth £7000m (the same as the crown estate). He is not a royal. . .The royal family costs 66 pence per year per person in the UK. That's about $1.05 in US dollars. The executive office of the president of the United States is about $1.10 per person (in the U.S.)."

and

"The Italian President for example costs the Italian taxpayers £1.29 a year each in tax"

answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081109075629AAzTMI4

The latest info I can find so far on what the Civil List is spent on is the ten years from 2000 to 2010 All the figures will have gone up since then, but I assume the categories of things that the queen pays for and the general proportions will be the same

"Between 1990-2000 an unspent surplus of £35m led to an agreement that the Civil List would be frozen at £7.9m until December 2010."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/10391693

"If the Queen's expenditure exceeded this sum she would be able to withdraw funds from the £35m reserve." By 2010 £34.1m of the reserve had been withdrawn.

The largest expenditure was pay, but "Spending on executive and administrative salaries has increased by 77% while housekeeping and furnishings salaries has more than doubled since 2001. But the Palace points out that the Royal Household has taken responsibility for additional salary expenditure since 2000 which was met previously by government departments."

If only there was thirty five million for the homeless

Looks like we are doing better than other countries then, value for money wise,which is interesting.Royal children do far more now than they have ever done in the past, to justify their position in life.

Wish the windsors would take responsibility for the cost of police protection of their homes , I exclude Buck house and Windsor

It would seem that security is the only gripe here, but any head of state + their immediate family and their homes have to be protected, so even in a republic the costs are roughly the same, except dreary president, foreign interest = money virtually nil. Royal family, foreign interest, can't get enough particularly Americans, money = shedloads!!! win win all round!

Ex PM's cost us a fortune in protection and they only bring money in for themselves so why can't they pay for their own protection?