Royal Wealth and Finances 1: Ending 2022

[Opal]

I haven't heard anything about it either.

 

[wbenson]

Ministers will lay down the law on how the Queen spends her £38m | Mail Online

The Queen has been forced to give up her right to manage the royal finances in a secret deal that gives the Government the final say.

Queen tried to use state poverty fund to heat Buckingham Palace - Home News, UK - The Independent

The Queen asked ministers for a poverty handout to help heat her palaces but was rebuffed because they feared it would be a public relations disaster, documents disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act reveal.

Royal aides were told that the £60m worth of energy-saving grants were aimed at families on low incomes and if the money was given to Buckingham Palace instead of housing associations or hospitals it could lead to "adverse publicity" for the Queen and the Government.

Queen signs agreement giving government veto over spending - Telegraph

The Queen has signed an agreement which gives the government an effective veto over her spending, it has been disclosed.

In 2006, the Queen was persuaded by the Labour government to acknowledge a “financial memorandum” which officially ceded control to ministers.

Calls for a full review of Queen's accounts - Home News, UK - The Independent

The Queen's accounts must be opened up to a full review after secret papers revealed deals had been done behind closed doors to shore up the Royal Household's finances, campaigners said yesterday.

 

[yvr girl]

The Civil List has remained the same for a long time

I know it's 10 plus years. I bet there are no other government departments who have managed that kind of restraint.

 

[muriel]

I know it's 10 plus years. I bet there are no other government departments who have managed that kind of restraint.

Actually the Civil List payments are still at the same level as they were in 1990!

 

[Australian]

Queen tried to use state poverty fund to heat Buckingham Palace - Home News, UK - The Independent

The Queen asked ministers for a poverty handout to help heat her palaces but was rebuffed because they feared it would be a public relations disaster, documents disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act reveal.

Royal aides were told that the £60m worth of energy-saving grants were aimed at families on low incomes and if the money was given to Buckingham Palace instead of housing associations or hospitals it could lead to "adverse publicity" for the Queen and the Government.

That is absolutely disgraceful. That's all I can say. Shame!

 

[karla64]

It reported Queen made bid for poverty grant

Report: Queen made bid for poverty grant - TODAY People - The Royals - TODAYshow.com

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK...ce-And-Windsor-Castle/Article/201009415742369

 

[Lumutqueen]

That is absolutely disgraceful. That's all I can say. Shame!

Disgraceful on who's part?

The way they have announced this has really annoyed me because all they could say on the news this morning was that "if the Queen was given a poverty grant, there would be outrage" now they announce it, and what do they get?

 

[Iluvbertie]

If the Queen did ask for a 'poverty' grant then she should be ashamed of herself. She is one of the wealthiest women in the world and far from someone who should be getting a 'poverty' grant.

My respect for her has dropped markedly over this greedy grab for more money.

 

[wbenson]

There's a piece of information buried in this article that I found interesting:

A DCMS spokesman explained the reasons behind the request for funding by Buckingham Palace.

He said: "It was initially thought that the royal palaces as publicly maintained buildings might be eligible, but subsequent advice from the Treasury pointed out that the scheme was aimed at schemes serving public sector customers such as local authorities, social housing providers, hospitals, universities, and other public sector buildings such as schools, leisure centres and town halls."

If the grants were aimed at retrofitting facilities such as hospitals, universities, schools, and government administration buildings, it wasn't quite as outrageous for palace officials to suggest that Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle might qualify to receive some of the funds. I'm not sure where the term "poverty grant" comes from. I can't find any use of it to describe the Community Energy program that dates from before this story hit the papers.

It seems that the grants weren't appropriate for projects like what was being done at the royal residences—that's why the application was denied. That doesn't automatically make the application an act of malfeasance, greed, or contempt.

 

[Zonk]

Add to that this story is approximately 6 years old.

God forbid anyone report the facts correctly. Isn't it the Government's responsiblity to maintain government housing?

 

[Mermaid1962]

One would assume so.

God forbid anyone report the facts correctly. Isn't it the Government's responsiblity to maintain government housing?

The palaces are publicly owned buildings and as such should be paid for from public funds. If the Palace was asking for funding for Balmoral or Sandringham, I can see the outrage. As for the "poverty funding", that sounds a lot like republican spin to me.

If the grants were aimed at retrofitting facilities such as hospitals, universities, schools, and government administration buildings, it wasn't quite as outrageous for palace officials to suggest that Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle might qualify to receive some of the funds.
It seems that the grants weren't appropriate for projects like what was being done at the royal residences—that's why the application was denied.

