Palace refurb

mags1234 the Queen doesn't own Buckingham Palace so not sure why she should use her own money to do essential repairs.

I don't think the Queen's the richest woman in the world any more, either.

Mostlyharmless I agree with your views totally. The Queen works harder than any other older person I know, time to reorganise things when the heir takes over. No the Queen is by no means the richest woman now, what about the philanthropic Mrs Philip Green! !

It's good that the Government are looking after the housing needs of at least two of the nation's OAPs!

Personally I feel the Queen does do a very good job but I cannot believe that in these desperate times when many of her subjects are homeless, sometimes through no real fault of their own but because of horrendous circumstances, she can accept that public money is used to pay for these improvements when she is such a very rich woman in her own right.
After all that Theresa May said in the beginning I'm amazed that she is sanctioning this.

I am no Tory but in fairness to May the labour shadow chancellor agrees with her on this

If these repairs and updates are to be done, I think that a condition of being awarded contracts should be that a certain percentage of the work is done by apprentices; thus as a country we would at least gain from the young people concerned learning trades such as carpentry,electrical installations, plastering etc. And not to be used as cheap labour either, proper supervised apprenticeships which will be asset on their cvs later on. I am going to write to my (flag waving/take back control Brexit supporter)of an MP and ask that he raises this as a condition of contracts being awarded

I am with all those who have said repairs should have been ongoing as and when needed, then the plumbing, wiring, etc would not have all gone wrong at the same time. Common sense really, if something needs fixing, then fix it because before you know it, something else will go wrong. Whoever is in charge of maintenance seems to have been turning a blind eye or hoping for the best. Housing repairs need to be kept on top of. As previous poster said "a stitch in time saves nine"

Can she not go halves? If not, open it up to the public and make it pay for itself.

Just let the b****y place fall down. That's what austerity is all about and after all we're 'all in this together'.

Judging by the Japanise tourists I saw on Friday traipsing around The New Place in Stratford-upon-Avon it won't matter if it's not even there any more.

for those who didn't know Shakeskeare's House 'The New Place' was pulled down in 1703 but you still get charged to see where it once stood

Excellent point GillT57.

The Palace is public property and is Grade 1 listed. It has had little or no maintenance since the 50s - in other words for most of HM's reign. I would like to know why not? Surely it's up to the owners to keep it in decent condition. This amounts to landlord negligence. I have been looking at some info about the Crown Estate which owns a vast amount of land and property all over the country. It isn't clear whether this applies to the Palace but what is clear is that it brings in more than enough revenue (paid to the Treasury) to pay for the renovations.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

Yes, anno The crown estate took over the assets owned by the crown centuries ago, and the income from them goes into national coffers. Surely the upkeep of the properties should have been coming OUT of the same crown estate income regularly over the years, not as a sudden vast expense?

Could this be a sudden realisation that the queen isn't going to around for ever and it would be cheaper to renovate Buck House now than to wait until Charles is in residence and expressing expensive opinions on what he wants done?

On my occasional forays to London - hate the place really - but it gets the best exhibitions, I am amazed at the volume of tourists and they do all seem to want to see BP. They've seen it as the backdrop to so many royal weddings, etc it just represents London and to let it fall down would send a really good message that we are a third rate country.

I read somewhere that the French Presidency costs more to support than our Royal Family and in all honesty does anyone want some washed up politician as President of the UK (I'm not suggesting the Fr president is a washed up politician but you could bet that's what we would get).

The Crown Estate is paying for the repairs, not the taxpayer. Buckingham Palace is managed by the Royal Household, and they pay millions to the Crown Estate every year, so over the ten year period they'll put in more than the cost of the repairs.

Buckingham Palace should be sold off - it belongs to the Crown Estate and the Queen has said several times she doesn't like it as a residence. Windsor would be a suitable base for her to use when in London. I am sure one of the Russia multi millionaires would happily buy it. According to the Government this country is in dire straits, women have had their pension age increased by 6 years, men by a year. The sick and disabled are having their money cut, the out of work are having their benefits slashed too. Zero hour contracts are becoming the norm. How can we justify spending this money on a building??

Wow didn't expect this reaction here! Well setting aside the issue of Monarchy V Republic, BP is not owned by the Monarchy but by us, the taxpayers. Yes they live there, in a goldfish bowl with barely a private moment doing a job until death, without paying rent, a small "perk" you might call it but one with out of date heating, plumbing and electrics. If you were in a rental property with these basic issues needing sorting out then wouldn't you expect your Landlord i.e. Our Government, to sort it out for you? Have an obligation to do so? Long after the Queen is dead the taxpayers will still own BP. Prince Charles is well aware of the Country's feelings of inflated Royal Lists (just look at the recent spat with Charles and Andrew over his daughters being placed on the List and paid for) and being perceived as Royalty being Value for Money. Having a Royalty brings in revenue outweighing the cost of List but having more tours of BP would bring in increased income for future renovations and should be considered like many other smaller stately homes have had to resort to. But that's a Government decision not for Royalty as not the owners, simply peacocks in a gilded cage.

in all honesty does anyone want some washed up politician as President of the UK I think they all cost more than our Royal Family.
And who wants to risk a politician like Blair or businessman like Trump as a President?

If we own it shouldn't we be able to knock on the door and ask our tenants if we can inspect our property?

The bitterness of some of the anti-Royalists on here amazes me. I do think the Queen should have a word with Prince Andrew and his daughters though!

Buckingham Palace is held in Trust by The Crown Estates not owned by the Monarchy.

The Monarchy only actually own Sandringham & Balmoral.

Crown Estates hold properties for the use of the Monarchy.

Grade I listed buildings would not appeal to Developers due to the stringent rules that govern any work carried out.

Houses of Parliament, another ancient building which it would be difficult to convert to another use.

Who is responsible for letting these buildings fall into this state - Governments over the years not spending money when it was needed. This is my opinion, others may not agree, can't see any solution other than repairing to a reasonable standard.

trisher you could take some sticky tape to seal up leaking windows and some buckets to catch the drips.
I'm sure they'd be pleased.

Or some electric cable to replace 60 year old cables, copper pipes to replace lead.
Last year, when a workman tried to carry out repairs to the Queen’s private chain-pull toilet, the whole structure reportedly came away from the wall.
Or you could mend the loos.

It is shocking that it has been allowed to get into this state.

GillT57 sorry just read your post - when Windsor Castle was repaired after the devastating fire British Craftsmen & Apprentices worked on the repairs - I visited just after it reopened - it was an amazing experience

GillT57 that is an excellent idea

I will write to mine too.

Is it just coincidence or is it some sort of GNHQ joke that an advert for an exhibition called Portrait of the Artist at The Queens Gallery keeps flashing up on this page? I assume the bits holding the huge and incredibly valuable art collection are OK. Can't see Queenie letting her old masters get wet.