Duties and Roles of Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie 1: Discussion Until 2022

[BeatrixFan]

Because we're all very sad individuals who seem to value our hard earned money. How silly we are.

 

[zembla]

I don't see why they need taxpayer money all the time...if they want to fly private...use your own money fools...that includes unnecessary bodyguards. Britney Spears doesn't even have one anymore...I think they can survive...

They're rich...sometimes they act like they're are just servants to the people.

 

[Fabulous Fake]

Also while I am on it, I am a sales trainer in a financial service company and our company has a $100 limit on spending on one of our clients in a year handed down by the law. That means in New York, that its almost impossible for our sales reps to get their fave clients Yankee tickets.

But there is a workaround. The $100 limit doesn't apply if our rep attends the game with them. So what do you think our guys do? They buy tickets for themselves and their clients and their clients families and they all enjoy the game.

So our reps are not going to Yankee games just because they want a free game onthe company money but its the only way to offer a perk to an important client without getting in trouble with the law.

ysbel

I was extremely complimentary about one of your earlier posts.


How exactly is the above pertinent to the British tax-payer when we resent Andrew and his family free-loading?

 

[Fabulous Fake]

I applaud Prince Andrew taking Beatrice to Egypt with him. Princess Beatrice will have to do her round of Royal Engagements after she finishes Uni anyway, and it is an ideal start of the learning curve for her. I honed skills with the public by observing my father do them - so why exactly are we being so hard on Beatrice???

Imho we've only heard about this nonsense of 'training' because of all the earlier bad publicity about someone who's never done a day's work in her life requiring £250 000 of 'protection'.

Most late teenagers get up off their backsides and actually do something. Sadly Beatrice apparently does not have that ability or level of maturity to do such a thing.

 

[Bella]

I don't see why they need taxpayer money all the time...if they want to fly private...use your own money fools...that includes unnecessary bodyguards. Britney Spears doesn't even have one anymore...I think they can survive...

They're rich...sometimes they act like they're are just servants to the people.

Are you for real???? Comparing members of the BRF to skanky loser Britney Spears? I think you're on the wrong site. The Royals are more than just rich people. To many they represent an entire country/history/culture. They are not just "celebrities", though this younger generation seems to behave like them. You can't compare royalty to some actor/musician/businessman. It goes much deeper than that.

 

[Fabulous Fake]

The public's annoyance about the expense of security for Beatrice is just not going to go away.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32094/-40-000-bill-to-protect-Royals

From article above

''The total cost of security would have included about £12,000 on business class flights for the officers, who stay in five-star hotels with their charges and are understood to receive £120 a day in expenses on top of their wages. The revelation comes after security sources complained of being treated as “chauffeurs and gofers” by party-loving young Royals like Beatrice when they go globetrotting and nightclubbing.''

''Retired chief superintendent Dai Davies said: “Yet again they are showing a total disregard for the public purse at a time when resources are stretched.''

''But it hasn’t been all work for Andrew, who found time in his busy schedule to attend a pro-am golf championship in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday.''

Now isn't it surprising that Prince Andrew found time to fit golf into his busy schedule?
Wonder if that's part of Beatrice's 'education' too.

 

[Skydragon]

But a lot of companies do. I've worked in family-run companies and its staggering the waste that goes on. Some of the extra expense is charitable like escorting the son with multiple sclerosis of the retired CEO on a private first class jet from Berlin to Los Angeles to get the best medical care available as my first boss did. And this company was not a private family enterprise but the 3rd largest chemical company in Germany at the time.

However, one wonders if the son of someone not so important would deem the privilege of a first class flight and the best medical care available.

My personal belief is that once a country holds a royal prince up to a profit and loss balance sheet, then the country has no need for royal princes any more.

I will repeat my argument about businessman v royal. If a listed company wastes it's shareholders money, the shareholders can vote the board out, freeze payments, put their money elsewhere. If an MP is seen to waste taxpayers money, he has to answer to the select committee and can be voted out. Andrew and his daughters, can't. Andrew is not bringing enough money in for the taxpayers to warrant his 'expenses'. He may be bringing extra money for individual companies, but not the taxpayer. Beatrice has enjoyed a nice little holiday at our expense and to try to placate the UK public with the sudden 'it's a training course', just shows the utter contempt Andrew and his team have for UK taxpayers.

