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

[muriel]

Am I getting the sense that your biggest concern is that having fun whilst doing charity work is unacceptable? They spent their own money on their flights and accomodation, so the argument of using others money does not really hold.

 

[Skydragon]

Am I getting the sense that your biggest concern is that having fun whilst doing charity work is unacceptable? They spent their own money on their flights and accomodation, so the argument of using others money does not really hold.

Did you read the report in the Mirror, detailing the cost of hiring bikes, entry fees, food and accommodation for the security offices who accompanied them, these costs are on top of the salaries?

 

[Roslyn]

I am more and more dismayed by the behaviour of Prince William and Harry too, but more William since he is future monarch. The helicopter business and now, what I consider to be worse, the motorcycle jaunt, tell me that William does not give much throught to his place in the bigger picture, and think through the likely consequences of his actions. If he's not capable of it, surely he has advisors whose job it is to do just that.

It's all very well and good for the princes to lend their support to raise an event's profile, but, IMO anyway, they should both have made sure that they personally paid all the costs associated with their "baggage" so the charities got the greatest possible benefit. They can both well afford to do so and considering they both have such large personal fortunes because of the early death of their charity-conscious mother, I think they should be more generous with it. They would both have shot way up in my estimation if they had paid their costs. As it is I am left with the impression that William is a bit sneaky and has an over-developed, and undeserved, sense of self-importance.

 

[muriel]

Did you read the report in the Mirror, detailing the cost of hiring bikes, entry fees, food and accommodation for the security offices who accompanied them, these costs are on top of the salaries?

I did.

This point about the cost of security came up recently in the context of Beatrice and Eugienie. At the expense of repeating myself, here are my thoughts: 24 hour security is expensive, so lets address the question as to whether certain members of the royal family need protection or not. If it is determined that they need security, then we really should not be using the argument about the cost of security to curtail their movements. Thats just not fair! I agree that security costs for trips overseas by the royals are high, but that comes with the territory.

 

[muriel]

I am more and more dismayed by the behaviour of Prince William and Harry too, but more William since he is future monarch. The helicopter business and now, what I consider to be worse, the motorcycle jaunt, tell me that William does not give much throught to his place in the bigger picture, and think through the likely consequences of his actions. If he's not capable of it, surely he has advisors whose job it is to do just that.

It's all very well and good for the princes to lend their support to raise an event's profile, but, IMO anyway, they should both have made sure that they personally paid all the costs associated with their "baggage" so the charities got the greatest possible benefit. They can both well afford to do so and considering they both have such large personal fortunes because of the early death of their charity-conscious mother, I think they should be more generous with it. They would both have shot way up in my estimation if they had paid their costs. As it is I am left with the impression that William is a bit sneaky and has an over-developed, and undeserved, sense of self-importance.

Roslyn - The costs associated with the security for the boys would have been bourn by the government or the royal household, not the charities themselves. The royal family never personally pay for the cost of their security (see my precious post above) - that is covered by the government.

I think the point of criticism, in my opinion is that the boys did not contribute more funds to the charity. However, it may well be that they may have donated separately, and their donation was not made public - in line with the policy of not making public the amounts the royal family donates to specific charities.

 

[MARG]

Cost of security as a minus for every Royal moving outside of Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace, Clarence House, etc. is a crock!

I have this really great idea . . . why don't we just get Madame Tussards to make waxworks of all the major royals, dot them around the abovementioned residences and open them up as paying museums!

Sure as hell cut down on the "security" costs, although the hit the nation would take without it's best ambassadors may very well outweigh the savings. I mean a banquet with the Prime Minister just doesn't quite cut it.

 

[muriel]

Surley we cold ave a banquet with the PM and a wax work of the Queen

 

[Menarue]

As the main objection to security costs seems to be with the minor royals, they could perhaps be considerate and stay home.
I have absolutely no problem with the Queen´s security costs, but I do have a bit of a problem with Eugenie and Beatrice having a security escort to night clubs or being all veiled up or whatever to go to Turkey.

 

[muriel]

So maybe we should pass an act of Parliament that bans all members of the royal family other than the monarch (and consort, or why bother with the consort) from leaving the boundaries of Buckingham Palace!

 

[Skydragon]

We are not just talking about the cost of security, salaries, accommodation, food on this trip, we are talking of UK taxpayers paying the £9,000 entry fee, + hire of the 6 extra bikes + motorcycle clothing allowance etc on top of any overseas allowances, not for an official visit, not even an official holiday, but for a jolly!

 

[Menarue]

I had never heard about the £9,000 entry fee! Wow!
Muriel I like your idea, it might cost a lot to make the walls higher round BP, perhaps with some barbed wire......to keep them in of course.

