Gransnet forums

News & politics

£102.4 million

(231 Posts)
Esspee Thu 30-Jun-22 06:50:16

Apparently that is the amount of our money spent on the Royal Family last year.
I would like to see an end to this anachronism. What about you?

Toula Fri 01-Jul-22 11:32:57

Don't forget the €1million cash that Charles carried in a plastic bag thro Customs.....four times apparently. Needed it to heat the properties they move around in at leisure? Perhaps we should be paying more than £0.60 per week to keep them comfortable. Philip, the original pauper Prince, has had his death wealth concealed for the next 50 years. I don't give cash to charities, but I give my time and support.

Daisydaisydaisy Fri 01-Jul-22 11:33:39

I'm sure it balances out with the amount of tourists that come into the country partly because of them ..smile

orly Fri 01-Jul-22 11:33:42

Casdon

I don’t usually join in royal threads but I’ve got my grumpy head on this morning. It’s a drop in the ocean. Manchester City signed one player, Jack Grealish for £100m last year, which puts it into context.

£4billion was wasted on unused PPE. That’s hardly been discussed on Gransnet, whereas the Royal Family is never without at least three interminable threads. They are worth £102.4 million just for the apparent joy people on here get from picking over the bones constantly.

Beautiful post, Casdon.

Anniebach Fri 01-Jul-22 11:35:28

Charles carried a plastic bag through customs , when ?

Lilyflower Fri 01-Jul-22 11:36:22

Just under £50 million was raised in ticket sales to royal residences in a year and £28 billion is the revenue raised from foreign visits to the UK much of which is directly related to the draw of the royal family which is beamed throughout the world via public and social media. The wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made £1 billion for the British economy. The Duchy of Cornwall raised £22 million and the Prince's charities raise £100 million a year.

This is without reckoning on the 'soft' power and influence that diplomacy, the Commonwealth and personal appearances by working royals wield for the social, political and economic benefit of the country. 'The Crown' made $260 for Netflix.

£102.4 million looks like a snip.

How much do we make for our country? Only about the top 6% of taxpayers are net contributors. The rest of us enjoy the largesse.

The queen is the hardest working person in the country and she can live for another hundred years for my liking.

Nanatoone Fri 01-Jul-22 11:37:00

I’m not a royalist as such but I do love a bit of pomp and ceremony. I think the Queen has been remarkable over her lifetime but like many, I would prefer a smaller set of working royals. However, I do think the end is nearly nigh for the automatic ascension of one family to such an elevated role. I don’t get all this moaning about money, saying it could be spent on cancer treatment or the NHS if the money was saved. Absolute nonsense, it wouldn’t be.

Cambia Fri 01-Jul-22 11:40:52

Let’s keep the royals and get rid of all the civil servants and beaurocrats in the NHS. Lots of money everywhere being wasted, why just pick on the royals? Can we also get rid of biscuits and tea we pay for at All Meetings! Redundancies for people that are re-employed with a different job title by the same employers etc etc.

maddyone Fri 01-Jul-22 11:45:27

The Queen is the hardest working person in the country……

Are you actually serious? How about doctors and nurses during Covid working twelve hour shifts? How about people who work two or three jobs to make ends meet? How about people who work for Amazon with their poor working conditions? And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

I find it difficult to believe that anyone actually believes the Queen, or any of the royals who do royal duties, actually works hard. How hard is it to cut a ribbon and open a new ward? Or lay a wreath and say a few words? Or turn up in a beautiful frock and watch a premiere?

If you had said the Queen has shown dedication and service throughout her life, yes she has. And she’s old now and deserves to retire. But work hard. Good grief, I can hardly believe anyone believes that!

Nagmad2016 Fri 01-Jul-22 11:54:14

Hear! Hear! Why do we have to constantly berate British institutions like the Royal family? They do a lot of good and should be appreciated, not constantly criticised. There is an awful lot more money being wasted on 'trivialities' and law suits than on the royals. I wish people would just leave them alone.....

4allweknow Fri 01-Jul-22 11:54:37

The Jubilee may well have cost quite a sum, how much revenue did it bring in though? The RF apparently generates a lot of money for UK. Yes, there is a terrible financial pressure on people just now but look at how many managed to get to London to celebrate and all those local celebrations didn't appear cost free. Commerce loves a RF event
money in the tills. Goodness, look at Glastonbury, where did all the money come from for all attending that.. As for NS of course she is "bashed" she is a politician.