I applaud Prince Andrew taking Beatrice to Egypt with him. Princess Beatrice will have to do her round of Royal Engagements after she finishes Uni anyway, and it is an ideal start of the learning curve for her. I honed skills with the public by observing my father do them - so why exactly are we being so hard on Beatrice???

Why will she have to do a round of royal engagements, what if nobody is interested enough to invite her? What if 10 years down the line, she decides that she has no interest in doing anything for Uncle Charles? Will they then repay us? She hasn't exactly been honing her skills by sitting in on two short meetings iMO.

 

[Charlotte1]

The figures being quoted are just for Andrew, as you will have seen if you read the articles, by his own admission 500,000GBP this year.

.

No the quotes are not just for Andrew, using The Independent links you provided the quote was

This makes it easy for critics to question whether the £500,000 bill that the taxpayer will have to foot for his UKTI work this year is value for money. "In terms of the return on investment to the UK, bearing in mind I am part of a number of people, I would suggest that £500,000 is cheap at the price," he says.

So it still refers to a 'team' not him individually. I still don't know where the 500,000 pounds comes from as it's not on the UK Trade and Investment audit which is online https://www.uktradeinvest.gov.uk/ukti/fileDownload/AnReportUkti2.pdf?cid=407359

500,000 pounds is actually not a huge expense when you compare the 45.5 million pounds for the trade shows, publicity, publications expenses that the UKTI paid out. ( I added a few amounts together) Also directors' salaries, money paid out to consultants, lets just say huge amounts of money are spent from the tax payer. Therefore all of which can be questioned as to are they value for money.

Also on the audit is this statement regarding Andrew's expenses

[FONT='Arial','sans-serif']UKTI meets part of the Duke of York’s overseas expenses.[/FONT]

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Why will she have to do a round of royal engagements, what if nobody is interested enough to invite her? What if 10 years down the line, she decides that she has no interest in doing anything for Uncle Charles? Will they then repay us? She hasn't exactly been honing her skills by sitting in on two short meetings iMO.

Skydragon, come on... We can't look into the future. I as well have my serious doubts about that young lady from the way she is presented in the media so far (well, the media can only present what is there... and so far there is nothing but annoying infos.).

Plus that golf tournament in Abu Dhabi is speaking for itself. But still, give the girl a chance. This time at least she did something a bit positive for her future. And we won't know if there isn't another princess Alexandra in the making...

 

[Skydragon]

So it still refers to a 'team' not him individually. I still don't know where the 500,000 pounds comes from as it's not on the UK Trade and Investment audit which is online https://www.uktradeinvest.gov.uk/ukti/fileDownload/AnReportUkti2.pdf?cid=407359

We will have to agree to disagree on our interpretation of this - "the £500,000 bill that the taxpayer will have to foot for his UKTI work this year is value for money. "In terms of the return on investment to the UK, bearing in mind I am part of a number of people, I would suggest that £500,000 is cheap at the price," he says". - IF the £500,000 was for the team, it would say 'the UKTI work'.

£17.6 million (£15.9 million) was spent on funding customer-facing activity (International Trade Teams) delivering international trade support in the English regions. The budget for the year was £17.1 million. By utilising some of the savings from other programmes, it was possible to strengthen the regional customer-facing teams, who support business by advising
how trading internationally could help grow their business;​

• £11.8 million (£13.1 million) was spent on sector specific export promotional activities in markets and sectors with strong potential for British business.

That is the cost of the teams, Andrew expenses are not shown, none of the expenses are.​

 

[Skydragon]

Skydragon, come on... We can't look into the future. I as well have my serious doubts about that young lady from the way she is presented in the media so far (well, the media can only present what is there... and so far there is nothing but annoying infos.).

Plus that golf tournament in Abu Dhabi is speaking for itself. But still, give the girl a chance. This time at least she did something a bit positive for her future. And we won't know if there isn't another princess Alexandra in the making...

