The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #281  
Old 11-12-2011, 08:13 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 353
This story seems odd to me. I would think the bodyguards would pay for their own meals etc. (And then expense them.) They are on the job.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 11-13-2011, 08:13 AM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 2,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by yvr girl
This story seems odd to me. I would think the bodyguards would pay for their own meals etc. (And then expense them.) They are on the job.
It seems odd to me too- I can't see any of her friends talking to the press like that either.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 12-03-2011, 04:47 AM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 2,034
I met someone tonight who had some very interesting stories to share :) He was a protection officer in the eighties, and he worked with Diana occasionally when she was in Scotland. (He said it was when she would visit Glamis Castle with the boys, which she did sometimes when the rest of the royal family was at Balmoral. Does that seem right? I don't know enough to know for sure)

He said he only met her a few times, as he was not a personal protection officer, but one who helped keep the estate secure. He said that the few times he did meet her, she was lovely- she brought them all food and drinks on cold nights. His great-grandfather was also a protection officer, and was one of George V's PPOs. This man had a thank you note to his great-grandfather signed by George V, which I thought was particularly interesting.

Very, very cool story. I enjoyed hearing about it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 02-20-2012, 05:31 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,236
Buckingham Palace intruder Michael Fagan 'given whisky by Queen's staff' - Telegraph

Michael Fagan, the man who broke into Buckingham Palace, has claimed that her staff gave him whisky after catching him in the Queen’s bedroom, saying that he looked like ‘he needed a drink’.

'I was high on mushrooms': Why the man behind the biggest royal security breach in a century broke into the Queen's bedroom | Mail Online

It was in 1982 when Michael Fagan scaled the 14ft wall of Buckingham Palace and wandered into the Queen's bedroom while she was sleeping.

And now, as the Queen celebrates her Diamond Jubilee, Mr Fagan has spoken of that incredible night for the first time in a number of years.

Michael Fagan: 'Her nightie was one of those Liberty prints, down to her knees' - Profiles - People - The Independent

The man who, 30 years ago, climbed a drainpipe and broke into Buckingham Palace, not once but twice, recalls the moment he came face to face with the Queen in her bedroom. Emily Dugan meets Michael Fagan
__________________
TRF rules and FAQ
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:19 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
Princesses Beatrice & Eugenie officially stripped of Royal Security

The whole world now knows that Beatrice & Eugenie are no longer protected 24/7 as they once were in a cost cutting measure to reduce spending for royal security. Many British papers have reported that Prince Andrew will shell out nearly $500,000 a year from his private funds to protect his daughters. My question is....Unlike Prince Charles who has steady income from his lucrative Duchy of Cornwall estate, how can Prince Andrew afford this? He gets an allowance/annuity of $249,000 a year from The Queen to carry out royal engagements. When he divorced Sarah Ferguson, it was The Queen who paid the divorce settlement, not him. What wealth does he have of his own to pay such large salaries out of pocket... not including the additional cost of hotels, meals, airfare etc when the Princesses travel?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 10-04-2012, 03:49 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 744
Andrew sold Sunninghill for around 12 million pounds a couple of years ago plus both girls have trusts and Beatrice has a job maybe they are chipping in too. Not too sure how much it will cost Beatrice lives at St James so she doesn't need protection 24/7 and Eugenie is at home at Royal Lodge if it's only for when they go out it shouldn't be that much for official events the Queen will cover them. Princess Anne's kids don't have bodyguards and the do fine so really there is no need for Beatrice or Eugenie too. Princess Margarets children have also managed fine without protection.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 10-04-2012, 04:48 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
Well according to the newspaper The Daily Mail & others, he's hired ex royal protection officers to guard them 24/7. And the ownership of Sunninghill is also in question as the house was built by The Queen for use by the former Duke & Duchess of York. So whether Andrew got any of that $12 million is hard to say.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 10-04-2012, 05:32 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,491
Sunninghill was given to Andrew and Sarah as a wedding present by the Queen so when it was sold Andrew did get the money.

He also has a trust fund from at least his grandmother if not also his mother.

Beatrice hasn't started work - yet. She starts next week.

Eugenie is now sharing Beatrice's apartment at St James.

