Royal Wealth and Finances 1: Ending 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

How do you reckon scrapping the annual christmas present would do down with the staff instead? :)
 
BBC News - Queen cancels Christmas party for her staff

Queen cancels Christmas party for her staff

Staff at Buckingham Palace are thought to be disappointed by the cancellation
The Queen has scrapped a Christmas party for her staff because of the "difficult financial circumstances" facing the nation.
Every two years the Queen pays for a celebration at Buckingham Palace for the 600 members of the Royal Household.
But a spokesman said: "The Queen is acutely aware of the difficult economic circumstances facing the country.
"It was decided it was appropriate for the Royal Household to show restraint and not hold the party this year."
The Sun newspaper claimed the party would have been held on 13 December and would have cost around £50,000.
At previous Christmas parties the Queen, Prince Philip and other members of the Royal Family have mixed with staff and even hit the dancefloor.
 
How do you reckon scrapping the annual christmas present would do down with the staff instead? :)

I don't think she should scrap anything to do with her and her staff, both things must mean a lot to her staff.
There must have been other things she could have cut.
 
I don't think she should scrap anything to do with her and her staff, both things must mean a lot to her staff.
There must have been other things she could have cut.

At a time of national austerity, we all (including royal servants) have to make cuts, and the christmas party is an obvious one. It has been well reported that the government has asked most departments to make cuts of about 25% in their budgets. I have no doubt HM runs a tight ship, and has been paring back on the expenditure of the royal household.
 
Yes we all have to cut back, and the government is cutting back the country to cover it's mistakes but I doubt the MP's themselves are making any cut backs.
The Queen is making them because she either has to or is being made to, but The Christmas Party and/or presents isn't an obvious choice, this affects her staff, and probably how they view her.
There are better ways of "cutting back" and not affecting the staff.
 
I am sure the staff while disappointed are grateful to have jobs while so many do not.

Its a Christmas party, and while it certainly is fun, a great morale booster and a way to celebrate the holiday and thank the staff at the end of the day its just that...a party.
 
I am sure the staff while disappointed are grateful to have jobs while so many do not.

Its a Christmas party, and while it certainly is fun, a great morale booster and a way to celebrate the holiday and thank the staff at the end of the day its just that...a party.


The Queen is making them because she either has to or is being made to, but The Christmas Party and/or presents isn't an obvious choice, this affects her staff, and probably how they view her.
There are better ways of "cutting back" and not affecting the staff.

Thats right, its just a party, and one would hope that most employees would not be changing their opinion of HM just because of this!

There are better ways of "cutting back" and not affecting the staff.

Any suggestions?
 
Exactly!

I have been employed by companies that as a result of changing finances, that either scaled down or cut the Christmas party altogether. And while it was sad (for one company it was great fun) we realized how much that type of party cost. And honestly, at the end of the day we would all rather have a job and benefits than a fun party. At one of my companies (during the 90's when the economy was FANTASTIC) all employees were given $150 (about 100 to 150 employees locally), a copy of It's a Wonderful Life (VHS no less!) AND given a Christmas party at a very nice hotel.

Sometimes as an adult (or the leader of an organization, company, etc.) you have to make the hard decisions that are best for the company and its employees.
 
Last edited:
Thats right, its just a party, and one would hope that most employees would not be changing their opinion of HM just because of this!


Any suggestions?

One would hope, but I don't even work for her and I think she's done something very wrong and cruel.
I have no suggestions, due to the fact that I do not know the inner workings of the royal household.
But i'm pretty sure there is something else, other than the annual christmas party, that would have helped her "scale down".
A lot of people pointed out that HM has a lot of money she could use, when she asked for a heating allowance from the government. I myself wasn't one of them, but i'm starting to alter my opinion of this royal household.
 
Are we being a bit dramatic?

By canceling an optional Christmas party which is strictly social and nature is being wrong and cruel? Its a party. She (or her ministers) are not cutting jobs, not cutting hours and certainly not cutting benefits. Which in this day and age, is something that is certainly being done around the world as many business strive to keep their costs in control. A party.