You are quite right, we can't look into the future, , but there is a very serious issue at stake here, one of trust. Andrew is showing that he has very little regard for the taxpayers of the UK. Most people if criticised for a certain type of behaviour, will try their utmost not to be seen doing the same thing again. Andrew certainly gives the appearance of a spoilt brat, doing what he wants and s*d what anyone thinks. In a house of cards, it only takes one to cause the pack to tumble. By taking Beatrice with him on this jolly, that just happens to include his favourite pastime, he is not showing her a work ethic but how easy it is to con the British public.

Most youngsters do something with their gap year, not hang out with mummy or daddy!

 

[Incas]

A lot of business are done on the golf course. On many occasions, business negotiations are down to personality and relationships. It may seems all play and games, but depend on the others present on the golf course, there may be a lot of informal socializing involved.

 

[Bella]

You are quite right, we can't look into the future, , but there is a very serious issue at stake here, one of trust. Andrew is showing that he has very little regard for the taxpayers of the UK. Most people if criticised for a certain type of behaviour, will try their utmost not to be seen doing the same thing again. Andrew certainly gives the appearance of a spoilt brat, doing what he wants and s*d what anyone thinks. In a house of cards, it only takes one to cause the pack to tumble. By taking Beatrice with him on this jolly, that just happens to include his favourite pastime, he is not showing her a work ethic but how easy it is to con the British public.

Most youngsters do something with their gap year, not hang out with mummy or daddy!

Skydragon, I think you're contradicting yourself here. In previous posts you have stated that Andrew can not behave like other businessmen (who tend to make biz deals on the golf course, etc.) 'cuz he's a member of the RF and so forth and so on. You've said the same thing about the York girls - they are held to a higher standard because of who they are and the taxpayers who foot the bill for many of the priviledges they enjoy. Yet in the above statement, you're criticizing Beatrice for not doing what other kids her age do.

So which is it? Should the royals behave like the rest of us or should they not. Unfort. it seems they're pretty much damned if they do and damned if they don't. I wouldn't want to be in that prediciment.

 

[Skydragon]

Skydragon, I think you're contradicting yourself here. In previous posts you have stated that Andrew can not behave like other businessmen (who tend to make biz deals on the golf course, etc.) 'cuz he's a member of the RF and so forth and so on. You've said the same thing about the York girls - they are held to a higher standard because of who they are and the taxpayers who foot the bill for many of the priviledges they enjoy. Yet in the above statement, you're criticizing Beatrice for not doing what other kids her age do.

So which is it? Should the royals behave like the rest of us or should they not. Unfort. it seems they're pretty much damned if they do and damned if they don't. I wouldn't want to be in that prediciment.

I don't feel it is a contradiction at all.

I was highlighting the fact that most girls of Beatrices' age are out and about on their own, royal or not. It is unusual for a girl of 19 to 'hang out' with mummy or daddy, in or out of royal circles.

Andrew can make as many deals as he wants, wherever he wants, but it seems highly suspicious that of the many overseas trips arranged by the UKTI department, he only appears to attend those that specifically include a golf tournament.

 

[ysbel]

I don't think the taxpayer argument is valid against Andrew and here's why.

Andrew doesn't get paid from the Civil List, he gets paid by the Queen. His salary and business expense for his job as Special Representative gets paid by the UK Trade & Investment Board that sponsors the initiative. The UK Trade & Investment Board is funded by the government but manned by personnel whose head was chosen by an elected official and therefore the head of the board is not accountable to the taxpayer. Rather the elected official that put him in place is accountable to the taxpayer for the Board's spending. This is an important distinction. In government, even in the US, an appointed official is not accountable to the taxpayer but an elected official is.

So ultimately Andrew is accountable to the Queen for the money she gives to him which is personal between mother and son and none of our business and he's accountable to the UK Trade & Investment Board for the salary and perks he receives through his position but there are very few statements in the public press about how well he performs his role as the Special Representative, there are only complaints on how much money he is spending. In fact I daresay that most people here really have no understanding what the purposes, goals, and strategies the UK Trade and Investment Board has put in place for its objectives. We have no knowledge of the Board's budget for Andrew's position and how well they think he is meeting their goals. Without knowledge of the Board's goals and strategies for meeting them, there is no way for us to judge whether Andrew is fulfilling his responsibilities there and whether the cost is worthwhile.

