Prince William and Prince Harry: Charity Motorbike Trek in Africa - October 2008


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Might one ask, at the risk of a knuckle rapping, where you learned that charles was ever given such an opportunity and like for like how much did they each raise for each charity, £500 wasn't it

I might ask you the question of where you learned that he had not. Since the private holidays of the royals were not reported on then with the same full color and glossy attention to detail that they are now, I'm afraid that neither of us will ever know for sure how many times he had a jolly on the taxpayers dime as a young man.

£500? Sounds like the problem is that William and Harry need to find some more generous friends who are willing to shell out bigger contributions when they do something worthy like this.


They didn't need too, cuisine has improved since Charles took Diana anywhere, although how anyone..... :rolleyes:

IMO, It shows when people have to sink to something Charles is reported (by Dianas ex chef needing to... sell a book) to have done, that there is no excuse for their behaviour.:whistling: This is probably the same ex employee who gave the egg story to Giles Brandreth, which unusually for them, Clarence House denied emphatically!

I'm just giving this story the same merit that is given to all DM stories. BTW, just because a book needs to be sold doesn't make the information in it false. :whistling:
 
I think I was distracted by the photo of the princes looking very pleased with themselves and was angered by the fact they each paid only the minimum donation when others raised much more.

This doesn't mean they didn't pay more money to the charity. It also doesn't cover the fact that the entry fee is ALSO money being given to the charity.
As long as either the Duchy or the princes themselves paid the security people's costs of the jaunt over and above their ordinary salaries, I have no complaint except that the princes are mean since it seems they only gave the minimum donation required. If there is a valid reason details of the royals' donations to charities are not published fair enough, but if they did give extra, the fact they did give more should have been mentioned, I think.

Why would they mention it? That is simply going to leave them open to questions of "How much more did you give?" and questions such as "How come you gave XYZ amt to that charity and not the same/less/more to this charity?"

I would totally understand admitting the entry fee being paid since it is obvious that they would have to pay in order to be a part of the ride. However much more they gave is really a private matter not for the public IMO.

And why didn't they arrange to be sponsored by friends as other people were? Is that forbidden for royals too?

Think about how much charity work these boys do and are asked to do. Then think about how often you get asked (on a personal level) to donate money to charities yourself and how often you actually WANT to donate when it's the same thing coming round time and time again.

Usually you want to keep your friends. You can't do that if you are constantly coming to them with your hand out for donations. Eventually they are going to get annoyed and stop talking to you.

I'm also not believing the $500 until it is actually VERIFIED by someone other than "an anonymous source." It's too easy to fabricate a story by claiming some "source" said this and that when none of it is true.

Also, while the financial amount they themselves brought in between themselves and their friends might be small the amount of attention and publicity they brought to the CHARITY is priceless- as many people will see the charity and donate simply because they have become more aware of it because of the princes.

None of us would probably have known this charity even existed if it were not for the princes' "jolly" ride and yet you are all discussing whether $500 is enough of a donation.

I'm sure much more than $500 has been brought in by the princes' media awareness simply through people who became aware of the charity through the princes' place in the media- the princes' should get credit for those too IMO.
 
No, it isn't, but as long as the protection officers are salaried, it doesn't matter where they are, they're getting paid anyway.

As far as their expenses to travel to and from Africa and take part in the trek - do we know (by which I mean, is it disclosed and itemised anywhere and been confirmed) who paid? And if it has been confirmed, could we get a link to wherever the information is posted?
I think we can all be certain that with the negative publicity this has caused, if they had paid the extra money for their 6 security men, it would have been released. I will turn your question on it's head, do any of you have any link to a suggestion they might have paid?
 
At least William and Harry didn't request Sandringham pheasant flown to them while they were on the trek.

I wonder how Charles should represent Britain and its industry (including the food industry and tourism - which is about food as well) with using only locally bought products for the banquests he hosts. You simply can't impress your guests with British lifestyle on serving them locally raised Prime Beef with Idaho potatoes... You need the genuine stuff and that has to come from Britain - in honour of the guests even from a Royal residence, if possible. Another example: think of Nicolas Sarkozy hosting a thank you-dinner for the US president in the French embassy in Washington - would you comment on the fact that he is serving French wines instead of US-American ones? Or rather wonder if he doesn't?