Yet you are okay with the Queen's ministers (cause I don't believe it was her) asking for money from a program aimed at helping the poor to heat Buckingham Palace?

I am sorry, that doesn't make sense. And this is going to change your opinion of the Royal Household?
 
One would hope, but I don't even work for her and I think she's done something very wrong and cruel.
I have no suggestions, due to the fact that I do not know the inner workings of the royal household.
But i'm pretty sure there is something else, other than the annual christmas party, that would have helped her "scale down".
A lot of people pointed out that HM has a lot of money she could use, when she asked for a heating allowance from the government. I myself wasn't one of them, but i'm starting to alter my opinion of this royal household.

As Zonk has suggested, we just have to keep things in perspective - it is, after all, just a party. Assuming it cost the £50k that has been touted, just as an example, she could have either let go of a couple of people and had the party for the others, or she could have kept the home fires burning for everybody. In any case, as per the BBC story, this party was only held every 2 years, so I am sure it can be reinstated in better times. Lets not forget, HM has not had a pay rise in 20 years (since 1990), so she must be running a pretty tight ship now to make the books balance.

Most of us are not familiar with the inner workings of the royal household to be able to make informed suggestions of where further savings could be made. Personally, I have read enough over the years that makes me think that HM probably runs a very tight ship, and most extraneous costs have been taken out by now. We have read how a lot of the food and wine for BP now comes from Tesco instead of Fortnum & Mason as was traitionally the case. I also remember reading somewhere not that long ago that in recent years, a lot of the receptions at BP for various funbctions are now timed so that only tea or drinks with canapes can be served instead of lunch / dinner, with a view to cutting costs.
 
It is entertaining to read the discussion about the cancelled Christmas party. Corporate parties, bonuses and other perquisites for employees are usually the first victims of any austerity plan. If employees want to have a party, they can fund one.
All this token solidarity with pensioners appears disingenuous to me. Her Majesty will never know the hardships of pensioners, who worked as hard as her their whole lives.
 
I am sorry, that doesn't make sense. And this is going to change your opinion of the Royal Household?

Not this particular event, but my mind has been altering for a while, I used to be a strong Monarchist, as my posts will reflect, but it's been altering over the past few weeks.
This is my opinion, and if it's deemed dramatic then okay. But I think cancelling a christmas party, one that has happened every year presumably? Whether it was optional or not is the wrong thing to do. Cruel maybe the wrong word, but I can't seem to think of another one.
This party isn't the same as the usual corporate event, it's a party with the Queen.

I can certainly say that HM runs a tight ship, in terms of money saving costs etc, I didn't know some of the things you pointed out Muriel so thank you. However I still think that there would have been a better way to save, then scrapping something that connected her to her staff.

But anyway, we can argue over and over again. Let's leave it there. :)
 
We can agree to disagree as you say.

I am sure there a lot of things that have been trimmed that the public is not aware of. As Muriel pointed out, food is now purchased at a less expensive outlet. As evidenced by the heat scenario I believe that the temperature has been dropped so that saves money as well. The canceling of the Christmas party is probably only one of many things that have been cut back. Its not like the days of Edward VIII when he cut the staff (and recycled soap) at the Palaces, while increasing his expenditures for Mrs. Simpson.

As another point, a lot of people might happy that the Christmas party is canceled. The Christmas season is typically tight socially (mine is and I am not half as social as the royals and the upper crust crowd), and sometimes you feel the pressure that you HAVE to attend the work event. And even then, you are on your p's and q's about what you can and cannot say. It might not be so bad to just hang out with your friends without the pressure.
 
All this token solidarity with pensioners appears disingenuous to me. Her Majesty will never know the hardships of pensioners, who worked as hard as her their whole lives.

Am I missing this point about solidarity with pensioners? Cd you pl explain?
 
I stand corrected.
But Her Majesty was determined to show solidarity with a nation struggling with hardship and called it off after consulting senior courtiers.
Let me re-rephrase. All this token solidarity with the struggling nation appears disingenuous to me. Her Majesty as well as the royal family will never know the hardships of working people, who work as hard as them.
 
I stand corrected.

Let me re-rephrase. All this token solidarity with the struggling nation appears disingenuous to me. Her Majesty as well as the royal family will never know the hardships of working people, who work as hard as her.

I agree the royals will never fully truely feel the way an underpriviliged individual may do, as they have not experienced those situations first hand. However, IMO, excessive or non-essential spending by them at a time of national austerity is not going to go down well with most subjects, irrespective of their financial position. It is exactly this feeling that, in my view, HM is sensitively dealing with.
 
Talking about not winning no matter what you do.

HM doesn't throw a Christmas party (that she pays for) because she doesn't want to seem over the top and ostenatious to the thousands (no millions) of Britons and people around the world who are experiencing economic hardship. And she is raked over the coals.

I wonder if the same people would be so disappointed in HM if she threw this party that costs about 80K. Would we get the comments that the money could have been better spent feeding the poor?

No HM doesn't experience the trials and tribulations like the common pensioner (nor do a lot of middle class people by the way either) and still her motives are being questioned.

Just goes to show you. You can't please everyone.
 
Last edited:
:previous:
You are quite right. In our part of the world, employers do such things quietly without grand announcements that reek hypocrisy. It may not be so democratic, but it is less disingenuous.

Queen Elizabeth II Cancels Staff Christmas Party, Citing Economy
Speaking from my Asian perspective, I tend to think that British courtiers are clumsy in dealing with such "hard-to-please-anyone issues". It is truly sad that it is Her Majesty, but not her advisers, who makes bad headlines. The comments under the article are interesting.
 
I stand corrected.

Let me re-rephrase. All this token solidarity with the struggling nation appears disingenuous to me. Her Majesty as well as the royal family will never know the hardships of working people, who work as hard as her.

I am willing to bet that HM is saddened to have to cut this Christmas celebration as much as her loyal staff is. To be honest, I think the reasoning why its being canceled is understandable by all.

The Queen has never come across to me as being an extravagant person. She reminds me so much of my late mother who also grew up in the Depression era. With rationing during wartime on both sides of the pond, everyone was expected to make sacrifices. I grew up with the adage "Waste not, want not" and my mother would even save aluminum foil to reuse up till she died in 98. HM uses Tupperware, actually likes doing the washing up from picnics and once told Charles to go find a dog lead he'd lost because "Dog leads cost money you know".

Its disappointing I'm sure that the party had to be canceled but like so many of us, there are things we're doing without these days.
 
Unfortunately I think HM is being ill advised on this, the party should go on.
Now I understand both sides, if it was public funds then possibly cancel especially on the heels of asking for assistance with heating expenses. Don't ask for money for heat and then throw a party.

But it was noted that private funds are used for this party. I can see that it would not appear right that the Queen is asking for heating money but spends her own on a party.
So HM is between the rock and the hard place, which way to go?

To me it boils down to why is she cutting back and what she's cutting.
If she want's to join hands in solidarity with the people then she should cut out one of her families personal expenses.
Tell any royals on the payroll no more trips unless you are working dang hard. No photo ops on ski slopes, etc.
Instead HM has been advised to cut a staff event.
The Christmas party isn't for the royals, it's for the staff. Yes those same working class poor HM's advisors are trying to show she's one with.
The household staff I've heard do not make exorbitant salaries look forward to this event. And it only happens every other year.
Part of the mystique of monarchy is the trappings of state, the palaces, the footman, etc. The household is key to what makes monarchy magic.
It's bad form to cut a Christmas party for the staff then have them pack your luggage for your jaunt to one of your estates.
 
Thanks much for the article, Al_bina! :flowers: Sometimes I wonder if the info - or the info's sources - we receive concerning the BRF's finances is/are trustworthy. Normally I don't believe anything I hear or read, in other words.;)
 
I mean really...are they not getting paid a wage for working?