A British taxpayer could conceivably see no benefit in the Board's mission and say that its all a waste of taxpayer money and campaign their elected officials to cut funding for the Board. That would be an effective use of the voice of the people. From most people's point of view, I think that most people can have an opinion whether they think spending money on the Board's purposes of promoting British industry abroad is worthwhile but I would hazard a guess that the average British taxpayer does not know enough about the Board's budget and individual objectives to judge whether too much is being spent on one person's position even if it is a royal such as Andrew. In that case, the taxpayer is micromanaging the Board's governing by critiquing expenses for one official even if it is a royal. The taxpayer can question the Board as to an individual's expense but as I said Andrew's expenses and perks seem to fall in line with the business people he is meeting with and whose businesses he has been tasked to support. So one cannot point to a golf trip in Abu Dhabi or wherever Andrew is doing business as the Special Representative and use that as conclusive evidence that Andrew is wasting taxpayer money.

The Board obviously thought the position was necessary for their goals of promoting British commerce internationally and they obviously had a budget for salaries and expenses, however, this information is generally not as accessible to the public as info on the voting records of elected officials. This is pretty standard for appointed officials, not just royals. They are not directly accountable to the taxpayer and therefore the way their jobs operate, its harder for the taxpayer to judge whether they are earning their keep. That's why we have elected officials who appoint government officials in these positions.

The board has had Special Representatives before Andrew and they will have Special Representatives after Andrew. They are not just making accomodations for Andrew.

I find that with Andrew's financial situation the taxpayer argument is misleading. Conversely, if he were elected he'd be more accountable to the public but that is the reason that BeatrixFan is in favor of a republic.

It seems that if one is interested in defining the Royal family as line items on your tax expense report, even when they are not, then the country needs an elected head of state who one can vote in and out of office like you do the PM. Electing a public official is how you get line item control over a government employee's expenses.

 

[Skydragon]

Andrew doesn't get paid from the Civil List, he gets paid by the Queen. His salary and business expense for his job as Special Representative gets paid by the UK Trade & Investment Board that sponsors the initiative. The UK Trade & Investment Board is funded by the government

I cut you short! The UKTI is financed by the taxpayer, no matter who is at the helm. HM receives money from the civil list, as does Philip and as such if HM chooses to give her son pocket money from the civil list allowance it is indeed up to her, but lets hope she doesn't request an increase. Employees of UKTI are classed as civil servants, the UKTI is a government department, exactly the same as 'work and pensions'. Therefore he is answerable, ultimately to the UK taxpayer.

If Andrew wants to be seen as a businessman, then let him get a 'proper' job with a company paying his salary, where they will apparently encourage his playing golf to promote business. But my argument remains, of the engagements Andrew takes up as a representative of UKTI, how many are because there is a golf tournament and how many does he turn down because there is no tournament?

None of this alters the fact, that in my and many others opinions, the 'in training' tag was applied to Beatrices holiday with daddy, to try to calm the outrage expressed for the UK people, in the UK press.

 

[Elspeth]

I think part of this has to do with a misunderstanding of who's being paid by whom. Many people still seem to believe that the Queen's immediate family is still paid for by the Civil List and that it was just the Gloucesters and Kents who were dropped. They therefore think that, since the Civil List is government money (and most people don't understand the business about the income from the Crown Estates being surrendered in exchange for govermnent income), they're entitled as taxpayers to have a say in how royal family members conduct their public lives.

Even people who understand that the senior royals apart from the Queen and Prince Philip are no longer funded frm the Civil List seem to have a hard time letting go of the "we as taxpayers have a right to demand that they behave in a certain way" argument. People were very keen to see the Civil List shrunk and all these "freeloaders" (particularly Andrew, Fergie, and Edward) dropped, but it does mean that they have less right to demand, as outraged taxpayers, that these royals behave in specific ways. It's certainly true that most of us don't want to see the Queen's immediate family take advantage of their privileged positions and shirk the accompanying responsibilities, but that's our opinion as concerned citizens who don't wish to see our monarchy being debased by the antics of some of its members who should (but apparently don't) know better. It's a different matter from that of royals wasting taxpayers' money, since they aren't paid by taxpayers' money any more.

I don't think anyone can fault the Queen and Prince Philip for the way they behave in their public lives, and they're the only two Civil List recipients since the death of the Queen Mother.

 

[Skydragon]

Exactly, but I am not complaining about a 'civil list' payment to or for Andrew, but because the UKTI is a government department, funded by the taxpayer.

If he has the position because he is a 'royal', then he must be sure to show that not only is he worth our payment to him, but that he is not abusing his position and only choosing the trips that include a tournament.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

If he has the position because he is a 'royal', then he must be sure to show that not only is he worth our payment to him, but that he is not abusing his position and only choosing the trips that include a tournament.

I'm not interested enough to follow Andrew's trips but I see how well received the trips of Prince Joachim of Denmark or of the Crown Prince/ss of Belgium were when they did a tour organized by the trade board of their respective country. Plus I once was a guest at a Munich dinner for Haakon of Norway where they promoted Norwegian Salmon and other foods from Norway - unfortunately Mette-Marit had agreed to an interview before the trip to Germany where the German TV-team burned her with their lights, so she couldn't come! To be honest, yes, I wrote a bit about Norwegian foods afterwards, so I guess they got from me what they wanted.

So I don't see at the moment what's the problem with Andrew when it comes to his trips. He seems to be well received by his hosts, like any good PR-person should be. Is he not successful enough in promoting the products? Or do you think the events are arranged too much for his fun and less for the promotion of British goods?

Hm... I know to well how boring these kinds of promotional events are, so I skip most invitations. They really have to bring in Royalty or excellent winemakers to tempt me... And that's how it is here in Munich - a lot of collegues think along a similar line. Maybe that's a reason why the trade board is happy to have Andrew and maybe later Beatrice?

 

[Bella]

I don't feel it is a contradiction at all.

I was highlighting the fact that most girls of Beatrices' age are out and about on their own, royal or not. It is unusual for a girl of 19 to 'hang out' with mummy or daddy, in or out of royal circles.

Andrew can make as many deals as he wants, wherever he wants, but it seems highly suspicious that of the many overseas trips arranged by the UKTI department, he only appears to attend those that specifically include a golf tournament.

Well, I've been saying that Sarah "hangs out" far too often w her daughters and I agree that's not normal for anyone. However, I don't consider Pss B accompanying her father on a biz trip hanging out. At least that's never how I looked at it when I'd accompany my parents on business trips.

 

[jcbcode99]

I'm with Skydragon--he really does seem to only pick business meetings and locations where he can golf--I understand that we all need to unwind, but his habits are becoming noticible and can call into question his motives for choosing where he goes.....
As for Bea--I like it that she accompanied her father on this trip. We've been complaining that she has no duties--perhaps her father suggested she come with him to see what he does rather than partying. I'd say as a father he may have just wanted her where he could keep an eye on her and perhaps the Queen suggested it as well, to help put her granddaughter on a track towards more responsible behavior??

 

[Avalon]

It would never enter my mind to critisize a Royal like Princess Alexandra for receiving money from the Civil list. She's been working for Britain whole her life. Actually, she started working in support of the Queen since 1950, when she was barely 14. Imo, she deserves every penny from the £225,000 she gets.

Same goes for the Duchess of Gloucester (Brigitte), who has worked tiresly to support the Queen since 1972, and a whole lot of other Royals.

But if I were British, I wouldn't like to pay for Andrew and Beatrice. I do like them both, but like I'm not sure he does a good job representing Britain. If he wanted to be a buisnessmen, that could probably be somehow arranged.
As for Beatrice... She's a nice girl, but seems only interested in clubbing. Yes, I know she is young. But most of the members Royal Family did at least some duties by that age (I'm talking about the Royals, who receive allowance, and those, who weren't studying at her age).

 

[Mermaid1962]

I'm all for Andrew taking his daughters "under his wing" and having them accompany him on official trips, because they are the only young women close to the line of succession. Even if Princes William and Harry both marry within the next few years, which other ladies will there be besides Sophie and Camilla and Anne doing Royal engagements in a few years time? If Beatrice and Eugenie are going to keep their titles, they should do Royal duties. The sooner they start training, the better.

 

[iowabelle]

It was interesting during the Meredith Vieira interview that he bragged about Eugenie's artistic abilities but he was more vague about Beatrice. They did show coverage of Beatrice travelling with him on an official visit, so maybe the idea is that Beatrice prefers that kind of life?

 

[rmay286]

It was interesting during the Meredith Vieira interview that he bragged about Eugenie's artistic abilities but he was more vague about Beatrice. They did show coverage of Beatrice travelling with him on an official visit, so maybe the idea is that Beatrice prefers that kind of life?

I thought Andrew mentioned Eugenie's talents not because he felt her talents were more important than Beatrice's, but in order to include her. Meredith brought up the subject of Andrew taking Beatrice to Egypt with him, but probably wouldn't have said anything about Eugenie if Andrew hadn't mentioned her as well.

At least that was what I suspected. I thought it was nice that Andrew mentioned Eugenie because in recent years she has been more in the background, whether it's because she's quieter or because Beatrice is the oldest. She might be quite happy to escape the public attention, but at the same time I thought it was the gesture of an unbiased father for Andrew to make sure both his girls were mentioned in the interview.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I liked the way that he was supportive of William and Harry as well. Good uncle!

 

[Elspeth]

How should Princess Beatrice spend the next few years?

The British forum mods have seen quite a lot of criticism and other opinions about what Princess Beatrice is doing with herself, what she plans to do in the future, and what our members think she should do in the future.

It isn't clear at this point, as far as I know at any rate, whether she'll be carrying out royal duties once she graduates from university or whether she'll be looking at carving out a career for herself like other less senior young royals are doing.

Let's please try to keep this thread focused on what you think she should be doing with herself and why, rather than letting it slide into lots of criticism about what she's doing or not doing. I know there's bound to be an element of the latter, but I hope it won't dominate.

 

[Bella]

Right now I believe it's wise for her to continue her education in whatever subject(s) she finds interesting and believe she might do well at. I do think that while on school breaks she should devote some of her time to charity, again something she feels strongly about and wants to be part of; maybe children dealing w dyslexia or healthy eating/exercising (along the lines of her mum). I think she should distance herself from people like Kate Moss and others who have formed a career out of going to clubs and parties. I also would cut back on some of the exotic vacations she seemed to have enjoyed this past year.

In the next several years, once HM passes on and Uncle Charlie takes over as sovereign, we may see Pss B taking on more royal duties. I think this would be a very good thing. She'll be more mature by then and one of the few princesses-by-blood able to take over for the aging Pss Alexandra and the Duchess of Gloucester. She may never be front and center in the RF, but I think she could very well be a fine asset in years to come.

 

[Elspeth]

So you don't agree with the people who say the royal family should be restricted to Charles's descendants and Beatrice should expect to have a career outside the royal family?

I hope she's been given some idea from the Queen about what will be required of her in the future. I remember reading in Princess Alice's memoirs that they asked the Queen or her top advisors whether the Gloucester boys should prepare to have independent careers or would be needed for royal duties, and the response was that Prince William would be needed for royal duties because he was going to inherit the title but Prince Richard should expect to find a career for himself. That all changed when Prince William died and Prince Richard was the one who inherited the title, but at least they knew what to expect ahead of time.

 

[Bella]

It's hard to say from this perspective. I think alot will change about the monarchy once the Queen passes on. I def. get the impression Charles is in favor of narrowing down the number of those considered an active part of the RF. But there really won't be alot of them over the next few decades. Pss. Alexandra, The Gloucesters, Kents and even P/Pss Michael will be further up in age and will be relinquishing most if not all of their royal duties. I'm sure Pss Anne, P Andrew & Edward (& Sophie) will still be willing to carry out formal engagements in the name of The Crown. But that's only four people. You know Peter Phillips and Zara will continue with careers outside of the RF and I doubt the Wessex kids will ever take on (nor will there be the need for them) royal duties. Pss B & E are the only princesses by blood of their generation. I don't think it's too far-fetched to see them taking on some of the issues their 2nd cousins do now. They won't be considered "major royals" but I think they'll still have a role to play.