I think it has been established without any doubt that Charles is very environmental concious and surely would personally prefer to serve local food, which is another of the topics dear to him - so surely he had a good reason like the above mentioned to make pheasants from Sandringham the culinary highlight at a banquet he hosts.
 
It also doesn't cover the fact that the entry fee is ALSO money being given to the charity.
The entry fee is apparently the only money they gave, £1500 that everyone taking part had to pay towards their food, accommodation and guides, so in reality did the charities receive any money.
Why would they mention it? That is simply going to leave them open to questions of "How much more did you give?" and questions such as "How come you gave XYZ amt to that charity and not the same/less/more to this charity?"
A simple 'The princes also made a private donation to each of the charities', would have been sufficient.
Think about how much charity work these boys do and are asked to do. Then think about how often you get asked (on a personal level) to donate money to charities yourself and how often you actually WANT to donate when it's the same thing coming round time and time again.
Sorry, I don't understand your question or point. I, like many donate money and time on a regular basis to charities I wish to support. The others that might come round once a year, I again donate to if it is a cause/charity I agree with. Unfortunately I have never yet found one that doesn't have it's merits.
I'm also not believing the $500 until it is actually VERIFIED by someone other than "an anonymous source." It's too easy to fabricate a story by claiming some "source" said this and that when none of it is true.
The organisers gave the information to the media, the 500GBP is the entry fee of 1500GBP broken down to cover the three charities supported this year. What evryone seems to have missed, myself included until this morning, is that the 1500GBP fee, also appears to cover their guides, food and accommodation, which reduces the amount given to charity even more.
Also, while the financial amount they themselves brought in between themselves and their friends might be small the amount of attention and publicity they brought to the CHARITY is priceless- as many people will see the charity and donate simply because they have become more aware of it because of the princes.
None of us would probably have known this charity even existed if it were not for the princes' "jolly" ride and yet you are all discussing whether $500 is enough of a donation.
It is not a charity, it is an event to raise money for selected charities. Now that the esteemed members of TRF know of this event, how many I wonder are going to sign up or sponser someone?
 
No, it isn't, but as long as the protection officers are salaried, it doesn't matter where they are, they're getting paid anyway.

As far as their expenses to travel to and from Africa and take part in the trek - do we know (by which I mean, is it disclosed and itemised anywhere and been confirmed) who paid? And if it has been confirmed, could we get a link to wherever the information is posted?

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]From: BBC News | UK | 'Severe' cuts in Royal security
Both Buckingham Palace and the Home Office would not make a statement on the reported review, and told BBC News Online they "never comment on royal security".
[/FONT]

So I guess we won't find reliable data about the costs for this trip. But the bill is of course funded by the taxpayer, as the whole SO14 department is funded by the Home Office.

There is a special procedure for overseas visits of Royals, as mentioned at the Diana-inquest, but I haven't been able to trace more information about that. But if the Royalty and Diplomatic Protection Department has a fixed procedure how to work, I guess that they are the ones to cover the costs as well.
 
Nobody has left it up to the Mail, as far as I know, unless you have something to say that all the negative comments in all the papers and all the negative comments on this and other forums, are by members of the Mail. That would equate to a suggestion from me, that anyone defending these two children (I use the word knowingly) works for their PR department! :whistling:

The fundamental point is that the royals cannot be forced into a situation where they have to think about the incremental security costs everytime they stepped out. The cost of security is bourn by the government. You can't start demanding on a piecemeal basis that specific elements of those costs be reimbursed by the royal household. Thats just ridiculous, and defeats the purpose. Its tantamount to saying that the Queen should start to receive an element of the Crown Estate's annual surplus despite a certain ancestor of hers having agreed to surrentder the surplus to the Treasury in return for the civil list!

Miliband was being guarded in the UK because of his job - he wasn't on a jolly needing the extra payments made on behalf of unnecessary expenses incurred by his detail.

....but he was! His role as Foreign Secretary does not extend to taking his children to the playground on Sunday mornings! The Zoo is next door, and they may have gone there after that. I bet Miliband would not be required to pay for the entry of the security detail. This could go on, but the key point is that the costs of security are fully underwritten by the government for those that have been afforded security cover.

By the way, if Milibands security guards were seen by you, they were not very good, or were they just a couple of chaps who happened to be in the same vicinity.

Its not often you see two men in ties and formal jackets sitting in a corner in a playground, who then follow the Foreign Secretary when he heads around the corner!
 