 

[Skydragon]

However, it may well be that they may have donated separately, and their donation was not made public - in line with the policy of not making public the amounts the royal family donates to specific charities

Oh right, the very secret policy that they wouldn't want to make public. It could well be that they donated an extra £0,000.00, we have apparently no way of knowing.

I had never heard about the £9,000 entry fee! Wow!
Muriel I like your idea, it might cost a lot to make the walls higher round BP, perhaps with some barbed wire......to keep them in of course.

Everyone taking part pays £1500 entry fee, so with 6 protection officers that equals £9000 there. Then add in the motorcycle clothing and the motorcycle hire, all that on top of their normal salaries, overseas payments, overtime payments, Sunday payments and the bill for the taxpayer just goes up and up.

 

[muriel]

We are not just talking about the cost of security, salaries, accommodation, food on this trip, we are talking of UK taxpayers paying the £9,000 entry fee, + hire of the 6 extra bikes + motorcycle clothing allowance etc on top of any overseas allowances, not for an official visit, not even an official holiday, but for a jolly!

how would you define an "official" holiday?

 

[muriel]

I think I have the perfect solution - keep them locked up in BP only. That way security costs will be lower. Better still, move them out of BP to a council estate in South London, and convert BP into an events arena - just like the millenium dome became the O2 Arena!

 

[Skydragon]

how would you define an "official" holiday?

An official holiday is one that is part of your yearly legal entitlement. We know this was not the case with Harry as it was stated that he was given 'special leave'.

I think I have the perfect solution - keep them locked up in BP only. That way security costs will be lower. Better still, move them out of BP to a council estate in South London, and convert BP into an events arena - just like the millenium dome became the O2 Arena!

Do you really want to lower the tone of council estates in London? We have enough events arenas, we could use it to house the homeless perhaps.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

Everyone taking part pays £1500 entry fee, so with 6 protection officers that equals £9000 there. Then add in the motorcycle clothing and the motorcycle hire, all that on top of their normal salaries, overseas payments, overtime payments, Sunday payments and the bill for the taxpayer just goes up and up.

Skydragon, I never thought about that, but you're right, of course, when it comes to the amount of extra cost to the taxpayer. But maybe the government should (or has already done so) view the whole BRF as some sort of "amusement park" for the taxpayers. These parks cost, that's a fact but if they amuse enough people, then they turn into a successful business...

Of course, they could fix the costs for security for the princes and princesses and let them in on the costs and decide how to spend it. Like: okay, Your Royal Highnesses, we have enough money in this year's account to cover the cost of either going to university/serving as officers for the rest of the year or stay at home for the rest of the year except for two visits to nightclubs in november and three in december (the last one a personal gift from your grandparents...). Ah, and BTW - the government decided that visits to nightclubs are not longer included in next year's allowance, but we have already contacted two charities which might come up with a solution for you if you are willing to highlight their profile with some sort of ribbon-cutting....

 

[muriel]

but we have already contacted two charities which might come up with a solution for you if you are willing to highlight their profile with some sort of ribbon-cutting....

oh, like a rent-a-royal - what a wonderful idea. seeking inspiration from people like princess michael of kent! extending the same thought further, may be the government could ask the Queen's car to carry advertising on the side - just like a london cab!

 

[muriel]

An official holiday is one that is part of your yearly legal entitlement. We know this was not the case with Harry as it was stated that he was given 'special leave'.
Do you really want to lower the tone of council estates in London? We have enough events arenas, we could use it to house the homeless perhaps.

Is it fact that Harry was given special leave, or is it mere speculation? And even if he were given special leave, thats a matter between him and his superiors.

As regards the cost of security as I previously said, if it has been decided that the boys need security, then that is it. You can't use that as a stick to restrict their movements. Asking the "court of the Daily Mail" for approval for what might be a suitable charity event for members of the royal family to attend is asinine in my opinion!

I was in london for the weekend a few weeks ago and went to Primrose Hill with some family. By the swings was none other than David Miliband, playing with his 2 sons, followed discretely by 2 security guards. Extending your argument further, surely the foreign secretary has no business to take his children to the playground on a Sunday morning!

 

[Menarue]

I hope some of the men in grey are reading this forum, they will be inspired. There might even be a knighthood somewhere for someone.

 

[rmay286]

The economic crisis in the U.S. has spread globally and grown deeper faster than most people, economists included, predicted. It is possible that things will get much worse before they get better and that the world may see a global recession of unprecedented severity for several years. If this happens (I'm not saying I hope it does!, just that it is a possibility), and British taxpayer reaction to the costs of royalty is so critical even now, in really straitened times, what might happen to the monarchy? I'm interested in hearing the opinions of people who live in the UK.

