The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Current Events Archive

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #61  
Old 01-07-2007, 04:34 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,379
Andrew is on the Civil List. The Queen (out of her own funds) pays for the Gloucesters, the Kents (Duke and Princess Alexandra). She may subsidize some of her children's expenses...but didn't he get money from the Queen Mother.And has that house, Sunninghill been sold yet?
__________________

__________________
  #62  
Old 01-07-2007, 04:57 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
I was out by a few thousand!

"Even Andrew's official job, as Britain's "Special Representative for International Trade and Investment," prompts criticism. Cynics moan that it requires the taxpayer to finance his leisurely lifestyle to the tune of £355,992 a year.
Noting that the Queen donates another £249,000 in pocket money to her second son each year, they raise eyebrows at the frequency with which Andrew's overseas visits coincide with sporting events, or short trips to top golf courses".
http://news.independent.co.uk/people...cle2060042.ece

His travel is picked up by the taxpayer out of the monies paid to the royals, in the civil list.

2004
2005

Didn't Sarah decide to move in with Andrew to save the £6000 per week, it was costing her to rent a 6 bedroomed mansion?
__________________

__________________
  #63  
Old 01-07-2007, 05:12 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk
Andrew is on the Civil List. The Queen (out of her own funds) pays for the Gloucesters, the Kents (Duke and Princess Alexandra). She may subsidize some of her children's expenses...but didn't he get money from the Queen Mother.And has that house, Sunninghill been sold yet?
Andrew isn't on the Civil List any more; nor are Edward and Anne. Only the Queen and Prince Philip are on the Civil List these days - the Queen Mother was on it, but since her death there are no recipients other than the Queen and Prince Philip. Prince Andrew gets an allowance, but the Queen repays it, so his expenses are met by her.

http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page4968.asp
__________________
  #64  
Old 01-07-2007, 05:32 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,379
Thanks Elspeth.

When did this change happen? I know its not that recent but I do seem to recall a time when she did pay for just the junior royals.
__________________
  #65  
Old 01-07-2007, 05:38 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I think it happened after Windsor Castle burned down and the Queen started paying taxes (around 1992?)
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #66  
Old 01-07-2007, 05:48 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
I was out by a few thousand!

"Even Andrew's official job, as Britain's "Special Representative for International Trade and Investment," prompts criticism. Cynics moan that it requires the taxpayer to finance his leisurely lifestyle to the tune of £355,992 a year
The Independent is a republican paper so it would be critical of any expenditures for the royals.

Is this figure for his travel and lodging expenses or is there a salary involved?

I think I'll spare Andrew my indignation at his timing his business trips to coincide with sporting events and trips to golf courses since I am timing my big business trip this winter to coincide with the big ski season in Colorado this winter. Plus in my office all the portfolio managers suddenly had to go to Germany this past summer to research the major companies of the German stock market (coincidentally all of these companies were headquartered in cities where a major World Cup match was scheduled. )
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #67  
Old 01-07-2007, 06:10 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
The Independent is a republican paper so it would be critical of any expenditures for the royals.

Is this figure for his travel and lodging expenses or is there a salary involved?

I think I'll spare Andrew my indignation at his timing his business trips to coincide with sporting events and trips to golf courses since I am timing my big business trip this winter to coincide with the big ski season in Colorado this winter. Plus in my office all the portfolio managers suddenly had to go to Germany this past summer to research the major companies of the German stock market (coincidentally all of these companies were headquartered in cities where a major World Cup match was scheduled. )
That seems to cover just his salary, his travel is still met out of the royal expenses. The same or similar articles are in the Guardian, Mirror, Mail, the Age, etc.

Ohhh ysbel, you naughty, naughty girl!
__________________
  #68  
Old 01-07-2007, 06:50 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
Ohhh ysbel, you naughty, naughty girl!
I know...

Its not exactly golf in the Philipines but I'll take it.

I don't understand why Andrew would be getting a salary for his work, that should be covered from his expenses from the Queen.

I think they made the whole expenditures more confusing when the Queen starting paying for the minor royals. I would have preferred that she had made a stronger case that they were valuable to the government and deserved their civil list payments.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #69  
Old 01-08-2007, 12:16 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,076
My last post was back a bit but the C of E's official website says that a Christian marraige is valid for life so they are still married in the eyes of the Church. Also it says that only in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances can a couple be married again in Church so it's not commonplace.
__________________
  #70  
Old 01-08-2007, 12:29 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Plymouth, United States
Posts: 1,307
I tend to wonder if Andrew were not a royal prince if Sarah would be as involved with him as she is now. If he were just 'Average Joe Businessman', albeit with a comfortable lifestyle, would she be "living" with him whenever she was in town or would she have gone off more independently on her own, as most divorced women do, and really only see/deal with him in matters regarding their children? I guess we'll never know, but it does make me wonder.
__________________
  #71  
Old 01-08-2007, 12:37 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I think if Andrew were not a prince, Sarah and Andrew would still be married. They seem to have a remarkable compatibility but Sarah doesn't have a compatibility with the royal life.