I must say I have no idea but would like to know: what if Royals visit the opera? Or another place where an entrance fee is to be payed? Do the protection officers buy seats next to the Royal and pay entrance fees? Or are they allowed to go in for free because they are policemen on duty?
 
The fundamental point is that the royals cannot be forced into a situation where they have to think about the incremental security costs everytime they stepped out. The cost of security is bourn by the government. You can't start demanding on a piecemeal basis that specific elements of those costs be reimbursed by the royal household. Thats just ridiculous, and defeats the purpose.
The junior members ot the Royal Family should have to take into consideration the EXTRA costs that might have to be borne by UK taxpayers if they want to engage in an extra 'fun' activity. Did they do this m/c ride out of the kindness of their hearts, IMO of course they didn't, they saw it as a fun trip and if they could pass it off as being for charity, all the better, IMO.
....but he was! His role as Foreign Secretary does not extend to taking his children to the playground on Sunday mornings! The Zoo is next door, and they may have gone there after that. I bet Miliband would not be required to pay for the entry of the security detail. This could go on, but the key point is that the costs of security are fully underwritten by the government for those that have been afforded security cover.
Pretty sure hypothetical extras such as visits to the Zoo, would have to be declared, however, once again you are skirting the issue. The scenario you are presnting is that if William and Harry decide to orbit the moon at a cost of 1,000,000,000GBP each, because they are given security by the British taxpayer, their security detail of six would need to go and that would also be OK, as long as they dress it up as charity.:whistling:

Back to Miliband, being an elected member of parliament and the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, even whilst at the park or Zoo, he could be called on to immediately respond to a call from Brown, if he asked the security detail to accompany his children home, then that could be judged in the same context as William and Harry.
Its not often you see two men in ties and formal jackets sitting in a corner in a playground, who then follow the Foreign Secretary when he heads around the corner!
You quite often see men and women formally dressed sat in parks that happen also to include a play area, without a little sign on their foreheads you have no way of knowing who they were!:whistling:

This isn't about ordinary security details, it is about the extra costs incurred by taxpayers to enable William and Harry to enjoy an adventure motorcycle ride.
 
I must say I have no idea but would like to know: what if Royals visit the opera? Or another place where an entrance fee is to be payed? Do the protection officers buy seats next to the Royal and pay entrance fees? Or are they allowed to go in for free because they are policemen on duty?
For the opera or cinema, they are not normally given seats, they stand or sit outside the box and in the foyer, as they are not watching the performance, they wouldn't be expected to pay.
 
... This isn't about ordinary security details, it is about the extra costs incurred by taxpayers to enable William and Harry to enjoy an adventure motorcycle ride.
So lets be clear, if the charity event was in wettest wales, and involved visiting a hopsital, that would have been okay?

Your biggest objection again comes across as the boys cannot be seen to be having fun whilst doing charity work. You are certainly entitled to the view, though IMO it does not stick! But we can agree to disagree.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Which would have been cheaper, the Wales mud or sunny Africa.... Which would have been more exciting, Mud in Wales or the dust in Africa..... Gosh they would be in a dilemma to choose between these wouldn´t they? Especially if cost doesn´t matter. "I can just imagine them asking "can I have special leave to get covered in mud in Wales please"....
 
So lets be clear, if the charity event was in wettest wales, and involved visiting a hopsital, that would have been okay?

Your biggest objection again comes across as the boys cannot be seen to be having fun whilst doing charity work.
No, that is the interpretation you seem to be determined to try to put on it:rolleyes:
*****************
So let us be really, really clear -

They can take 500 bodyguards on an adventure weekend in deepest Peru, as long as they pay, on the bodyguards behalf, the entry fees and extra costs.

The UK taxpayer will continue to pick up the tab for the extra security and normal travel cost, normal board and normal lodging.

The UK taxpayer will not be expected to pay for hire of motorcycles, helmets, surf boards or any other unnecessary costs to ensure these two can have a good time.
******************
I think the people of Wales might object to your suggestion that it is always wet or that by visiting a hospital in Wales, it is A. Not a fun thing to do and B. 2nd rate.
 
I think we can all be certain that with the negative publicity this has caused, if they had paid the extra money for their 6 security men, it would have been released. I will turn your question on it's head, do any of you have any link to a suggestion they might have paid?

I don't think we have any hard data one way or the other. Which means that it probably isn't safe to jump to conclusions.