This issue with that is that they can only stay in a royal residence as long as they do royal duties or they will have to start paying commercial rent for the apartment - that was why Diana had to return to work instead of retiring as she announced - that she would have to leave KP if she didn't do public work and why the Michael's of Kent have now started paying commercial rent for their apartment.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 10-04-2012, 01:46 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
Princess Anne's kids never had protection and so were Princess Margaret's. I dont understand why do these Yorks see themselves as such high profile royals..when it is pretty clear that they are not going to have any active royal role in future.Now dont start all this "Fifth in line to the throne" song again..Thats hardly gonna make a difference..On one hand their mother exploits them globe-trotting for her tell-all misadventures, proclaiming herself the best mother in the world..while on the other hand The Queen (in name of Prince Andrew..anyone with a bit of common sense makes this out) keeps footing their security bills as they go to these celebrity parties and pubs..I am not saying they should stop these..But they should accept the inevitability and just get their own careers as soon as possible and settle down quietly..The "HRH Princess" thing cant be altered as per the LP of KG V..But if they quietly settle down in their careers it will automatically die down..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 10-04-2012, 02:05 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
Princess Anne's kids never had protection and so were Princess Margaret's. I dont understand why do these Yorks see themselves as such high profile royals..
Princess Anne's children have no titles and have never been in the limelight except their own weddings. They are high profile, they have titles and they can be a potential target for anything or anyone. If Andrew can afford to protect his daughters, I don't see why he shouldn't. Wouldn't everyone love to do that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
The Queen (in name of Prince Andrew..anyone with a bit of common sense makes this out) keeps footing their security bills as they go to these celebrity parties and pubs..I am not saying they should stop these..
So what if Andrew's money comes from his mother? Most of the royals are funded by the Queen or inheritance they have received from deceased relatives. Money is money no matter where it comes from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish View Post
But they should accept the inevitability and just get their own careers as soon as possible and settle down quietly..The "HRH Princess" thing cant be altered as per the LP of KG V..
Why should they give up something they have had from birth? They both look likely to have normal careers, why can't they use their notoriety for good and bring attention to the causes that are close to their hearts, I think that's a great thing.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 10-04-2012, 02:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
What has this discussion to do with the Diamond Jubilee? Shouldn't matters related to the Duke of Yorks daughters to moved to the Duke of York sub forum?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 10-04-2012, 02:57 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Princess Anne's children have no titles and have never been in the limelight except their own weddings.
Why should they give up something they have had from birth? They both look likely to have normal careers, why can't they use their notoriety for good and bring attention to the causes that are close to their hearts, I think that's a great thing.
That is the entire point here..people want a more downsized monarchy and Charles is planning to shape things as per that..So they are not required to do something good, on public funding, using their image..I want them to settle down like Princess Anne's children, in their own careers quietly.. Its as simple as that..All the paparazzi and fuss will slowly die down in a few months once they start their normal jobs..
And by the way I will be happiest if British are ok with a dozen full-time working royals..You will be able to tell me actually..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 10-04-2012, 03:13 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
What has this discussion to do with the Diamond Jubilee? Shouldn't matters related to the Duke of Yorks daughters to moved to the Duke of York sub forum?
Totally agree..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 10-04-2012, 04:49 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by vkrish

That is the entire point here..people want a more downsized monarchy and Charles is planning to shape things as per that..So they are not required to do something good, on public funding, using their image..I want them to settle down like Princess Anne's children, in their own careers quietly.. Its as simple as that..All the paparazzi and fuss will slowly die down in a few months once they start their normal jobs..
And by the way I will be happiest if British are ok with a dozen full-time working royals..You will be able to tell me actually..
Neither Charles nor the people have ever spoken the words 'I want a downsized monarchy'. It is all rumour and assumption. Zara and Peter have never been royal, they have never truly experienced life in the public eye. Beatrice and Eugenie have, it makes them different. They aren't going to loose their HRHs, they can put them to good use.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 10-04-2012, 05:23 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
There are a lot of things Charles doesn't speak about openly. All I'm saying is sooner or later especially in William's reign they'll need Princesses Beatrice & Eugenie. The Gloucester's & Kent's will be dead more than likely, if not to old including Andrew, Anne & Edward. I believe the future lies with William, Kate, Harry & their children including Princesses Beatrice & Eugenie as working royals. Many charities & organizations will be effected by this slimmed down royal family. Even Princess Anne complains about not having enough hours in the day to see & visit her many charities. Like I said earlier, I don't see any royal roles for Beatrice & Eugenie in Charles's reign, but I am very sure they'll be needed in William's.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 10-04-2012, 05:24 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Princess Anne's children have no titles and have never been in the limelight except their own weddings.