This is a problem with any woman interested in Andrew.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #72  
Old 01-08-2007, 01:11 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I think if Andrew were not a prince, Sarah and Andrew would still be married. They seem to have a remarkable compatibility but Sarah doesn't have a compatibility with the royal life.

This is a problem with any woman interested in Andrew.
I totally agree with that Ysbel. Sarah loves Andrew the man who happens to be Prince not Prince Andrew. Sure she does love the lifestyle (wasn't she a Sloane Ranger back in the 80's) but it wasn't new to her. She was aware of it and lived on the fringes back in the day as well.

While I agree that Sarah does not deal well with the Royal restrictions..I am willing to bet if she had been allowed to live with Andrew when they first got married. Things might have turned out a little differently. At least for a while...it might have still ended but they might have been married a little longer.

And he does tend to date women who are not right for Royal life. I would say about 85% of his women are like this.
__________________
  #73  
Old 01-08-2007, 01:27 PM
sesa's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: orange, United States
Posts: 628
I agree with the above post. I think they would still be married. They seemed to have made a good couple when they were married as they do now as friends.
oh and by the way, Sarah is on the cover of the brand new W.W. magazine wearing a red and white polka dot dress. she looks o.k., but not great. She also looks as if she has put on some weight, but it just could be the dress. I would post the picture, but we do not have a scanner at work.
__________________
  #74  
Old 01-08-2007, 01:32 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by angela
My last post was back a bit but the C of E's official website says that a Christian marraige is valid for life so they are still married in the eyes of the Church. Also it says that only in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances can a couple be married again in Church so it's not commonplace.
Very many couples having divorced can and do marry within the CoE religion, while it may not be a doctrine they want to be seen to preach, it is fairly commonplace and has been, IME, for many years.
Friends of ours had to have a civil ceremony (to each other) and a recommitment ceremony, otherwise they could not be seen as a married couple and their children could not attend the CoE school.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk
I am willing to bet if she had been allowed to live with Andrew when they first got married. Things might have turned out a little differently.
Many couples marry, new husband or wife goes off on service and they rely on letters to stay in touch. Quite a few of them are happy to wait for their spouse, either at home on or off base or at their parents. Very many service spouses know that this is what life is going to be like for them, it is not rocket science.

It has always been like this in the British navy, so to blame the fact that Andrew went off, doing his duty (a job he was paid for) and it was all too much for Sarah to handle, is rather insulting to all the other forces wives and husbands.

You seem to be painting a picture of someone who was incredibly thick. She didn't know and couldn't imagine what the confines of the royal family would be. She didn't know and couldn't imagine what life married to a naval officer and royal prince was going to be like.
Circumstances beyond her control?
__________________
  #75  
Old 01-08-2007, 01:43 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
Many couples marry, new husband or wife goes off on service and they rely on letters to stay in touch. Quite a few of them are happy to wait for their spouse, either at home on or off base or at their parents. Very many service spouses know that this is what life is going to be like for them, it is not rocket science.

It has always been like this in the British navy, so to blame the fact that Andrew went off, doing his duty (a job he was paid for) and it was all too much for Sarah to handle, is rather insulting to all the other forces wives and husbands.
Hi skydragon, I agree with you to a point. With Sarah's father in the military, I never understood how clueless she was.

However, the difference between Sarah and an ordinary military wife was that she was a public figure and married into the Royal Family who were never easy in-laws to get along with in the best of times; all while the main reason for her accepting this life was thousands of miles away for months at a time. I think it was somewhat realistic for Sarah to believe that she and Andrew would be allowed to live together during some parts of his assignments. She probably underestimated how difficult life as a Royal would be for her.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
  #76  
Old 01-08-2007, 01:45 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,379
Well since this thread is about Sarah and not about the wives and officers of other forces, I am not talking about them. So please don't assume what I say about her is applicable to others. Its apples and oranges. And while there are wives who are willing to toe the line so to speak, there are other wives, like Sarah who can't handle the distance and the separation. And their marriages pay the price as a result.So let's not act like she is the first wife of a Naval officer who couldn't handle the stress. Being aware of a situation and actually living a certain situation are two totally different things.