As far as I know, William and Harry's expenses are met by the revenues from the Duchy of Cornwall. If all these extra thousands for their PPOs to accompany them on the trek weren't paid for out of Duchy funds, then presumably the Queen would have had to authorise their payment from the funds that she uses to reimburse members of the family who are performing royal duties.
 
Has any paper posted a list of the additional cost and how the figure adds up? Did they hire extra security personell for the bike trip or was this their usual security team? I always thought both William and Harry have 3 bodyguards each anyways. Doesn't Scotland Yeard have a special royal "protection squad" anyways who are on stand-by to cover members of the BRF? They are paid regarless of where they go aren't they or do they get additional salary for travels abroad? So what are the additional security costs? Travel expenses and accomodation?

Btw. who decides how much security they get and the overall budget on royal security? Scotland Yard or the RF themselves?
 
I don't think we have any hard data one way or the other. Which means that it probably isn't safe to jump to conclusions.

As far as I know, William and Harry's expenses are met by the revenues from the Duchy of Cornwall. If all these extra thousands for their PPOs to accompany them on the trek weren't paid for out of Duchy funds, then presumably the Queen would have had to authorise their payment from the funds that she uses to reimburse members of the family who are performing royal duties.
No the payments for security are met, as Jo posted, by the Home Office. HM does not pay for nor authorise payments to SO14, nor are they paid by the Duchy.

I am beginning to question whether anyone actually reads what I have written. It is not about the salaries paid to their security detail, it is about the payments made to enable the security detail to take part, i.e. 6 x 1500 GBP, the hire of 6 motorcycles and the cost of 5 sets of motorcycle outfits. The adventure event was not a royal duty.
 
It was a lark disguised as a charitable act.
 
Has any paper posted a list of the additional cost and how the figure adds up? Did they hire extra security personell for the bike trip or was this their usual security team? I always thought both William and Harry have 3 bodyguards each anyways. Doesn't Scotland Yeard have a special royal "protection squad" anyways who are on stand-by to cover members of the BRF? They are paid regarless of where they go aren't they or do they get additional salary for travels abroad? So what are the additional security costs? Travel expenses and accomodation?
Yes the additional costs were shown early in the thread. Yes, in line with all police units they will receive an overseas payment on top of any overtime earned. The extra cost are, once again the entry fee, the hire of the motorcycles, the cost of protective motorcycle clothing, including helmets and boots.

I have suggested to my friendly MP, that he ask for a full breakdown of the extra expenses paid by taxpayers for this jaunt, it will be interesting to see if any reply is forthcoming or whether this will be resisted with a 'we do not disclose individual extra costs incurred by members of the royal family, by TPTB!
 
No the payments for security are met, as Jo posted, by the Home Office. HM does not pay for nor authorise payments to SO14, nor are they paid by the Duchy.

I am beginning to question whether anyone actually reads what I have written. It is not about the salaries paid to their security detail, it is about the payments made to enable the security detail to take part, i.e. 6 x 1500 GBP, the hire of 6 motorcycles and the cost of 5 sets of motorcycle outfits. The adventure event was not a royal duty.

When royals go on vacation - the sort of vacation where access is difficult and special equipment is required - does the Home Office pony up for whatever's needed for their PPOs to take part? I'm just wondering whether it's standard procedure for royals to be able to decide to do something expensive like climb Everest or take part in a round-the-world yacht race or whatever, and the Home Office just has to fork over the cash for their protection officers to go along, without anyone exercising any oversight.
 
I have to say I don't know, the problem seems to have been that the moment if William or Harry say they are going to do some charity work, people forget to ask questions with regard to how much will it cost the taxpayer or they think that it doesn't matter because it is their right to security whatever it costs.

I would imagine if any of them decided to climb Mt Everest, the home office would provide clothing and the like, but I also think, especially as we are apparently officially in a recession, the government would advise HM, who would advise whoever, that it would not be a very good idea.

William and Harrys' PR team seem to be an absolute disaster.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I really hope there's a way for the royals to reimburse the Home Office for this sort of thing. But it wouldn't surprise me to find that there isn't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think we have any hard data one way or the other. Which means that it probably isn't safe to jump to conclusions.

I think that is right - the "facts" are not out there, mere speculation by a few journalists as to who may have paid the costs.

