Paxo on the Queens Children.

?

Channel 5 last night, Annie

Thank you merlot

The title said it all for me. Paxo = acerbic/unpleasant. The title 'The Queen's Children' also indicated the likely negative underlying attitude. Result- didn't bother to watch it. Life's too short.
PS 'The Crown' was very good.

I saw the trailers for this...he shouts...'What are they for?'.....I could ask....what is he for?

Am happy to have a wonderfully dysfunctional family with a long tradition as head of state...or whatever they are....The alternative is having a President voted in every now and again....and we all know where that ends......!!!!!

I watched it last night and felt very sorry for Prince Charles and I think Paxman did as well. He had a horrible life when he was young. To me it seems as if the effects of this are still visible today.

I don't think the Queen and Philip deliberately set out to make him unhappy I just think they are people without much imagination or empathy and find it difficult to understand someone with a different mindset to their own.

I agree with Paxman and I never thought I'd say that WHAT ARE THEY FOR?

People especially people on here focus on the bad presidents but there are and have been far more who are good at their jobs ,who dont cost a fortune who dont have security or homes for their children and GC and who dont get massive rises while hoarding billions of pounds worth of STUFF bought with taxpayers money.THEY have to be accountable to their electorate .Time the monarchy was gone its a medieval concept in a modern world NO ONE should be born to be a superior to the rest of the country ,its patently ridiculous .

No need to shout, paddyann.
We can hear you already.

HildaW

To quote Paxman,

'I used to believe that Britain should be a republic. Now I'm Monarchist.'

The trailers might make you think the programme is going to be critical but it's far from it.

You clearly didn't watch it, Paddyann because you'd be disagreeing with Paxo who thinks that decades of interviewing politicians have made him realise that the role of Britain's figurehead should be kept out of the hands of those who would actually want the job.

Neatly put!

Yes, what is Paxo for and while we're at it what are Clarkson and his sidekick for ?

I think the answer is 42 Lily65.

I was thinking it was K.

Why are the Royal Family being sprinkled with stuffing mix?!!!

the role of Britain's figurehead should be kept out of the hands of those who would actually want the job.

I have to agree with this. Imagine the populist vote? The winner of X Factor might be considered, or Beckham, or Holly Willoughby.

I jest, but I'd rather have Her Maj than the likes of Tony Blair, Corbyn, Cameron, etc.

I do agree that we confer honour and privilege on far too many minor royals who may work the odd day in opening something, but for the best part swan around/holiday in a life of wealth and privilege. Harry and Megan come to mind, now that he is far removed from being heir to the crown. The royal family, imo, are a bit like a tree that needs quite a few branches lopping off.

The problem for the children of the monarch or her heir is there is little they can do apart from the armed forces , their names would be used for publicity if they took employment .

I agree with Paxman
paddyann

hoarding billions of pounds worth of STUFF bought with taxpayers money.
Do you have evidence that anything they own themselves (as apart from State-owned) has been bought with taxpayers' money?

I would question the validity of that statement.

Miep, funny.

I think that the RF has been pruned quite drastically Day6 - at least those in receipt of any money for duties they carry out on behalf of HM.
Apparently that is a cause of an argument between Charles and Andrew because the latter wants more of a public role for his daughters and Charles is resisting.

HM receives a certain sum (Sovereign Support Grant) each year for the duties which the (pruned) RF carries out from the proceeds of the Crown Estate.
The Crown Estate manages the assets of Britain's reigning monarch. It is not the private property of the monarch, and cannot be sold. Instead, it is run as if it were a business and pays all profit back into the public purse. In 2009/10 it handed £211 million to the Treasury.

I think the amount received went up from 15% of the profits of the Crown Estate to 25% to cover the cost of renovating Buckingham Palace.

I can't imagine a President wanting to live in a leaky, draughty old Palace. Oh no, he or she would want a new one built at taxpayers' expense.

I thought this was going to be about sage and onion stuffing

What are they for?? I suppose they are for keeping devoted royalists busy making scrapbooks, collecting mugs and buying Hello! type magazines! Oh and creating debates on forum! Otherwise not sure what they are for, any more than my DDs are 'for' anything!

Why are we here? What is the meaning of life?
What are we for?
What's it all about? (Alfie?)

In a hereditary monarchy there has to be children.

That's what they're for.

Surely we ask what an object is for not a human being