 

[Elspeth]

One thing I don't understand here is that when Prince Charles is accused of wasting taxpayer money for one reason or other, his defenders are very quick to point out that he's funded by revenue from the Duchy, not via the Civil List. I think William and Harry are also funded from Duchy money rather than being paid for out of the Queen's taxpayer-provided income. So if they used their own money to pay for expenses over and above the salaries of the protection officers, which would be paid whether they were in Africa or in England, how is it all of a sudden taxpayers' money being used?

 

[Roslyn]

I stupidly had it in my mind that the charity carried extra costs associated with the security men accompanying the princes. That is clearly wrong. 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.

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. Whether they like it or not public opinion of them does matter these days, and this is the sort of thing that affects public opinion. And why didn't they arrange to be sponsored by friends as other people were? Is that forbidden for royals too?

 

[Skydragon]

Is it fact that Harry was given special leave, or is it mere speculation? And even if he were given special leave, thats a matter between him and his superiors.

I think you will find that special leave was granted, but as I unable to prove it, we will have to leave the articles by the various media organisations as checked by them. One might get it wrong, but not I think all. With regard to being 'up to his superior officers', it depends how much they want to keep their jobs and whether they are soldier soldiers or political soldiers.

As regards the cost of security as I previously said, if it has been decided that the boys need security, then that is it. You can't use that as a stick to restrict their movements. Asking the "court of the Daily Mail" for approval for what might be a suitable charity event for members of the royal family to attend is asinine in my opinion!

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! They can travel wherever they want in their pursuit of the wow factor, just ensure they pay ALL the extra costs of their security detail and ensure they actually raise some money.

I was in london for the weekend a few weeks ago and went to Primrose Hill with some family. By the swings was none other than David Miliband, playing with his 2 sons, followed discretely by 2 security guards. Extending your argument further, surely the foreign secretary has no business to take his children to the playground on a Sunday morning!

But you are not extending my argument at all are you, you just seem to be trying to deflect the facts with such a statement, I find it hard to believe that you are unable to comprehend the difference. 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. 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.

One thing I don't understand here is that when Prince Charles is accused of wasting taxpayer money for one reason or other, his defenders are very quick to point out that he's funded by revenue from the Duchy, not via the Civil List. I think William and Harry are also funded from Duchy money rather than being paid for out of the Queen's taxpayer-provided income. So if they used their own money to pay for expenses over and above the salaries of the protection officers, which would be paid whether they were in Africa or in England, how is it all of a sudden taxpayers' money being used?

Security is not paid by The Duchy, nor are the costs incurred by the security team. IF Charles had gone off on such a jaunt and expected the taxpayer to pay the extra costs incurred, I would push him off his motorbike! I understand the cost of the security officers entry, m/c clothing etc was not met by William, Harry or Charles, the only money paid by them was apparently their own entry fees, clothing and m/c hire, all items extra to those a security team would need in the normal, day to day job of providing security for them.

 

[Skydragon]

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

But neither the Duchy nor the princes paid.

 

[kimebear]

Security is not paid by The Duchy, nor are the costs incurred by the security team. IF Charles had gone off on such a jaunt and expected the taxpayer to pay the extra costs incurred, I would push him off his motorbike! I understand the cost of the security officers entry, m/c clothing etc was not met by William, Harry or Charles, the only money paid by them was apparently their own entry fees, clothing and m/c hire, all items extra to those a security team would need in the normal, day to day job of providing security for them.

I find it difficult to believe that Charles, at their ages, never went on any jaunts of his own, protection officers in tow. Of course this was in the day before the royal family reported all of their expenses to the public.

 

[Skydragon]

Just about everything Charles or Andrew did was reported here to death and no, I can't think of any little jollies such as this. I think Anne only had one bodyguard when someone tried to kidnap her. If he had, I am quite confident the squirrels at the Mail would by now have drawn the comparrison.

 

[kimebear]

Well you can't exactly compare the them at full value. While William and Harry put a little fun into their charity work, Charles' charity work has always been rather traditional. That's not to say that Charles was not given plenty of opportunity to have a non-charity related jolly or ten courtesy of the taxpayers at their age.

At least William and Harry didn't request Sandringham pheasant flown to them while they were on the trek.

 

[Mermaid1962]

At least none that we know of.

At least William and Harry didn't request Sandringham pheasant flown to them while they were on the trek.

 

[Skydragon]

Well you can't exactly compare the them at full value. While William and Harry put a little fun into their charity work, Charles' charity work has always been rather traditional. That's not to say that Charles was not given plenty of opportunity to have a non-charity related jolly or ten courtesy of the taxpayers at their age.

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

At least William and Harry didn't request Sandringham pheasant flown to them while they were on the trek.

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

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. This is probably the same ex employee who gave the egg story to Giles Brandreth, which unusually for them, Clarence House denied emphatically!

 

[Elspeth]

Security is not paid by The Duchy, nor are the costs incurred by the security team.

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?