The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1061  
Old 09-22-2018, 03:13 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Uh? The happy bride and groom would like to marry in a chapel on her grandmother's estate, she can use one of the splendid carriages parked in her grandmother's mews, pulled by her grandmother's horses, to be driven on her grandmother's domain. The Princess is damn' right to make use of the splendid infrastructure and facilities her beloved grandmaman has so graciously given at her disposal for an upcoming unforgettable day.

The point is, she is NOT just being driven on the estate, but also on the street in Windsor, thus increasing security costs and annoying the taxpayers who must foot the bill.

If she had the same sort of carriage ride Peter Phillips did, then nobody would object.
__________________

  #1062  
Old 09-22-2018, 04:54 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
My apologies, I should have said princess of the blood (royal)... As that expression is still used if I am not mistaken.
Not in this day and age, except in forums like this maybe. Ask the average person in the street what that means and they wouldn't have a clue what you were talking about.
__________________

  #1063  
Old 09-22-2018, 05:05 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 3,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
Not in this day and age, except in forums like this maybe. Ask the average person in the street what that means and they wouldn't have a clue what you were talking about.
Luckily I am currently on TRF and you (and hopefully others) did understand. I wouldn't use the same terminology on the streets
  #1064  
Old 09-22-2018, 05:25 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 9,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
The point is, she is NOT just being driven on the estate, but also on the street in Windsor, thus increasing security costs and annoying the taxpayers who must foot the bill.

If she had the same sort of carriage ride Peter Phillips did, then nobody would object.
I understood two streets outside the estate. And when the bridal couple would limit themselves to the domain and not greeting the folks outside, undoubtedly this would provoke critics as well for being too entre-nous, too hautain, etc.

If the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is not able to send a few constables for the short passing-by of a bridal carriage, then the once so great country is deeper in the eh... then I thought.
  #1065  
Old 09-22-2018, 05:34 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,857
I think the point is, the UK can and do... when they want to.
  #1066  
Old 09-22-2018, 05:34 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,926
I posted a link up thread for road closures, parking, policing and the like. Windsor is used to hosting royal weddings. Everything is on schedule and according to plan.

It looks to be a wonderful event.
  #1067  
Old 09-22-2018, 06:32 PM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophie25 View Post
The BRF won't go under specifically because of this but it's just another thing that will help to chip away at goodwill towards the institution. Take away the carriage ride and I think there would have been little controversy so in that respect I think is was the wrong call.
I disagree, whatever opposition there is over this doggone carriage ride, this is not 1992 nor 1997. The carriage ride has already been planned and the route announced, to cancel or downgrade the carriage ride is a slippery slope. What next? Fewer carriages at Ascot? Fewer carriages for Trooping of the Color? Order of the Garter? Fewer royals on the Buckingham Palace balcony? So is that the future, the BRF reversing course in response to headlines in online tabloids and social media chatter?
  #1068  
Old 09-22-2018, 08:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 5,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
The point is, she is NOT just being driven on the estate, but also on the street in Windsor, thus increasing security costs and annoying the taxpayers who must foot the bill.

If she had the same sort of carriage ride Peter Phillips did, then nobody would object.



Where does the funding for RF security come from ? If it comes from the Sovereign's grant, then the taxpayer is not "footing the bill". The Sovereign's grant is not appropriated from general tax revenue (the "bill" the taxpayers foot), but rather from the surplus revenue of the Crown estate itself.


That is the biggest difference really between the British royal family and other European royal families: the British royal house is largely self-funded by the commercial exploitation of its own assets. If the Queen wants to pay for extra security, it is mostly "her" money, not "the people's" (i.e. tax) money.
  #1069  
Old 09-22-2018, 08:28 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,545
Its my belief that the security of the royal family comes directly from the Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard and those that work protecting the royals such as RPOs are paid directly from an allotment of funds granted to them by the government and hence the taxpayer's are footing the bill. An example being that Charles' RPO does not work for Charles. He works for the Met Police/Scotland Yard.