 

[Zonk]

You know I have a feeling if all of the monarchies were done away in one fell swoop, and democracies were put in their places...you would still have the same problems, the same cries of elitism, the same calls of people feeling that their money is being wasted.

Nothing would change. I mean, the cost of utilities have increased. Its like your own personal budget. If you have a certain amount as your take home pay (i.e. also known as the budget) and heating, and insurance increases...you are going to be short at the end of the month. I don't know how it was in the UK but a couple of years ago in the State of Maryland, everyone's electric bill increased at least 25%. I would imagine that Buckingham Palace's bill increased as well.

Now if there is a choice between giving the money between other buildings and organizations that might be more giving, than that is certainly understandable but let's not cry for the Queen's head. But then dont complain when you do a visit of Buckingham Palace in the winter time and its freezing. Its cause they can't afford to keep the heat on all the time. In my old home I used to have oil heating....you better believe it that there were times that it wasn't on all the time.

 

[Australian]

Disgraceful on who's part?

Disgraceful on the part of the wealthy HM Queen Elizabeth II

 

[Lumutqueen]

Disgraceful on the part of the wealthy HM Queen Elizabeth II

Why is it "disgraceful"?
If she didn't have enough money to heat her homes, she has the right to ask for help. She wouldn't ask unless she absolutely needed it.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Especially since they aren't her private homes. The request was for official buildings, which I believe are supposed to be maintained by the Department of the Environment. There are stories about pieces falling off Buckingham Palace. I believe that Princess Anne was almost hit with something once. Does a nation really want their national hostess in a cold building with pieces falling off? I don't think so. The cost would be the same if the UK were a republic and had a presidential building.

Why is it "disgraceful"?
If she didn't have enough money to heat her homes, she has the right to ask for help. She wouldn't ask unless she absolutely needed it.

 

[wbenson]

Royal family's £96,000 bill for dusting chandeliers while £1.5m spent on non-urgent jobs | Mail Online

The Queen’s officials spent more than £1.5million of taxpayers’ money on cosmetic improvements to her palaces as other aides begged the Government for more cash.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Why is it "disgraceful"?
If she didn't have enough money to heat her homes, she has the right to ask for help. She wouldn't ask unless she absolutely needed it.

She is one of the wealthiest people in the world. She does have the money if she was to actually use her personal wealth to heat her homes. When I rented property it was up to me to decide how much I wanted to spend on heating and she is the same - she could spend her own money rather than ask for handouts from the public as she is worth billions personally.

 

[Australian]

She is one of the wealthiest people in the world. She does have the money if she was to actually use her personal wealth to heat her homes. When I rented property it was up to me to decide how much I wanted to spend on heating and she is the same - she could spend her own money rather than ask for handouts from the public as she is worth billions personally.

Exactly. So, I guess its official..... the Queen of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth is living in poverty now I guess.

The Queen claiming she needs a poverty handout is a slap in the face to people who actually need it.

 

[Lumutqueen]

But why should she use her own money to heat official buildings?

 

[muriel]

Royal family's £96,000 bill for dusting chandeliers while £1.5m spent on non-urgent jobs | Mail Online

The Queen’s officials spent more than £1.5million of taxpayers’ money on cosmetic improvements to her palaces as other aides begged the Government for more cash.

Just the usual DM drivel!

 

[Iluvbertie]

But why should she use her own money to heat official buildings?

Who pays for the heating in government housing now in Britain? Here it is the tenant or the taxpayer?

These are just high end public housing and only if the poor people who live in government housing because they are unemployed or refugees or disabled etc and thus qualify for government housing also have all their heating expense paid by the taxpayers should she even think about it.

She is an extremely wealthy woman and is seeking more taxpayer money to heat her home just because she is a tenant and not the owner.

Obviously from your question people in public housing in Britain have all their heating expenses paid for by the government whereas here they pay their own heating/cooling bills and just pay a nominal rent for the property and the government pays for the maintenance but not the heating/cooling/water etc.

 

[muriel]

Who pays for the heating in government housing now in Britain? Here it is the tenant or the taxpayer?

These are just high end public housing and only if the poor people who live in government housing because they are unemployed or refugees or disabled etc and thus qualify for government housing also have all their heating expense paid by the taxpayers should she even think about it.

She is an extremely wealthy woman and is seeking more taxpayer money to heat her home just because she is a tenant and not the owner.

Obviously from your question people in public housing in Britain have all their heating expenses paid for by the government whereas here they pay their own heating/cooling bills and just pay a nominal rent for the property and the government pays for the maintenance but not the heating/cooling/water etc.