Delene100 Fri 01-Jul-22 11:54:53

Plus £32bn wasted on a useless track and trace system and the many contracts given to friends off the back of the pandemic. Prince Charles pays £5m tax per year of his £21m earnings from the Duchy of Cornwall.

pat9 Fri 01-Jul-22 11:58:51

The revenue from the Crown estates goes into the public purse and the queen gets an allowance from it. This generates a huge amount of money.

25Avalon Fri 01-Jul-22 11:59:25

I think the RF have thought about it. With Diana’s death awareness that they were not in step with their’ ‘subjects’ was forced upon them. The Queen had to fly the flag over BP at half mast and was advised by Tony Blair I believe to return to London from Scotland and show her humane side. That was definitely a wake up call. They now try to keep on the popular side. Pity about Andrew and Harry! And Charles latest.

So we have Charles wanting to slim back the working royals
And reduce their expenditure. Apparently he spent less on his family last year to I think the tune of circa £1.2million. Whilst the majority approve and want the monarchy it will remain. Any head of state, however is going to cost money. Will there be any or much saving do you reckon?

Anniebach Fri 01-Jul-22 12:06:15

The Queen stayed with two grieving grandchildren, the sobbing and crying in London was soooo dramatic, no thought
for those young boys ,

Galaxy Fri 01-Jul-22 12:08:21

The nation will care for them
2021. Harry is thick useless etc etc.

Annaram1 Fri 01-Jul-22 12:19:51

As someone else said, footballers cost a lot more for one purchase than the Queen.

katy1950 Fri 01-Jul-22 12:27:27

How much does a president and everything that goes with the title cost every year I bet it's much the same

Growing0ldDisgracefully Fri 01-Jul-22 12:29:44

The RF certainly needs trimming down, and no money from the public purse to go to all the hangers on, who are just trading on royal connections.
We should also stop paying expenses to MPs, subsidised meals and drinks etc. They are civil servants after all, the vast majority of the civil service have to pay for their own meals and travel - I know, I used to be a civil servant.

ruthiek Fri 01-Jul-22 12:30:16

The royals gave their money to us many years ago! And just think of the tourism they bring in . Sick of the moaning on here about the royals, yes there are some hangers on but wait to see what Charles does then complain

Sueki44 Fri 01-Jul-22 12:38:46

What about the £100 BILLION ( and rising) that HS2 is going to cost ? That white elephant is going to be redundant before it’s even finished and will benefit few. In comparison the Royal family seem a bargain!

Corkie91 Fri 01-Jul-22 12:38:57

Total waste of money, that could be spent on better things

Amalegra Fri 01-Jul-22 12:42:29

I have no time for the outdated class system and social inequalities this encourages. Titles, including royal ones, should indeed be an outdated concept in this day and age. BUT (and it is a big but!) what system do we replace it with? A presidential republic? Would the President be an active head of state as in the USA (look how that’s turned out lately!)? Or merely titular as in Ireland with no real powers ( waste of money?!)? While the monarch is Head of State, with ‘soft power ‘ only, our (unwritten) constitution is somewhat protected from political upheavals (coup, anyone?). Plus spending on presidential perks, corruption etc is likely to be high ( a certain V. Putin is proof of that!). We probably wouldn’t save much money at all. Let the Royals carry on as a slimmed down version with full accountability. Cut out the pointless ceremonies that mean nothing to the average person (like the garter ceremony-meaningless now as look which disgraced Duke is a Garter Knight!). But let’s keep them until maybe one day, in the fullness of time, we hit on a better way of doing things!

clairefraser1 Fri 01-Jul-22 12:45:28

it adds up to less than £1.50 per person.

Glorianny Fri 01-Jul-22 12:55:53

ruthiek

The royals gave their money to us many years ago! And just think of the tourism they bring in . Sick of the moaning on here about the royals, yes there are some hangers on but wait to see what Charles does then complain

I love this! They pinched a load of land and resources then kindly gave it back to us and asked us just to pay them every year for ever afterwards for it!!!!
As for the it's only £1.50. If people want to pay that, that's fine, but having to pay it with no say on how it is spent isn't. So let's make it an opt out system, whereby, if you don't want to fund the monarchy, you don't have to. I wonder how popular they really would turn out to be?

HannahLoisLuke Fri 01-Jul-22 13:17:57

I like having a monarchy. That’s all I have to say on the matter.