I agree with this comment in relation to Peter but disagree that Zara has never been in the limelight.

You are better placed than I am to comment on the situation in the UK but from this end of the world she seems to have as much of a public profile as the York girls.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 10-04-2012, 06:49 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,491
I don't think there will be a role for the York girls in The Firm and charities are going to have to cope without royal patronages.

Some people seem to be under the impression that Charles is going to cut off all the working royals except for himself, Camilla, William, Kate, Harry and Harry's wife when he becomes King but that has never been what has been even intimated. All that has been implied is 'no more cousins'.

Looking at the numbers and ages:

Currently we have as working royals:

The Queen - aged 86
Philip - aged 91
Charles - aged 63 (64 next month)
Camilla - aged 65
William - aged 30
Kate - aged 30
Harry - aged 28
Andrew - aged 52
Edward - aged 48
Sophie - aged 47
Anne - aged 62
Richard - aged 68
Birgitte - aged 66
Edward - aged 76 (77 next week)
Alexandra - aged 75 (76 at Christmas)

15 working royals

I haven't included the Michael's of Kent because like Beatrice and Eugenie they only really appear at the very big events and the Duchess of Kent doesn't even make all of them.

Now add 20 years to those ages and we have:

Charles - aged 83 (84 next month)
Camilla - aged 85
William - aged 50
Kate - aged 50
Harry - aged 48
Harry's wife - ????
Andrew - aged 72
Edward - aged 68
Sophie - aged 67
Anne - aged 82
Richard - aged 88
Birgitte - aged 86
William and Kate - children (2) in late teens
Harry and ???? - children (2) in early teens

12 working royals (maybe 10 with the Gloucesters having retired although retirement isn't a real option for royals) - not that big a drop in numbers over a 20 year period is it? 15 - down to 10 to 12

Add another 20 years

William - aged 70
Kate - aged 70
Harry - aged 68
Harry's wife - ????
Andrew - aged 92
Edward - aged 88
Sophie - aged 87
William and Kate's 2 children and spouses in their mid - 30s

And now we are still at about 10 - 11 - so over 40 years we still haven't dropped the royal workforce all that much and the children of the second child onwards haven't had to take on royal duties at all (like Princess Margaret's children). When you actually look at the figures like that it is clear that there is no role for Beatrice and Eugenie and in time for Harry's children either. Those people will have the chance for real jobs and real careers rather than the fake life of a royal - making small talk with people they will never see again and opening this and that, making mundane speeches which really say nothing much etc etc.

Charles is on the right track with reducing the size of the royal family particularly when you look at the situation in 40 years time when there will still probably be 10 - 11 or so working royals with a new generation on the way and Andrew, Edward and Sophie slowing down during the reign of their nephew.

The reason why the royal workforce is as large as it is is because when The Queen became Queen there were very few adult royals to help her - her mother, her husband, her sister (aged 21), one uncle and two aunts (total 7) so she asked her cousins to help her and so the Gloucesters and Kents - stepped up to the plate. However The Queen then had 4 children with spouses bloating the royal workforce for a time but also meaning that Margaret's children - the first cousins of the next king - weren't going to be needed any more than the first cousins of the 2nd in line to the throne will be needed either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 10-05-2012, 01:33 PM
LadyGabrielle's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: kapaa, United States
Posts: 1,148
Well that was indeed very interesting and enlightening iluvbertie. Although imagining some of these people at those ages is quite difficult, I can see your point. Thanks for the explanation.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 10-05-2012, 03:14 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: City on islands, Sweden
Posts: 1,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaB View Post
I agree with this comment in relation to Peter but disagree that Zara has never been in the limelight.
I would say that the fact that Zara have been in the limelight as much as she has been have more to do with her career as an equestrian, not so much just because she is the granddaughter of queen Elizabeth.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 10-05-2012, 03:29 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meraude View Post
I would say that the fact that Zara have been in the limelight as much as she has been have more to do with her career as an equestrian, not so much just because she is the granddaughter of queen Elizabeth.
I agree to some extent but how many other equestrians have the profile Zara does?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, gloucester, kent, kidnapping, minor hrh, royal security, security, terrorism


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
Security Aspects Harold Royal Life and Lifestyle 4 10-18-2007 07:36 AM
The Royal Family's Security Helen88 Royal House of Sweden 5 02-11-2005 07:59 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:34 AM.

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]