Gransnet forums

News & politics

Are the Royal Family losing their touch?

(793 Posts)
volver Sun 03-Apr-22 16:22:31

A couple of weeks ago we had the disastrous PR associated with the Caribbean tour, and now the judgement of the Queen is being questioned, for giving Prince Andrew such a prominent role in the Duke of Edinburgh's memorial service.

The position of the Royal Family depends very strongly on their acceptance by, and the support of, the public both here and overseas; are they losing that?

maddyone Fri 20-May-22 16:44:53

The basic pension for a single person was £5,587.40 in April 2012. It is £7,376.20 in April of 2022. Just saying.

Grany Fri 20-May-22 11:49:46

Not everyone is facing a cost of living crisis

Sovereign grant has increased by 55% since 2012

And is £85 million can only go up not down

Grany Thu 19-May-22 13:09:34

Prince Charles and his wife Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall in Canada from May 17, as part of a three-day royal tour. Speaking on GB News, Royal expert Rafe Heydel-Mankoo discussed Charles and Camilla's short tour and how this is a "slap in the face" to the British monarchy.

Speaking on GB News, Mr Heydel-Mankoo said: "I think on the back of the visit to the Caribbean of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and the Earl and Countess of Wessex, and also given what we've seen in Canada over the past year or two in regards to the treatment of the indigenous people, we've seen the toppling of statues of Kings and Queens of Canada, setting alight of churches by indigenous people, I think there's going to be a certain degree of trepidation".

Mr Heydel-Manko said the short visit is a "case of the current liberal government in Canada not being very keen on the monarchy"

Royal book for schools

To clarify:

• Wales has a new school curriculum
• A historian whose work informs the curriculum read the book
• The historian concluded the book was incompatible with the new curriculum
• End of story

It’s would be deeply contradictory to hand out a curriculum-informing history book on one hand, and a book about a monarch with a dose of longevity that undermines the curriculum’s teachings on the other.

"...because they represent something that a lot of people object to. Not Britain, but elitism, unearned wealth, limits on democracy and hereditary privilege. At a time when millions are suffering from the cost-of-living crisis, they also represent a deeply unequal and unfair society. We live in a country that leaves many destitute while rewarding one family with hundreds of millions of pounds, two-dozen luxury homes and a fleet of private jets, helicopters and even their own train. And why? For no reason than that their ancestors stole power and land from everyone else.

maddyone Wed 18-May-22 23:54:54

I think there was a spot of trouble disagreement once before about cake baking. So I’m saying nothing at all, a bit like the ladybird. She said nothing at all if I remember correctly (What the Ladybird Heard by Julia Donaldson.)

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:57:25


I'm trying not to think about it. Penalties 😥

Oh, was it?
I missed it (being out at a Neighbourhood Get-together party planning meeting)

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:55:52

You learn something new every day!

An extract of the Act said: “It is ordained and the decreed that the lords and barons both spiritual and temporal should organise archery displays four times in the year.

“^And that football and golf should be utterly condemned and stopped. And that a pair of targets should be made up at all parish churches and shooting should be practised each Sunday^ ...
^And concerning football and golf, we ordain that [those found playing these games] be punished by the local barons and, failing them, by the King’s officers.^”

Golf too.

Any fule knows that banning something makes people want to do it even more.
Just imagine trying to ban football or golf nowadays.

volver Wed 18-May-22 22:52:54

I'm trying not to think about it. Penalties 😥

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:51:56

Ah, got it.
Should I have known that?

I was thinking about tonight's match

volver Wed 18-May-22 22:50:28


^And no football^

You have to be kidding surely ⚽️
(Yes, I know you are)


James I. The real James I, 14 hundred and something. No football (or more authentically, futeball)

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:45:01


My husband's group has agreed to play at a celebration. Two of then are republicans. I think it's hypocritical

We're having French baguettes

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:43:21

And no football

You have to be kidding surely ⚽️
(Yes, I know you are)


volver Wed 18-May-22 22:39:49

You're not really trying to explain Puritanism to a Scot are you? We're not keen on sex standing up in case it leads to dancing. 😏

And no football. Takes you away from the archery practice.

volver Wed 18-May-22 22:36:45

You really don't want me to make a cake 😉

No, not humble. Not me. Not in front of la famille Windsor, anyway.

MissAdventure Wed 18-May-22 22:35:56

Oh has..
Not gas! grin

MissAdventure Wed 18-May-22 22:35:20

Not much gas changed since then.

nadateturbe Wed 18-May-22 22:35:14

My husband's group has agreed to play at a celebration. Two of then are republicans. I think it's hypocritical

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:32:57

"Cromwell believed that ‘pointless’ enjoyment was a sin while sports and entertainment were banned - theatres and inns were also closed. Plain dress was also enforced."
"One of the most extreme examples of Cromwell’s Puritan rule was that Christmas was banned. He wanted Christmas to be a purely religious celebration in which people contemplated the birth of Jesus. Puritans viewed with consternation eating and drinking on Christmas day. Festive food was removed from the streets which meant that the smell of a roasting goose could also bring trouble, while decorations, too, were banned."

However, Cromwell himself did not live a life of rigid self-control. He enjoyed music, hunting and bowls. He even allowed entertainment at his daughter’s wedding.

nadateturbe Wed 18-May-22 22:30:53


Of course you don’t Nadateturbe….

Because it isn't.

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:28:40

Ever so humble
No, that doesn't suit you at all! 😂

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:27:34

I didn't say it was right.
It is how it is just now, though, wrong though it may be.

Any suggestions how cancelling a street party will make a jot of difference to getting rid of this government?
Even the Republicans here are joining in.

Circus - that's a good idea for entertainment. We'll see which of the neighbours are acrobats and fire-eaters.

Bread - yes, on the list, thanks
Cake - a Republican has volunteered to make a cake.

volver Wed 18-May-22 22:21:23

Wait, what? Who's talking about banning anything?

No, let's have bread and circuses and the charity of "Those who can and have doing their best to help those who have not."

God bless us, every one. Let them eat cake.

(I can't shoehorn in any more quotes. Ever so humble, maybe.)

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:14:50


Charles and Camila tour cut short by Trudeau a slay in the face for monarchy

Well, at least something has cheered you up. I'm glad.

Callistemon21 Wed 18-May-22 22:13:36

Two thousand street parties and private bashes? Do they not know inflation is leading to unbearable food poverty?

Yes, we know.

So should we cancel everything and make joy unlawful?

Those who can and have will do their best to help those who have not.

Banning parties and festivities is not going to feed people.

Bridgeit Wed 18-May-22 21:51:18

I believe street parties are a matter of choice from town to town… not compulsory

Grany Wed 18-May-22 21:29:19

The cost of living crisis makes the Queen’s grossly excessive platinum jubilee look crass
Two thousand street parties and private bashes? Do they not know inflation is leading to unbearable food poverty?