The cost for security for this carriage ride will not raise the amount the taxpayers are paying in their yearly taxes. If the security forces felt that it would have been above and beyond what their funds would allow, they would have advised the Queen or anyone in charge of that carriage ride that it would have put a huge onus on the money they have available to pay for the security on October 12th.

I've heard of no complaints from those that will provide the security.
I've heard no complaints from the town of Windsor itself.
I've heard no complaints from the businesses affected in Windsor.
Only complaints I've heard is from some that pay UK taxes.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #1070  
Old 09-22-2018, 08:31 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Its my belief that the security of the royal family comes directly from the Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard and those that work protecting the royals such as RPOs are paid directly from an allotment of funds granted to them by the government and hence the taxpayer's are footing the bill. An example being that Charles' RPO does not work for Charles. He works for the Met Police/Scotland Yard.

The cost for security for this carriage ride will not raise the amount the taxpayers are paying in their yearly taxes. If the security forces felt that it would have been above and beyond what their funds would allow, they would have advised the Queen or anyone in charge of that carriage ride that it would have put a huge onus on the money they have available to pay for the security on October 12th.

I've heard of no complaints from those that will provide the security.
I've heard no complaints from the town of Windsor itself.
I've heard no complaints from the businesses affected in Windsor.
Only complaints I've heard is from some that pay UK taxes.
And complaints from a number of people who pay no taxes in Britain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
I disagree, whatever opposition there is over this doggone carriage ride, this is not 1992 nor 1997. The carriage ride has already been planned and the route announced, to cancel or downgrade the carriage ride is a slippery slope. What next? Fewer carriages at Ascot? Fewer carriages for Trooping of the Color? Order of the Garter? Fewer royals on the Buckingham Palace balcony? So is that the future, the BRF reversing course in response to headlines in online tabloids and social media chatter?
I think they did that in 1997 and have some regrets about that.
  #1071  
Old 09-22-2018, 08:33 PM
Ista's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: the West, United States
Posts: 2,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Its my belief that the security of the royal family comes directly from the Metropolitan Police/Scotland Yard and those that work protecting the royals such as RPOs are paid directly from an allotment of funds granted to them by the government and hence the taxpayer's are footing the bill. An example being that Charles' RPO does not work for Charles. He works for the Met Police/Scotland Yard.

The cost for security for this carriage ride will not raise the amount the taxpayers are paying in their yearly taxes. If the security forces felt that it would have been above and beyond what their funds would allow, they would have advised the Queen or anyone in charge of that carriage ride that it would have put a huge onus on the money they have available to pay for the security on October 12th.
This is my understanding, too.

I'm not sure why this extra loop in the carriage ride seems to be so unpopular with a certain segment of the British public, but I can only think that it reflects the general unpopularity of Eugenie's parents. I agree with Denville above that once the wedding is over the whole thing will fade away until the next outrage du jour.
  #1072  
Old 09-23-2018, 04:37 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
I understood two streets outside the estate. And when the bridal couple would limit themselves to the domain and not greeting the folks outside, undoubtedly this would provoke critics as well for being too entre-nous, too hautain, etc.

If the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is not able to send a few constables for the short passing-by of a bridal carriage, then the once so great country is deeper in the eh... then I thought.
I don't recall any critics getting bothered when Peter and Autumn did just that.
  #1073  
Old 09-23-2018, 05:01 AM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ista View Post
This is my understanding, too.

I'm not sure why this extra loop in the carriage ride seems to be so unpopular with a certain segment of the British public, but I can only think that it reflects the general unpopularity of Eugenie's parents. I agree with Denville above that once the wedding is over the whole thing will fade away until the next outrage du jour.
My sense is the faux-outrage in relation to the carriage ride comes from two principal categories of people:

Firstly, there are the general "moaners", who will complain about pretty much anything. It could be a royal jubilee, the Trooping or a wedding, it does not matter. The arguments for and against the event in question do not matter, they will be complaining.

