The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #761  
Old 01-28-2014, 08:23 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,005
This will not be a popular suggestion...

...but as I understand it, the Queen has vast holdings of art which belong to her personally. I would assume that they are on the walls and pedestals of rooms which will never be seen publicly. Perhaps she could sell some of those things in order to finance repairs to BP and Windsor. It would be a graceful gesture on the part of HM. Ordinary people sell things when they need to raise money.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #762  
Old 01-28-2014, 08:48 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 1,452
The art in the royal collection is not owned by her majesty personally. It is owned by the state just like BP, Windsor and the Crown Jewels. The money from opening the palaces and the various palace gift stores goes into the maintenance of the royal collection.

The maintenance problems of the palace isn't unique to the BRF. The parliament building is London is in bad shape also. In the Us, the national park services has a several years of maintenance problems for its parks, monuments and memorials.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #763  
Old 01-28-2014, 08:59 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladongas View Post
...but as I understand it, the Queen has vast holdings of art which belong to her personally. I would assume that they are on the walls and pedestals of rooms which will never be seen publicly. Perhaps she could sell some of those things in order to finance repairs to BP and Windsor. It would be a graceful gesture on the part of HM. Ordinary people sell things when they need to raise money.

The Queen could sell things she owns as a private citizen to fund repairs, if needed on her private property, but not to fund the state owned property or it sets an awful example - who next has to sell privately owned possessions to fund publicly owned property? Do we suggest that The Duke of Westminster sell his private property to fund the repairs to Westminster Palace?

The majority of the art works that The Queen 'owns' is actually part of the royal collection and thus belongs to the state and so she can't sell it. That is the same with gifts that she and the rest of the family are given - over a certain value it belongs to the royal collection and thus can't be sold either.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #764  
Old 01-28-2014, 09:09 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,537
It is all nonsense. "The staff ate free", oh how shocking. People being fed that work for less than they would in the private sector. One of the complaints. Look The "Royal Family" want for nothing. They work at nothing of much importance, some do more than others. If those Palaces belong to the people they should have access to them. It is a give and take situation. She lives for free forever, basically so do her children and grandchildren, to some extent. She pay from her purse. Where did she get that purse? She inherited a great deal of it. No one is jealous. They look at the poor pensioner who worked his butt off and see people in palaces who need more.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #765  
Old 01-28-2014, 09:35 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,379
While I respect your opinion, I often wonder why, given as you have such disdain for royals in general, you bother to spend your time on a forum dedicated to discussing them.

The BRF, regardless of the wage they pay, is under no obligation to feed its staff. Nor are they required to provide housing and what not. Nor should they be expected to sell off their privately owned property - however ill fully gained you might consider it to be - in order to finance repairs of state owned buildings.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #766  
Old 01-28-2014, 09:41 PM
Royal_Royal's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: City, Denmark
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
It is all nonsense. "The staff ate free", oh how shocking. People being fed that work for less than they would in the private sector. One of the complaints. Look The "Royal Family" want for nothing. They work at nothing of much importance, some do more than others. If those Palaces belong to the people they should have access to them. It is a give and take situation. She lives for free forever, basically so do her children and grandchildren, to some extent. She pay from her purse. Where did she get that purse? She inherited a great deal of it. No one is jealous. They look at the poor pensioner who worked his butt off and see people in palaces who need more.
Before you start to complain about how the British Royal Family acquired their properties, Countess, you should remember that the land where you and all the other americans are living now was conquered by the shedding of amerindian blood.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #767  
Old 01-28-2014, 09:50 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,379
Really folks?!

Let's stay on topic (i.e which has noting to do with The American Indians).

Any and all additional off topic posts will be deleted without notice.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #768  
Old 01-28-2014, 09:51 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 1,452
The staff doesn't get free housing. They pay a portion of their salary. A cleaner or footman don't have a large salary and could not afford to live in central London without a subsidized housing benefit.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #769  
Old 01-28-2014, 10:41 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Cincinnati, United States
Posts: 100
I suppose the British tax payers will be willing to pay for repairs on Buck House if one of the ceilings were to fall down and seriously hurt the Queen or someone else. This is all so foolish, I think. If repairs are needed, no matter how much it costs, the repairs should be done and done NOW because the problem will only get worse and cost more as the years go by.