Lets not forget that BP is a large building that houses a lot of offices, state rooms and other "public" areas. If necessary, I am sure HM would be happy to pay for the heating for her private quarters at BP. IMO, this would probably amount to less that 5% of the total square footage of BP, and therefore, not very material.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Lets not forget that BP is a large building that houses a lot of offices, state rooms and other "public" areas. If necessary, I am sure HM would be happy to pay for the heating for her private quarters at BP. IMO, this would probably amount to less that 5% of the total square footage of BP, and therefore, not very material.

As it is only open to the public for two months of the year it is a private home in which she is a tenant and therefore she is responsible for the costs of running it in my opinion.

But of course on here criticism of the Queen wanting more money when she is one of the wealthiest women in the world isn't allowed for the posters to whom she can do no wrong.

I had been a defender of her costs for many years but this sort of request when the country is in such an appalling financial state with thousands out of work and most others taking effective pay cuts but a woman worth billions wants more and people defend her.

She needs to learn her history - it was that sort of greed that lead to the French Revolution - the obvious greed of the royal family at the cost of the poor people who were getting less and less.

There is no defense for this. Just further evidence of the greed of the family.

Fortunately we don't have to pay anything for her and here in NSW we don't even have her representative living in a formal home any more - they live in their own home while Governor and only go to Government House for formal occasions - making that home available for the public on a lot more days and saving the people of NSW heaps of money.

 

[Australian]

Just visualise this in your mind. There is a single mother wearing rags for clothes. Then there is the Queen wearing her diamond tiara. The latter, wanting the money of the former.

As iluvbertie said, there is no defense for this.

 

[muriel]

As it is only open to the public for two months of the year it is a private home in which she is a tenant and therefore she is responsible for the costs of running it in my opinion.

But of course on here criticism of the Queen wanting more money when she is one of the wealthiest women in the world isn't allowed for the posters to whom she can do no wrong.

I had been a defender of her costs for many years but this sort of request when the country is in such an appalling financial state with thousands out of work and most others taking effective pay cuts but a woman worth billions wants more and people defend her.

She needs to learn her history - it was that sort of greed that lead to the French Revolution - the obvious greed of the royal family at the cost of the poor people who were getting less and less.

There is no defense for this. Just further evidence of the greed of the family.

Fortunately we don't have to pay anything for her and here in NSW we don't even have her representative living in a formal home any more - they live in their own home while Governor and only go to Government House for formal occasions - making that home available for the public on a lot more days and saving the people of NSW heaps of money.

Whilst BP may only be open for 2 months a year for fee paying visitors, the vast majority of its square footage is offices and state rooms, where it receives visitors (including state visitors, members of the public, charities, MPs etc) all year round.

I don't know many people who would compare the spending of HM with that of the Marie Antoinette and the French royal famaily at the time of the revolution. I respect your clearly republican sentiments, but IMO, but the argument you are espousing really does not appear very credible.

 

[Lumutqueen]

She needs to learn her history - it was that sort of greed that lead to the French Revolution - the obvious greed of the royal family at the cost of the poor people who were getting less and less.

To insuiate that Her Majesty does not know her history is bang out of order in my opinion.

Just visualise this in your mind. There is a single mother wearing rags for clothes. Then there is the Queen wearing her diamond tiara. The latter, wanting the money of the former.

As iluvbertie said, there is no defense for this.

Well seeing as Her Majesty never recieved this money and it was only made public out of pure spite, who is this harming exactly?
There are still those people who are struggling, and it is the government who is not giving them what they need, not the Queen.

 

[Russophile]

I don't think it's a matter of greed, I think it's a matter of people not coming up with some creative ways to solve the problem. Would be interesting to see Prince Charles take on this and perhaps he can push for alternative forms of energy.

 

[wbenson]

O glum all ye faithful: Royal party axed | The Sun |News|Royals

Faithful royal staff were devastated last night after the Queen axed the Buckingham Palace Christmas party in a cost-cutting drive.

Hundreds were looking forward to the lavish bash as it is the one time they can mingle with senior Royals.

But Her Majesty was determined to show solidarity with a nation struggling with hardship and called it off after consulting senior courtiers.

 

[muriel]

O glum all ye faithful: Royal party axed | The Sun |News|Royals

Faithful royal staff were devastated last night after the Queen axed the Buckingham Palace Christmas party in a cost-cutting drive.

Hundreds were looking forward to the lavish bash as it is the one time they can mingle with senior Royals.

But Her Majesty was determined to show solidarity with a nation struggling with hardship and called it off after consulting senior courtiers.

All sounds very sensible to me.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I'm sure there is something else Her Majesty could axe, rather than the one event when staff get to mix with royals. Rather cruel IMO.