The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 10-03-2013, 09:31 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 1,334
Rebecca is going to get mad at people ogling her Nick :)
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 10-04-2013, 10:06 AM
Duchess of Durham's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippyboo View Post
Rebecca is going to get mad at people ogling her Nick :)
Office romance?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 10-04-2013, 10:25 AM
julliette's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 2,131
^^ Apparently yes
Love story blooms at the palace | Adam Helliker | Columnists | Comment | Daily Express
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 10-04-2013, 10:37 AM
Duchess of Durham's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Durham, United States
Posts: 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by julliette View Post
Awww, how sweet. Thank you for confirming for me, Julliette.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 10-10-2013, 06:13 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: kingston, Canada
Posts: 47
Since no-one has posted the obvious, I guess someone should. Jesse Webb it is; she was papped with Kate and George at a rest-stop/MacDonalds on or about Sept. 9.

However, I have since read, in HELLO magazine--Canadian version--that Jesse is something of a part-time, stop-gap measure, and that the plan is to replace her with another nanny once the position becomes full-time.

With any luck, the story is true.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 10-10-2013, 07:01 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: kingston, Canada
Posts: 47
Today--Oct.10, Cdn time--I carried out my usual monthly check-in with The Guardian; I follow the old adage that it is wise to keep your friends close and your enemies closer--and ran across an article by Tanya Gold, rabid republican, in which she stated categorically that, and I quote--

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge now employ a butler, a valet, and a nanny. End of quote.

Tanya somehow managed to overlook Antonella.

My question is, is there any truth to her assertion? I do hope so; IMO, the Duke is about as high maintenance as they come, and with a baby, a huge new apartment, another house to decorate, Anmer Hall, up-coming events, God knows the Duchess could use the help.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 10-10-2013, 07:05 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,597
Doin't know about a butler, but William has an orderly - and this is mentioned in detail on this thread here Staff of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. And they have a p/t nanny helping them out.

Did Tanya say whether this was a good thing or a bad thing? Is she objecting to people being mployed and paid?
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 10-10-2013, 07:09 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 1,334
We have seen the housekeeper Antonella, Nanny Jessie and the Fijian orderly guy. That's all of the domestic staff that I know of. The papers are pretty good at trolling the royal household job vacancies. So if they advertised for a butler and valet , it would have probably been picked up.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 10-10-2013, 07:11 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,597
They obviously have cleaning staff, managed by Antonella - she cant clean 20 rooms on her own

But still no dresser, no stylist, or maid.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 10-10-2013, 07:20 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: kingston, Canada
Posts: 47
Cepe. Ms Gold is a republican. Of course she was complaining about the cost of said help. And about a great deal more.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 10-10-2013, 07:41 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,597
so short sighted.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 10-11-2013, 01:49 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Grundisburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,994
The way I've started to look at it is that we all employ someone from time to time to do jobs either we cannot do ourselves or do not have time for. We have quite a number of tall trees and hedges in our garden, so I employ a tree surgeon twice a year to prune them. Technically, I have the time to do it myself, could quite easily do it myself, but would rather pay someone else to do it for me.
I, like millions of other people employ/pay for a personal hairdresser to cut my hair once a month. A new company has set up in my local area who deep clean ovens and kitchens - I'm thinking on employing them once a year too!
A private car (usually a posh Mercedes or Lexus) and chauffeur comes to pick me up if I'm going out and want to drink from time to time (it's called a taxi/cab).
When you come to think of it, we all pay for someone to do something for us all the time and I see no difference to royalty doing so on a more regular basis! So the Guardian woman can put her views up her jumper for all I care!
__________________
J
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 10-11-2013, 05:28 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Jo View Post
Today--Oct.10, Cdn time--I carried out my usual monthly check-in with The Guardian; I follow the old adage that it is wise to keep your friends close and your enemies closer--and ran across an article by Tanya Gold, rabid republican, in which she stated categorically that, and I quote--

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge now employ a butler, a valet, and a nanny. End of quote.

Tanya somehow managed to overlook Antonella.

My question is, is there any truth to her assertion? I do hope so; IMO, the Duke is about as high maintenance as they come, and with a baby, a huge new apartment, another house to decorate, Anmer Hall, up-coming events, God knows the Duchess could use the help.