Back in the early 50s the White House had to be totally gutted and rebuilt while President Truman and family lived across the street. I haven't read that anyone complained because the repairs were necessary and if they had not been made the House would be unlivable now. Buckingham Palace is far older than our White House. Just do the repairs and have done with it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #770  
Old 01-28-2014, 11:40 PM
Victorian-Dandy's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: York, United Kingdom
Posts: 83
Unfortunately I can see the cash shortfall and the need for major repair work on the royal palaces being used by the various political parties to bash each other over the head with instead of working together to solve a potentially disastrous situation because the longer it drags on the less likely it will be feasible to repair the older places.

Personally the thought of them closing down BP or any of the other royal residences permanently or worst still selling them off to the highest bidder horrifies me but then I'm a sucker for the BRF, history and architecture.
Reply With Quote
  #771  
Old 01-29-2014, 04:40 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
The art in the royal collection is not owned by her majesty personally. It is owned by the state just like BP, Windsor and the Crown Jewels. The money from opening the palaces and the various palace gift stores goes into the maintenance of the royal collection.

The maintenance problems of the palace isn't unique to the BRF. The parliament building is London is in bad shape also. In the Us, the national park services has a several years of maintenance problems for its parks, monuments and memorials.
Well, yes, of course I understand that the "royal collection" belongs to the state. But HM also has a large collection of art which belongs to her exclusively. Here's just one article delineating it:

[I]Just How Rich Are Queen Elizabeth And Her Family? - Forbes

Queen Elizabeth, 85, has an estimated personal net worth of $500 million that comes from property holdings including Balmoral Castle in the Scottish Highlands, stud farms, a fruit farm and marine land throughout the U.K.; extensive art and fine jewelry; and one of the world’s largest stamp collections built by her grandfather.[/

That art has gone unseen by the outside world for decades, perhaps centuries, and it might be a noble gesture on the part of the Queen to 'chip in' to pay for restoring BP and Windsor.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #772  
Old 01-29-2014, 05:03 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,718
This is still mixing up her personal holdings and her holdings as The Queen/Duke of Lancaster. The 'marine land' is due to being Duke of Lancaster.

What art is privately owned is also hard to delineate - e.g. art works that were commissioned by her ancestors, who paid for them to be completed - are they still personal property or are they part of the heritage of the nation and not her personal property e.g. Charles I commissioned a lot of artwork - does she own that personally? What about the art works etc commissioned by George IV? The problem is where the money came from that was used which can argue that all the art work and jewellery are actually not hers personally.

That 500 million pound figure is disputed by a number of people for the simple reason that it isn't clear who actually owns a lot of the stuff.

Why she should have to pay for the maintenance of state owned property is beyond me?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #773  
Old 01-29-2014, 05:54 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladongas View Post
That art has gone unseen by the outside world for decades, perhaps centuries, and it might be a noble gesture on the part of the Queen to 'chip in' to pay for restoring BP and Windsor.
Question. Say you rent a house and one day you discover that there's a leak in the roof. This isn't because of anything you've done, but simply that the roof is old and needs to be replaced. Who's responsible for paying for the new roof, you or your landlord? The renter or the property owner?

The Queen and her family, for all intensive purposes, are the renters in this situation. Yes, they may be far wealthier than the average renter, and the financial situation may be somewhat different, but when it comes down to it places like BP are not owned by the BRF. So why should they be expected to spend their personal money on repairing these buildings that are owned by the state?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #774  
Old 01-29-2014, 07:20 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
Question. Say you rent a house and one day you discover that there's a leak in the roof. This isn't because of anything you've done, but simply that the roof is old and needs to be replaced. Who's responsible for paying for the new roof, you or your landlord? The renter or the property owner?

The Queen and her family, for all intensive purposes, are the renters in this situation. Yes, they may be far wealthier than the average renter, and the financial situation may be somewhat different, but when it comes down to it places like BP are not owned by the BRF. So why should they be expected to spend their personal money on repairing these buildings that are owned by the state?
The buildings in which the BRF have been privileged to live in for centuries, are not, for all intents and purposes, rental properties. No other family will be permitted to live there. The BRF are stewards of these properties and it doesn't seem unreasonable for them to make a magnificent contribution toward their upkeep.

Anyone who has ever been a renter knows that sometimes you do maintenance on that rental, even though a landlord should really be doing it. But you are the one living there, getting the benefit of whatever maintenance you do. For the BRF to put their own money into BP and Windsor is the equivalent of the average renter putting a coat of paint on the cottage. (And when that renter paints the cottage he has no assurance that he will be able to live there past the end of the lease. The Queen's family will still be able to enjoy that new roof and paint job into the far, far future.)