The second is a new category of small, but very rabid Meghan supporters, who will talk this wedding down, come what may. Not sure how the logic works as they are not, IMO, in any way "competing" royals, but I see a lot of pro-Meghan posters being very negative on this wedding and the carriage ride. Perhaps it is just an unhappy coincidence.
  #1074  
Old 09-23-2018, 05:42 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 9,916
I think there are bridal processions every day. There are always bridal couples using a horsedrawn carriage on the day. And even when the couple would have used one of the Queen's Bentleys, still constables are needed for the security and still such a car is escorted by cavalry, to bring pomp and circumstance. This discussion is beyond belief. What a venom towards a young couple.
  #1075  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:03 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NN, Lithuania
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I've heard of no complaints from those that will provide the security.
I've heard no complaints from the town of Windsor itself.
I've heard no complaints from the businesses affected in Windsor.
Only complaints I've heard is from some that pay UK taxes.
and Americans! Why?
  #1076  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:35 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,314
Quote:
And complaints from a number of people who pay no taxes in Britain.
Who [for some unknown reason], think its ANY of their damn business...
  #1077  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:41 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,784
Excuse me? Ya'll need to wind your necks in a bit. Many of the Americans here are just fine with Eugenie taking her carriage ride and have repeatedly supported this wedding.


LaRae
  #1078  
Old 09-23-2018, 06:53 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: LONDON, United Kingdom
Posts: 926
I never thought when Eugenie and Jack announced their engagement in January, there would be all this horrible stuff in the press about her wedding plans. I wouldn't blame her if she cancelled the whole Windsor Castle event and got married in the Royal Chapel at St James. I'm sure the press would find horrible things to say about that too.

I hope once they are married they stay out of the public eye and go quietly about their business. Sarah never really had anyone to guide her in the early days of her marriage, which is why she made so many mistakes, and the YORKS are disliked by most of the media. How different from the Duke and Duchess of York, in 1923, when they were loved by everyone!
  #1079  
Old 09-23-2018, 07:18 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by angieuk View Post
I never thought when Eugenie and Jack announced their engagement in January, there would be all this horrible stuff in the press about her wedding plans. I wouldn't blame her if she cancelled the whole Windsor Castle event and got married in the Royal Chapel at St James. I'm sure the press would find horrible things to say about that too.

I hope once they are married they stay out of the public eye and go quietly about their business. Sarah never really had anyone to guide her in the early days of her marriage, which is why she made so many mistakes, and the YORKS are disliked by most of the media. How different from the Duke and Duchess of York, in 1923, when they were loved by everyone!
Sarah made mistakes because she was silly.. and as a result she is unpopular, her ex is unpopular.. he made a lot of stupid mistakes too.. and the girls are suffering from that fall out. If Eugenie just quietely wanted to get married somewhere private, Im sure that she would not get any particular flak...
  #1080  
Old 09-23-2018, 09:12 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
I think there are bridal processions every day. There are always bridal couples using a horsedrawn carriage on the day. And even when the couple would have used one of the Queen's Bentleys, still constables are needed for the security and still such a car is escorted by cavalry, to bring pomp and circumstance. This discussion is beyond belief. What a venom towards a young couple.
How did we go from saying the public carriage ride is a mistake, to directing venom towards a young couple?

Personally I am interested in the wedding and hope they have a lovely day. I couldn't care less if they want to take a carriage ride from Windsor to London and back again.

(AND, I still say the carriage ride should have been the same as Peter Phillips had, because this expanded one is causing needless animosity. JMO.)
__________________

Closed Thread


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Engagement of Princess Eugenie of York and Jack Brooksbank: January 22, 2018 JessRulz The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 228 03-15-2018 10:50 PM




Popular Tags
alqasimi althorp aristocracy armenia belgian royal family birthday celebration castles charles of wales chittagong clarence house crown crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crown princess victoria current events cyprus danish history denmark duchess of sussex duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch dutch history dutch royal family felipe vi foundation french revolution future genealogy general news germany henry v hill historical drama house of bourbon house of glucksburg house of saxe-coburg and gotha jumma languages lithuanian castles mail meghan markle memoir mohammed vi monaco christening monaco history naples nobel 2019 norway official visit palaces palestine prince charles prince harry prince of wales russian imperial family saudi arabia settings spain spanish history spencer family state visit sweden swedish royal family swedish royalty thai royal family tracts united kingdom usa


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:38 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×