Gransnet forums

News & politics

Should Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie be funded as full time Royals?

(90 Posts)
shysal Tue 01-Nov-16 14:41:26

Some consider them a bit of a joke. What do you think?

Penstemmon Thu 03-Nov-16 22:09:40

Absolutely not. The fewer offspring from very wealthy families that the state supports the more funds are available for those who genuinely need financial help to get by day to day:e.g. sick and /or disabled. I object strongly that my taxes ever support fit and able priveledged young people to cut ribbons!

rosesarered Thu 03-Nov-16 20:57:38

It would give them a chance to wear those hats again though...so maybe they should do a few more duties.

merlotgran Thu 03-Nov-16 20:35:38

There just aren't enough Royal duties for them to perform.

Remember when we were young hardly a day went by without a Royal opening something or attending a prade or religious ceremony? The Kents and the Gloucesters were often drafted in to fill the ranks.

Royal appearances are much rarer now. Maybe it's a question of cost and security but Beatrice and Eugenie would be surplus to requirements.

Patricia61 Thu 03-Nov-16 20:17:46

Unless they are performing a public function on behalf of the Queen they should be funded by their father Andrew who should also fund their personal protection services. I would prefer my taxes were used for more socially useful activities.

DanniRae Thu 03-Nov-16 15:38:16

NO!

Granny23 Thu 03-Nov-16 12:02:43

Who remembers the bit in Anne of Greengables when she begs a bemused Marilla to call her Ann with an e? It was SO important to her.

M0nica Thu 03-Nov-16 07:38:43

I have a lot of Ann(e)s in my life, trying to remember which has the 'e' and which doesn't, is hard work, especially as they are so proprietorial about the 'e' or its absence and get quite upset/shirty when I get it wrong.

Shanma Thu 03-Nov-16 00:07:36

I was always told that if your name was Ann you only put an E at the end if you were a princess..but then I was told alot of things as a kid, probably to shut me up. My name is not Ann or Anne, by the way so why should I care grin

merlotgran Wed 02-Nov-16 13:59:45

grin galen

Jalima Wed 02-Nov-16 13:57:35

She is Princess Anne, she may have been born after rationing ended.

Jalima Wed 02-Nov-16 13:52:13

Wouldn't they fall through?
Some used to have those velvet crowns in as well eg
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_State_Crown#/media/File:Imperial_State_Crown_-_Seitenansicht_von_unten.jpg

Mine has anyway, quite helpful if you're having a lucky dip.

rafichagran Wed 02-Nov-16 13:45:28

No

merlotgran Wed 02-Nov-16 13:26:22

From BBC News archives:

On 29 August 1950, the name of the new princess was announced: Anne Elizabeth Alice Louise. Her official title was Princess Anne of Edinburgh.

She took her middle names from relatives: Elizabeth was after her mother and grandmother, Alice from Princess Alice of Battenberg - the Duke of Edinburgh's mother, Louise was the name of the eldest daughter of King Edward VII - her great-great grandfather.

The Westminster Registrar went to Clarence House to complete the birth certificate.

Are they not sufficiently 'in the know?' confused

Galen Wed 02-Nov-16 12:35:59

The Ann in my name is without an e. Mind you my Jenifer has only one n. Rather than admitt my mother was dyslexic ( she was an infant teacher) I explain that I was born during rationing.

nigglynellie Wed 02-Nov-16 12:15:16

You're right everyone spells Ann with an e, bit like Clare with an i, but those who know about these things and old newspaper cuttings insist/show it without.
Anyway, back to Beatrice and Eugenie, I couldn't care less how many holidays they have or how they lead their lives, so long as they fund it themselves.

trisher Wed 02-Nov-16 11:21:50

Didn't we have a thread some time ago about where they live and who pays for their London pad? Maybe that's why Andrew can spend 13mill on a ski lodge all his other housing costs are met and so are his children's.

Anniebach Wed 02-Nov-16 10:40:25

So true niggly, but Andrew could have brought his daughters up not to follow in his footsteps . I thought the younger daughter was getting married, doubt he is on the minimum wage

merlotgran Wed 02-Nov-16 10:38:49

It's Princess Anne, surely?

nigglynellie Wed 02-Nov-16 10:30:15

I think Princess Ann (yes that is how you spell it MaizieD!!!) has been lucky that she knew from an early age that her life long passion was horses. Also lucky for her was that she had the means, as has daughter Zara to follow this passion without the financial worry that this occupation so often brings. It's given her a purpose in life that her younger siblings don't seem to have been able to find, and I'm sure has overridden any royal pretensions that they, particularly Prince Andrew seem to have.

TerriBull Wed 02-Nov-16 08:07:32

oops consensus

TerriBull Wed 02-Nov-16 08:06:15

Agree with others here, Princess Anne set a good example in how she raised her children. Prince Charles seems in touch with the general concensus of public opinion for a slimmed down royal family. The perception of Andrew his ex wife and their daughters is not favourable, and Beatrice in particular appears to spend much of her time holidaying and not working very much, a lifestyle that might have been acceptable for a member of the royal family in a bygone era, but not anymore and certainly not paid for by the tax payer.

suzied Wed 02-Nov-16 00:21:45

When her maj does pop her clogs I think support for the royals will plummet.

Shanma Wed 02-Nov-16 00:04:15

NO!!! we have enough parasites already tyvm

rosesarered Wed 02-Nov-16 00:02:07

I liked 'those hats' Phoenix they were riveting, I couldn't look at anything else!
It takes guts to wear a hat like that in public.grin

rosesarered Tue 01-Nov-16 23:59:49

Kate is a commoner.