The reality is that here must be agreed upon procedures for these things that we are not necessarily aware of, which must have been adhered to. We can pontificate as to what these procedures might or should be (or give extreme examples to demonstrate our respective points of view), but that is as far as this debate is really going to get. :rolleyes:
 
I have to say I don't know, the problem seems to have been that the moment if William or Harry say they are going to do some charity work, people forget to ask questions with regard to how much will it cost the taxpayer or they think that it doesn't matter because it is their right to security whatever it costs.

Are you suggesting that an "independent" adjudicator or regulator of some sort be set up to "approve" every charity event a royal might like to get involved in? :)
 
Are you suggesting that an "independent" adjudicator or regulator of some sort be set up to "approve" every charity event a royal might like to get involved in? :)


Wonderful idea Muriel. :flowers:
 
Are you suggesting that an "independent" adjudicator or regulator of some sort be set up to "approve" every charity event a royal might like to get involved in? :)

No. I don't think so. There is no need for further control. because the system of Royalty as it works today can only work in future time if the people born Royal show that they are decent people with understanding of the people they should head due to their birth. Charles is decent even though he enjoys his personal wealth. We have unfortunately yet to see if his sons are decent as well. Come to think of it: his nieces yet have to pass the public's examination as well.
 
I had actually suggested the regulator in jest. You are right, royalty survives by the will of the people, which will clearly dissappear if the monarch and immediate family fail to demonstrate diginity and decency, amongst a wide range of other qualities.

As regards the current gen-X, I think the York girls are not central to the future of the monarchy, so their passing public examination is not really important. The Wales boys are obviously key, and they seem to have done all right so far, with a few notable exceptions being William's helicopter flights, and Harry in the nazi uniform. It is commendable that they have both embarked on military careers, although they will never be "normal" military careers. The boys will need to look at their father as a role model, on how to constructively use their time whilst waiting for the top job (in the case of Will).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, I don't understand your question or point. I, like many donate money and time on a regular basis to charities I wish to support. The others that might come round once a year, I again donate to if it is a cause/charity I agree with. Unfortunately I have never yet found one that doesn't have it's merits.

My point was that when multiple charities come around- and yes, I too give when I can and I also volunteer for various charities around my home- it gets tiresome when someone is repeatedly coming around with their hand out looking for charitable donations and at a certain point eventually you start saying 'no' and stop talking to the person.

I've had this problem with charities and with friends who do 'good works' for charities. Granted the RF has tons of money, and they really SHOULD have given more if they have the finances for it. However, my point was really that just because the RF (in the form of the princes) is doing this, it doesn't necessarily mean that their friends are obligated to donate for this. That comment was oriented to people talking about the princes finding friends who would donate more- in reference to the $500 sum that was discussed earlier in the thread.

A simple 'The princes also made a private donation to each of the charities', would have been sufficient.
Yeah, but just because no one has said anything doesn't mean the princes didn't give anything...wouldn't be the first time the PR people have goofed.
 
The entry fee is apparently the only money they gave, £1500 that everyone taking part had to pay towards their food, accommodation and guides, so in reality did the charities receive any money.A simple 'The princes also made a private donation to each of the charities', would have been sufficient.Sorry, I don't understand your question or point. I, like many donate money and time on a regular basis to charities I wish to support. The others that might come round once a year, I again donate to if it is a cause/charity I agree with. Unfortunately I have never yet found one that doesn't have it's merits. The organisers gave the information to the media, the 500GBP is the entry fee of 1500GBP broken down to cover the three charities supported this year. What evryone seems to have missed, myself included until this morning, is that the 1500GBP fee, also appears to cover their guides, food and accommodation, which reduces the amount given to charity even more. It is not a charity, it is an event to raise money for selected charities. Now that the esteemed members of TRF know of this event, how many I wonder are going to sign up or sponser someone?

Read the information from the Enduro Africa site, I've posted the link in another post. Each entrant pays 1,500pounds, that is the minimum amount that is given to charity. ( Each entrant can of course raise more money. Sponsors etc would be credited in this account, see blog of participant I posted) Altogether the participants need to pay 4,995pounds, from that amount 1,500pounds is guaranteed to go to charity, the rest of the money pays for the bikes, accomodation, guides etc. All the news article stated was that William and Harry contributed the 1,500pounds minimum to charity and didn't raise more money. But to have participated they along with their entourage would have paid the total fee. Also in the past the motorbikes were donated to Riders for Health, so another charity benefited.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom