Gransnet forums

News & politics

And What Do You Do? Book about the Royal Family by Norman Baker

(112 Posts)
Grany Thu 26-Dec-19 12:25:27

Shedding new light
A few of the comments

Unputdownable.
Every pro-royalist argument is neatly demolished. It shows us what the monarchy really is about: free-loaders; parasites; freebie holidays lovers; hypocrites of the highest order, including the Queen, who by the way has shares in Brighthouse; a firm that exploits the poor in society; the myth that they bring in 'loads of money' proves to be just that, a myth peddled by the Firm.
In fact the annual third of a billion pounds allocated to them (not including security costs which are kept secret-why is that?!) should be rerouted to the ailing NHS, not to the Queen, who is fabuously wealthy. Even their wills remain secret (again-why?)
As head of state she is useless. The institution is undemocratic and riddled with corruption. How can one respect such a family?

They have no place in 21th century Britain

This is a carefully researched exposure of the greed, the cynicism and the general uselessness of Britain’s royalty. It’s quite jaw dropping to read how the British state panders to them, using every mechanism in their armoury to protect and indeed expand the grotesque privilege they enjoy. Norman Baker also exposes the humbug of royals like Prince Charles and his sons who never miss a chance to leap into a chartered jet to swan around the world. His account of the current life of Prince Andrew is partially entertaining; partially enraging. Well worth the 5 stars

Just started this. Should be mandatory for everyone to read it. I know generally what is being said, but the actual facts are amazing ... and we still haven’t moved away from having a royal family, living in absolute luxury, doing very little and expecting us to pay for it all!
Plus we must tug our fore locks, and bow and curtesy.
Eventually it will happen. In our grandchildren’s time?!

lavenderzen Wed 15-Jan-20 13:02:07

Just received the book and read the first chapter. It will be a good read, very enlightening.

Jabberwok Wed 15-Jan-20 12:35:33

Before the Sovereign Grant was the Civil List granted to the RF since 1760 and for their numerous rellies. It was four different grants for various events. The Civil List was trimmed right back much to the annoyance of PA and other family members who ceased to benefit from it, and the four different grants under the Civil List was amalgamated into one grant,(the Sovereign Grant) in 2011. The RF have, since George 111 been the recipients of public money.

annep1 Wed 15-Jan-20 07:27:25

The Royals should be at the very least be slimmed down or abolished after the Queen.

Well, good luck with getting support for that view Grany. I gave up trying to enlighten some people.

Grany Wed 15-Jan-20 05:42:41

The thing is the Royals are extremely wealthy in their own right. They cost the earth there is security and transport as well to pay for and you don't see them offering to pay for anything.

They have lots of money streams coming their way.

And the Queen has millions hidden in a tax haven so no thought for her subjects.

It was only in this queens reign that her whole family was given money from sovereign grant or whatever it is so they are all doing extremely well.

They do not bring in tourism as more visit France to the Palace of Versailles than here.

And actually they have hundreds of dwellings don't know exact number, have to look in my book, to be looked after.

The Royals should be at the very least be slimmed down or abolished after the Queen.

After all with PA and now MH they are doing a pretty good job of sabotaging the Royal Family from the inside.

I think Meghan has been treated appalling by the press and it's no wonder that they both want to leave and go their own way and good luck to them. Meaghan does lots for charity she is ok in my opinion.

Callistemon Tue 14-Jan-20 20:39:32

public subsidies
But this is what we pay for the office of Head of State to function.

Why should anyone, Monarch or President, fund this work themselves and pay for all the salaries and expenses of the personnel, offices, entertajnment of world dignitaries, everything required for the Office of the Head of State to function properly?

We, the taxpayer, should pay if we wish it to function as it should.

Is there anywhere in the world where the Head of State is supposed to fund themselves out of the goodness of their heart, just because they may have personal wealth?

I find that a strange idea.

Anniebach Tue 14-Jan-20 11:48:25

Part time junior royal couple who live in another country but
take money from the Duchy of Cornwall, even have the Duchy
pay for their wedding.

Grany Tue 14-Jan-20 11:31:59

The House of Windsor has amassed extraordinary private wealth. The Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall are multi-billion pound private concerns, meaning, at the very least, that public subsidies like the civil list and royal grant should be scrapped.

The Royal couple challenge Britains sick press

novaramedia.com/2020/01/14/if-a-royal-couple-cant-challenge-britains-sick-press-what-hope-does-a-progressive-politician-have/

oldgimmer1 Sat 11-Jan-20 09:13:24

Woke is a term that describes people who "care" about things. I think it's from "awoke".

It started off as a compliment but more recently has been used to describe people - usually celebrities - who "care" but are preachy about it to gain publicity for themselves.

H and M being good examples of this by, for example, preaching about the dangers to the environment of flying and then jetting off all over the place themselves and not seeing the irony of that.

Tooting29 Fri 10-Jan-20 18:19:09

What exactly is wokeness another buzz word?

oldgimmer1 Thu 09-Jan-20 20:07:56

They've brought it all on themselves though.

If they hadn't preached at us and shoved their self-absorbed wokeness down our throats people may have had a bit more tolerance of them.

They just don't seem to get it.

Tooting29 Thu 09-Jan-20 16:01:03

Good luck to Meghan and Harry I say, you only have to look at the papers, Twitter and yes GN to see the opinions to understand why. After all he is 6th in line and his cousins have gone their own way - why not them. New babies bring new perspectives and perhaps they want a more normal life for their son. If they become financially independent then good for them. In the end it's none of my business or anyone's really.

Jabberwok Wed 08-Jan-20 16:22:18

Tbh, I think poor, slightly dim Harry simply doesn't see the irony of their life style and their supposed connection with the poor, climate change and a host of other worthy causes! I think Meghan sees it perfectly well and uses them and him for her own promotion !! Yes, they'd be better living abroad, America? less embarrassing for the RF! and us come to that!!
I agree about the state school! A security mans nightmare!

pinkquartz Wed 08-Jan-20 15:48:14

also I notice her face has slightly changed. No doubt she has been to see her fav face people in Canada....whatever you call people who fill your face with fillers etc.
I notice as an ex photographer that the planes of her face have changed in the new pics.

Anniebach Tue 07-Jan-20 21:55:44

I agree merlot

merlotgran Tue 07-Jan-20 21:46:49

It looks like they're flogging themselves to any country that will have them because they are disillusioned with UK.

They were enthusing about SA then blew it at the end of the tour. They've probably done the same again because it was supposed to be a holiday where privacy was paramount yet they couldn't leave without the glare of publicity.

They can't turn their backs on the UK completely because they'd have to fund themselves but I wouldn't mind betting they're hoping to split their time between here and AN Other - just so long as they can find a way of somebody else paying for it.

Anniebach Tue 07-Jan-20 21:32:27

I wish they would

pinkquartz Tue 07-Jan-20 21:18:06

I do wish they would emigrate and stay away. I liked not seeing her smirky face when I look at the news online.

Everytime their insincerity is outstanding: pretending to care about sections of the poor while living the most luxurious life possible.
Go away please.....

Anniebach Tue 07-Jan-20 17:10:45

I would not want my children to attend a state school attended by children of a heir to the throne, all that security,
all the security checks , nightmare for the staff and parents,

Anniebach Tue 07-Jan-20 17:08:09

NotToOld the turkey baster claims were made in a book by
the American Kitty Kelley

varian Tue 07-Jan-20 17:06:57

One of the disadvantages of having a RF in the UK is the way they have led a hierarchical social structure where private schools are a big factor.

What a difference it could have made if Charles and Diana had followed the example of other modern European Royals and sent their children to state schools.

Sadly it seems that William and Kate do not seem to be modernisers at least in this respect.

Anniebach Tue 07-Jan-20 17:05:45

I don’t recall them visiting ANYONE to thank for the hospitality they received in S.A.

merlotgran Tue 07-Jan-20 16:42:10

H&M do like to have everyone scratching their heads.

Although their six week stay in a luxury waterfront mansion was a strictly private affair, they felt the need to thank the Canadian High Commissioner for the hospitality. As this was obviously a public occasion it had to be announced by Buckingham Palace.

I hope they've remembered to thank the mystery multi-millionaire who owned the house and no doubt didn't charge them a penny. hmm

NotTooOld Mon 06-Jan-20 22:48:28

Every time I see moody M I'm reminded of Wallis Simpson. And we all know how that ended.

Anniebach, you make me laugh. A turkey baster? Are you kidding?!!!

Jabberwok Mon 06-Jan-20 20:51:28

????

Anniebach Mon 06-Jan-20 17:56:52

Didn’t think of that Jabber.

ok, she could be the ambassador and he can walk behind her.

Yes ?