Right now, the Queen is very popular. She would be even more popular if she put some of her considerable wealth into maintaining the family "cottages." And it would assure that the next king would not have to go hat in hand to get money to make those repairs.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #775  
Old 01-29-2014, 08:54 AM
Elenath's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nuth, Netherlands
Posts: 337
It sets a precedent though and I’m not sure if that’s such a good idea. The British people have a pretty good deal with their RF and they don’t even know it. The DRF doesn’t bring in money, they just cost money. And most people here are fine with that. We accept that the upkeep of the palaces is/should be paid by the government using public funds.

Now.. I’m not an expert when it comes to the workings of the BRF, but if the British government gets the profits of the Crown Estates, which technically still belong to the BRF (AKA The Queen), and have to pay for the Queens expenses and the upkeep of the palaces in return that seems like a bloody good deal to me and they really shouldn’t whine. Especially since the profits are a lot higher than the expenses and the Queens expenses haven’t gone up since 1997.

An alternative would be for the BRF to keep the profits and they would have to pay for everything themselves. But I suppose the British government won’t like that either. They’ve gotten used to that nice little extra income.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #776  
Old 01-29-2014, 09:58 AM
Royal_Royal's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: City, Denmark
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladongas View Post
The buildings in which the BRF have been privileged to live in for centuries, are not, for all intents and purposes, rental properties. No other family will be permitted to live there. The BRF are stewards of these properties and it doesn't seem unreasonable for them to make a magnificent contribution toward their upkeep.

Do you think Mr. Obama should pay for repairs at the White House? Or maybe the current President and the former living Presidents should pay, because all of them had the privilege to live there.

I can't see even a single reason for The Queen having to pay the repairs with her personal money.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #777  
Old 01-29-2014, 10:06 AM
Victorian-Dandy's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: York, United Kingdom
Posts: 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elenath View Post
...An alternative would be for the BRF to keep the profits and they would have to pay for everything themselves. But I suppose the British government won’t like that either. They’ve gotten used to that nice little extra income.
Exactly.

There is no way our government regardless of the political party in charge is going to surrender all the profits from the Crown Estates so that the palaces are brought up to standard.

They cannot expect the upkeep of palaces etc to remain static and I honestly believe that the expenses are in need of an increase but due to the austerity measures the ConLib government are constantly pushing through parliament I cannot see that happening, though they will of course happily give themselves an increase in wage.
Reply With Quote
  #778  
Old 01-29-2014, 10:17 AM
marine2109's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 1,799
Quote:
The Queen is down to her last million due to courtiers' overspending
The Queen's net worth drops - hellomagazine.com
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #779  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:20 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Balmoral, United Kingdom
Posts: 285
The important thing here is that there is clearly a large amount of renovation work that needs doing urgently, and the longer it is postponed, the greater the damage and cost will be.

The way i see it, is that the Queen is given a Sovereign Support Grant of over £30m, and the repair work should be funded by this. I realise budgets are tight, but we see the same family travelling around by train costing £81 a mile, and flights all over the world costing tens or sometimes even hundreds of thousands of pounds so there is clearly a lot of money that could be diverted to the more important repairs.

Of course the Queen shouldn't have to fund this from her private wealth, but there is clearly a case for the Royal palaces generating a greater income which would help with the overtall costs involved.
__________________
Virtually Royalty
Reply With Quote
  #780  
Old 01-29-2014, 11:34 AM
Nice Nofret's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Posts: 414
AFAIK allready the Queens Father didn't want to move into BP; also the Queen would have prefered not to move into Bucke Pile, but was forced by the then Goverment to move into it.

I'm quite sure also Charles has no wish to move from Clarence House, where he is quite cosy - and if he is allowed will gladly stay there. All ideas that the RF should fund renovations of BuckP will add to that. You will end with BP not lived in anymore - and only used for State Functions and staff-living quaters.

I'm quite sure that these staff rooms arent very comfortable, nor do they sport any nice views or modern gadgets. Probably quite basic and old.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, civil list, finances


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
Costs and Finances of the Belgian Royal Family Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 69 12-04-2014 08:44 PM
Wealth and Finances of the Spanish Royal Family hrhcp Royal Family of Spain 111 10-12-2014 05:39 PM
Royals and Wealth, Costs and Finances kcc Royal Life and Lifestyle 384 09-28-2012 02:27 AM
Wealth of The German Royal/Princely Houses kcc Royal Families of Germany and Austria 12 12-30-2007 04:35 AM




Popular Tags
belgium 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 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 president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:39 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]