Why should they not have an appropriate level of staff for their household if they can afford it? The household is not funded from public funds, so it is of no concern of ours. If anything, in the purest sense, this is job creation, which can only be helpful at this stage of the economic recovery.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 10-11-2013, 07:54 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: kingston, Canada
Posts: 47
Jacknch. Agree. I too employ help, on a regular basis, in the garden and in snow removal. Do wish that more UK citizens would speak out and admit the same; this WK bashing is reaching never-before-seen levels of foolishness. WK are doing nothing that a reasonably well-heeled anyone would not do. I sense no extravagance.

@Muriel. Quite correct, sort of. The difficulty arises because it is Charles, I assume, who pays WKs staff--it IS his responsibility--but, in the eyes of British republicans, Charleses wealth, which derives from the Duchy of Cornwall, amounts to ill-gotten gains. In sum, Charles is a robber-baron, a thief, and by association, so are WK. And yet, by past royal standards, WK are leading a rather spartan life which is reflected in the size of their staff.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 10-11-2013, 08:03 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Jo View Post
@Muriel. Quite correct, sort of. The difficulty arises because it is Charles, I assume, who pays WKs staff--it IS his responsibility--but, in the eyes of British republicans, Charleses wealth, which derives from the Duchy of Cornwall, amounts to ill-gotten gains. In sum, Charles is a robber-baron, a thief, and by association, so are WK. And yet, by past royal standards, WK are leading a rather spartan life which is reflected in the size of their staff.
You can never argue with ignorance. If those who criticise do not understand the set up of the Duchy, then there is little point in reasoning.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 10-11-2013, 09:20 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: kingston, Canada
Posts: 47
@Muriel. Sympathize with your point-of-view, but disagree. There is a clear need to refute the arguments of republicans, intelligently, and without unnecessary hostility.

Unhappily, I know very little about the workings of the Duchy of Cornwall, and hence, am not yet in a position to debate the claims of republicans.

This is so off-topic. I can only reiterate that from my long-distance lens, WK are inordinately thrifty, as royals go, and not just in matters of staff.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 10-11-2013, 09:40 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 1,334
The duchy of Cornwall was set up in the 1300s to provide an income for the heir to the throne so it isn't some recent land grab by greedy royals to screw the people over.

I agree that Cambridges live frugally compared to other rich people such as footballer and actors.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 10-11-2013, 10:00 AM
muriel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress Jo View Post
@Muriel. Sympathize with your point-of-view, but disagree. There is a clear need to refute the arguments of republicans, intelligently, and without unnecessary hostility.

Unhappily, I know very little about the workings of the Duchy of Cornwall, and hence, am not yet in a position to debate the claims of republicans.

This is so off-topic. I can only reiterate that from my long-distance lens, WK are inordinately thrifty, as royals go, and not just in matters of staff.
I completely agree that the best way to refute is to put forward a cogent, well thought through argument. I also accept that my previous post on the topic was offhand and flippant.

That said, there are no complex arrangements in place in relation to the Duchy of Cornwall. simply put, it is a pot of money (cash, land holdings etc) that provides income for the Duke of Cornwall. The incumbent holder of the title has rights over the income, but cannot take any capital. The Duchy is run professionally. There are no public funds at all. It does not take an awful lot to work out that there is no great conspiracy at play here. Charles' lifestyle, and those of his family, are not funded publicly.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 10-11-2013, 10:35 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: kingston, Canada
Posts: 47
Skippyboo. When do we go so off-topic that our posts are removed? Must say that the date you mentioned blew me away.

However, my concern re the Duchy is more modern. Are the finances transparent and above-board? And if not, why not? I am clueless in such matters, except to note that several other extremely rich and high-ranking families, the Westminsters and the Northumberlands spring to mind, seem to escape the scrutiny applied to the Windsors. Don't know why.

Do think that WK are getting an undeserved raw deal, re staff, re everything, esp in the DM.--Imagine my horror when I read--have forgotten where--that the Mail was the third most-read paper in the world, thanx to the internet. This makes this odious paper a force to be reckoned with.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 10-11-2013, 10:46 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: kingston, Canada
Posts: 47
Muriel, had no intention of ignoring your post; I happen to be a slow typist, so we missed each other. My reply to Skippyboo pretty much sums up my views.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


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





Popular Tags
abdication belgium birth 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 grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess margriet 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 visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:49 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]