And from what post of mine are you using to paint the picture of Sarah being thick? Sarah is not and has stated quite clear that she was not suited for Royal life. The statement above "Being of a situation and actually living a certain situation are two totally different things." is also applicable for Sarah's role when she was on the fringes of royal life and being an actual part of the Royal family.
__________________
  #77  
Old 01-08-2007, 02:05 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
Hi skydragon, I agree with you to a point. With Sarah's father in the military, I never understood how clueless she was.

However, the difference between Sarah and an ordinary military wife was that she was a public figure and married into the Royal Family who were never easy in-laws to get along with in the best of times; all while the main reason for her accepting this life was thousands of miles away for months at a time. I think it was somewhat realistic for Sarah to believe that she and Andrew would be allowed to live together during some parts of his assignments. She probably underestimated how difficult life as a Royal would be for her.
There you have probably hit the nail on the head. Her father was army, never away on long tours and able as an officer, to 'pop' home for most weekends. With the RF, I would imagine, it is like the club you want to belong to, without really knowing what is involved.

Many spouses get a shock when they realise what life as a servicemans spouse involves, Sarah never struck me as being that naive.
__________________
  #78  
Old 01-08-2007, 02:20 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk
Well since this thread is about Sarah and not about the wives and officers of other forces, I am not talking about them. So please don't assume what I say about her is applicable to others. Its apples and oranges. And while there are wives who are willing to toe the line so to speak, there are other wives, like Sarah who can't handle the distance and the separation. And their marriages pay the price as a result.So let's not act like she is the first wife of a Naval officer who couldn't handle the stress. Being aware of a situation and actually living a certain situation are two totally different things. And from what post of mine are you using to paint the picture of Sarah being thick?
I said "You seem to be painting a picture of someone who was incredibly thick". Once again you are missing the vital words out.

It is quite obvious to me, that if you are using the reasoning that she had no idea of what life might be like with her husband in the navy, that they would not be able to live together while he was a sea, you are suggesting IMO that she is thick. She knew Andrew was away for long periods when they were courting. They were able to live together when he was home, the same as any other navy wife.
There are wives and husbands who can't handle the long separations and the marriage disintegrates, these have tended IMO to be the couples that were married before one or other of them joined up.

You also have the ones who decide that life is not exciting enough and look for extra marital activities. Nothing to do with it being anyone elses fault.

Fine, she didn't like/couldn't cope with the lifestyle she was enjoying while her husband was away, her decision. The people who blame Phillip for everything is definitly buck passing.
__________________
  #79  
Old 01-08-2007, 02:21 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Plymouth, United States
Posts: 1,307
I'm sorry but how in love can you be and then go out and cheat on your husband. On more than one occasion. And very VERY publically? That, to me, does not smack of a woman in love. Maybe Andrew was in love, but I think Sarah was more in love w her priviledged lifestyle and status than I think she was with her husband. Otherwise, why do all the things (and there were MANY) that she did. Would a woman "in love" pull all that. And all that hogwash about being separated from her husband: Too Bad. That's what a military wife deals with. There are thousands of them that may miss their husbands, feel left behind and lonely, but they still keep their dignity and respect. I think Sarah was like a kid in a candy shop and she went way over the line. Then she got caught. As for her and Andrew still being married: maybe. And I only say that 'cuz I still believe all the cheating (by Sarah) would still be there but I doubt if Andrew would have done much about it. He probably wouldn't have done much about it as it were had Sarah been more discreet and if his family hadn't gotten involved. In love? I think Sarah is an opportunist and it suites her to still latch on to her ex royal spouse.
__________________
  #80  
Old 01-08-2007, 02:22 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon
There you have probably hit the nail on the head. Her father was army, never away on long tours and able as an officer, to 'pop' home for most weekends. With the RF, I would imagine, it is like the club you want to belong to, without really knowing what is involved.
Ah, I never thought about that! I guess I assumed that all the branches would be similar but of course the experiences in the Army and the Navy would be different. Thanks for clearing up a major point of confusion for me.
__________________

__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Closed Thread

Tags
fergie, sarah duchess of york


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Princess Madeleine, Current Events Part 5: January 2006 - January 2007 GrandDuchess Current Events Archive 170 01-15-2007 12:39 PM
Prince William current events 14: December 8, 2006 - January 15, 2007 Avalon Current Events Archive 201 01-15-2007 12:38 PM
Kate Middleton current events 15: December 16, 2006 - January 5, 2007 Avalon Current Events Archive 234 01-05-2007 11:09 AM
Charles and Camilla current events 13: July-September 2006 Warren Current Events Archive 201 09-11-2006 12:00 PM




Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]