You make it seem as if the Queen is cutting their salary and than having them pack a bag for her. Its a Christmas party. Not a salary. Its a nice gesture on behalf of the Queen. Its also worth noting that not every business is obligated nor gives a Christmas party for their employees.

I must say I have seen more posts criticizing the Queen about the canceling of the Christmas party as opposed to those who criticized her (or the ministers on her behalf) when they applied for heating aid for Buckingham Palace. Now I certainly don't think the Queen should have shared the blame for that last fiasco, but I think that those who had issues with the application of aid had more of a reason to be upset with the Queen than this. But that is just me.

Christmas Party vs. Aid which can assist the poor as opposed to BP.

ETA: And I believe that the Royal Household has cut down its budget as a result of these economic times and is more sensitive to public perception.
 
Last edited:
I am willing to bet that HM is saddened to have to cut this Christmas celebration as much as her loyal staff is. To be honest, I think the reasoning why its being canceled is understandable by all. ... [snipped]
I did hear the same justifications from Mr. Gorbachev in 1987-1989. However, the leaders did not alter their lifestyles much while asking usual people to be patient and wait for better times. Some fluid components in a setting can be different, but the ruling class is the more or less same everywhere. Thus, I am both skeptical and cynical in this respect. Once a certain perquisite disappears, it is unlikely to be brought back.
 
:previous: With all due respect, I don't think we should judge the Queen by other people action other than her own. I wouldn't compare her to Gorbachev, Clinton, any of the Bushes, Obama, or Beatrix of the Netherlands. She is her own woman.

From what I have read from her, while she is a woman of great wealth, she has never flaunted it. Nor do we know everything about the Queen. Contrast to the rest of her family, whose private life has been splashed ALL over the world. We don't know if the Queen gives Christmas bonuses to her employees or how much she donates.

In the US, politicans are required to release their tax returns. So every year we know if they are or not giving to charity. From what i understand, the Queen doesn't have to publicize this information, is that correct? So techinically she should could be as stingy as a kid with a new toy or a very giving woman? We just don't know.
 
:previous:
I am sorry, but ... Given the fact that we judge everything mostly through the lens of our personal experiences and ethos, I see little or no difference between members of the ruling class Her Majesty belongs to. As I have said above, some fluid components in a setting (such as culture, traditions, a geographical location, a current political situation within a particular country) can be different. Overall it is all the same.
That is all I wanted to say on this polarising topic.
 
:previous: With all due respect, I don't think we should judge the Queen by other people action other than her own. I wouldn't compare her to Gorbachev, Clinton, any of the Bushes, Obama, or Beatrix of the Netherlands. She is her own woman.

From what I have read from her, while she is a woman of great wealth, she has never flaunted it. Nor do we know everything about the Queen. Contrast to the rest of her family, whose private life has been splashed ALL over the world. We don't know if the Queen gives Christmas bonuses to her employees or how much she donates.

In the US, politicans are required to release their tax returns. So every year we know if they are or not giving to charity. From what i understand, the Queen doesn't have to publicize this information, is that correct? So techinically she should could be as stingy as a kid with a new toy or a very giving woman? We just don't know.

I completely support your view, Zonk. Its all very well to sit on our desks and pontificate on how HM should spend her money and how she should remunerate or what "benefits" HM should offer her employees, without realising the full story, or having all the facts to hand. It may make a nice headline for a tabloid, and offer a lot of interesting material to their readers, but thankfully this country is not headed by the Daily mAIL!
 
Yes we all have to cut back, and the government is cutting back the country to cover it's mistakes but I doubt the MP's themselves are making any cut backs.
The Queen is making them because she either has to or is being made to, but The Christmas Party and/or presents isn't an obvious choice, this affects her staff, and probably how they view her.
There are better ways of "cutting back" and not affecting the staff.

I don't think the cancellation is wrong or cruel. My firm did this 5 years ago and we've all adjusted and are glad we've been able to keep our jobs. Perhaps everyone will receive a gift instead...it would make sense to do that in any case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom