Royals & Nobles and Wealth, Costs and Finances - Page 6

Elspeth · #**101** 06-09-2005, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Are they worth all that money? well no. If you look at the queen's year you see that she has a months break over Christmas and New Year, another month at Easter and a three month break in the summer when she hides away at Balmoral. During those five months she carries out no public duties. For the remaining seven months she stays at Windsor every weekend from Friday to Monday and carries out no public duties on those days. That leaves 3 days when she does carry out duties. This means that there are only 84 days in the year when she carries out public duties. That is 11 weeks out of 52. Not bad work if you can get it.

Even when she isn't doing public duties, she's still dealing with government business. Her position as head of state carries government responsibilities, which isn't the case for all the European monarchies - I think the Swedish monarch is really just a figurehead these days - and she's working at her official job even when the public isn't seeing her out and around. I remember the Duchess of Kent saying in an interview once that people seem to have the impression that when royals aren't out in public, they somehow stop existing, whereas in reality there's a lot of day-to-day work that people just don't see.

His Lordship · #**102** 06-09-2005, 11:14 PM

I agree. Her Majesty, as we say in America, "works her butt off", as Queen. From what I read she is up by 7:00 each morning...works through her morning appointments, has lunch, afternoon appointments....both times of the day either in Buckingham Palace, traveling, or out and about in Britain....eat's dinner and then might have an evening engagement...usually in bed 11 or so...not as early as many on here think.

Imagine being 80 and doing all that...yes she may get her time in the late summer early fall at Balmoral, and at the holidays, but she has to keep up with the red boxes for containing the government papers to review, answer correspondence, since the older members of the Royal Family still prefer letter writing, and so on.

I am tired just thinking about it! :)

Victoria1999 · #**103** 06-09-2005, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azile1710

This is the most common sentiment I heard from the British people I met with during my travels. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't have the sense that other monarchs are met with this incredibly low public opinion.

Eliza

I would not be suprized. I mean see what happened in the 90's...Charles and Diana's divorce, Andrew and Sara...and sorry, but I just don't see how anyone can have a respect for Charles.
BRF thinks that it is on the top of the world, but actually the ordinery people are much better than them.

EmpressRouge · #**104** 06-09-2005, 11:38 PM

Constitutionally speaking, it would be hard to abolish the British and other monarchies. The prime minister enters his position by appointment by the head of state without the need for confirmation by parliament, the process is known as "kissing hands." Also, it is the monarch's job to give a Speech from the Throne to outline a government's upcoming policies (kind of like the President of the United States' State of the Union Address). Even though there are elections and democracy, the monarchies in these countries still plays an important part, even if it is just an important ceremonial party.

His Lordship · #**105** 06-09-2005, 11:56 PM

You know what though? If QEII said no to any government proposal, the government would come to a grinding halt. Not that she would, as she always says yes of course.

popsicle · #**106** 06-10-2005, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by His Lordship

It does not help that Sophie was trapped by that horrible reporter and recordered making those comments about three years ago. But, she also should have known better to keep her mouth shut.

can someone tell me the comments Sophie made??

His Lordship · #**107** 06-10-2005, 01:55 AM

A reporter disguised as a potential business client to her PR firm somehow managed to get her talking about various royals and the Prime Minister and Cherie Blair and the Opposition Leader MP Howard:

Below is taken from newspaper accounts in 2001. These are not my words or comments.

She made some rather unroyal comments for which she had to publicly apologize for.

A "naive" Countess of Wessex could find her PR business in jeopardy after private comments she allegedly made about the royal family were published.

The warning appears in this week's PR Week, the magazine for the public relations industry.

It said the alleged blunder by the countess would not inspire confidence in her clients. The row erupted when details of a conversation reported to have taken place between Prince Edward's 36-year-old wife and a journalist posing as a sheikh were printed in two Sunday newspapers.

This is from Hello Magazine in 2001:

2 APRIL 2001
In a bizarre sting operation, a reporter posing as an Arab sheikh taped conversations with the Countess of Wessex in which she allegedly insulted the Queen and Prime Minister Tony Blair, among others. Though the reporter agreed not to publish the tapes after Prince Edward’s wife granted an exclusive interview with the Sunday tabloid, excerpts from the covert exchange have surfaced.

The tapes reportedly reveal Sophie referring to Prime Minister Tony Blair as “too presidential,” and his wife, Cherie Blair, as “absolutely horrid.” She deems William Hague “deformed,” and comments on comparisons between herself and the late Princess Diana. Sophie predicts Prince Charles and long-time companion Camilla Parker Bowles would wed “after the old lady dies,” referring to the 100-year-old Queen Mother.

The mock sheikh posed as the head of a Dubai investment company in search of a PR firm. The two had met for drinks previously to discuss how Sophie’s outfit, R-JH, could work with his fictional company.

The Palace downplayed the situation, claiming that not a single of the alleged quotes was true. “The story is riddled with inaccuracies and fictions. Suggestions that she was in any way disrespectful to the Queen or the Queen Mother are untrue.” However, Sophie apparently felt the story significant enough to pen hand-written notes to the Queen and the Blairs, among others.

The Queen has expressed sympathy for her daughter-in-law, and is said to be angry with the newspaper for setting up such a dodgy operation. Edward too is supportive, though he was reportedly cool with her when the two left for an official visit to the Middle East over the weekend.

Breaking with royal precedent, the former Sophie Rhys-Jones sat for an extended interview with the News Of The World in which she discusses such taboo topics as her husband’s sexuality and their plans for a family.

“There’s a part of you that does get upset and hurt when you read something that is incredibly personal and completely untrue and either designed to hurt or just to make trouble,” she said, adding, “I mean, you know, supposedly separate bedrooms. That’s such a load of rubbish. Supposedly living apart all week. We are probably apart maybe one, maybe two nights a week, which is a lot less than an awful lot of other people.”

Sophie denies her husband is anything but a staunch heterosexual. “I can tell you he’s not gay. How I’d love to be able to shout and sing from the rooftops: It is not true. I want to prove it to people, but it’s impossible to do that.”
She reveals the two hope to start a family. “I do sometimes walk into a room and feel that people aren’t looking at my face, they’re looking at my tummy,” she said. “There has been a certain amount of pressure. I would explore all avenues and I certainly wouldn’t rule out IVF. It’s quite important for me to have children.”

Sean.~ · #**108** 06-10-2005, 01:59 AM

Quote:

=His Lordship]It is noteworthy that many other royals in other families around Europe do have real jobs in the sense of how we all do. They maintain their style and titles, but still go to the office everyday.

HRH Prince Richard in England is architect for example. He works. His children work and yet he still carries out official engagements.

He was trained as an architect & was a partner in a company in the late 60s and early 70s. However, The Duke of Gloucester resigned that position after the death of his brother in order to become a full-time royal. He doesn't work as an architect per se, but rather serves as a commissioner, is a member in the Royal Institute of British Architects, and President of an architectural society. His children are *not* royal (they are a part of the Queen's family), btw. The Duke and Duchess receive an allowance from the Queen.

Quote:

Prince Charles has his various schemes and also has his Duchy of Cornwall business with food and patio furniture.

Yes, but the Duchy is his business. He derives his (huge) income from it. He doesn't money from he civil list

Quote:

Prince Michael serves on several boards of companies and Princess Michael writes and lectures.

The Michaels, as the youngest son of a youngest son, are the only ones who do not receive an allowance from HM (Charles' income from the DoC notwithstanding).

Quote:

Lady Helen Taylor works with her husband and his gallery and is also an ambassador for Armani.

Viscount Linley has his shop which makes furniture and knicknacks. He is extremely talented.

Lady Sarah is an artist.

So, yes, they do work.

As they should because none of these three individuals are members of the royal family. They are members of the Queen's family. Big difference.

His Lordship · #**109** 06-10-2005, 02:04 AM

Thank you for clarifying Sean. I know HRH Charles does not receive money from the Duchy businesses.

I was simply illustrating a point that you can be a royal and still have a business per se when I mentioned all of these royals.

I would consider the three children of HRH Duke of Gloucester to be junior members of the Royal Family.

The Earl of Ulster has a budding military career and is married to a doctor. They married in 2002.

Sean.~ · #**110** 06-10-2005, 02:42 AM

Hello His Lordship,

Quote:

=His Lordship]Thank you for clarifying Sean. I know HRH Charles does not receive money from the Duchy businesses

He derives his income from the Duchy surplusses.

Quote:

I was simply illustrating a point that you can be a royal and still have a business per se when I mentioned all of these royals.

I would consider the three children of HRH Duke of Gloucester to be junior members of the Royal Family.

The Earl of Ulster has a budding military career and is married to a doctor. They married in 2002

You may consider them as such (as many others no doubt do), but technically and officially they are not members. Yes, Alexander married Claire Short in 2002. His sister, Davina, married Gary Lewis, a Maori builder, last year as well. Lady Rose Windsor is the last remaining single child of the Duke.

Elspeth · #**111** 06-10-2005, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Yes, Alexander married Claire Short in 2002.

I do hope not - that would be rather a mismatch!

You mean Claire Booth, I hope.

His Lordship · #**112** 06-10-2005, 03:45 AM

LOL!! Good catch Elspeth. :)

Do you know what type of doctor she is?

His Lordship · #**113** 06-10-2005, 03:50 AM

I would beg to differ. Just because they carry no official duties and do not have the HRH title, they are direct descendents and junior members.

I also believe that the children of Princess Alexandra, the Hon. Lady Ogilvy, and Sir. Angus, the children of HRH Duke and Duchess of Kent, the children of HRH Prince and Princess Michael of Kent are the same in that regard.

All the grandchildren of the Queen and Duke are as well members....titled or not.

But such is the beauty of debate and difference of opinion. How spirited of all us to engage in it.

But we are getting a little of base with the forum's purpose here.

So back to the Civil List discussions.

Take it away Elspeth... :)

Warren · #**114** 06-10-2005, 04:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by His Lordship

LOL!! Good catch Elspeth. :)

Do you know what type of doctor she is?

A GP, I believe.

norwegianne · #**115** 06-10-2005, 05:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by His Lordship

I would beg to differ. Just because they carry no official duties and do not have the HRH title, they are direct descendents and junior members.

A difference is made in most European monarchies on this, I believe. It lies in the fact that being part of the Royal family and being part of the monarch's family are often separate things. Being part of the Royal family is having a HRH title/HH title, having royal duties and getting an allowance from the state. Generally just for the monarch, the monarch's spouse, the monarch's children and grandchildren in the ruling line, though sometimes it may be a bit expanded.

Peter and Zara Phillips are part of the Queen's family, but they aren't part of the Royal family, as far as I'm aware. Marius Borg Høiby is part of King Harald's family, but not part of the royal family. The Rosenborgs of Denmark are part of Queen Margrethe's family, but not part of the Royal family, same goes with the Counts and Countesses Bernadottes of Sweden in relation with King Carl Gustaf.

Quote:

Originally Posted by His Lordship

So back to the Civil List discussions.

It may be just me who misunderstands this whole thing, but the Civil List? In reality? Doesn't it just support the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh? I've heard that the Queen pays it back for what she gets for the other royals.

Monalisa · #**116** 06-10-2005, 08:21 AM

I think this topic is already being discussed in other thread!

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...6&page=1&pp=20

Sean.~ · #**117** 06-10-2005, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I do hope not - that would be rather a mismatch!

You mean Claire Booth, I hope.

Yes, of course I did! My bad. I had the former minister in mind for some reason.

lashinka2002 · #**118** 06-10-2005, 09:38 AM

Does anyone know if when Princess Beatrice & Eugiene become of age will they have royal duties and be supported by the civil list or will they make carrers of their own and derrive income from that?

Sean.~ · #**119** 06-10-2005, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by His Lordship

I would beg to differ. Just because they carry no official duties and do not have the HRH title, they are direct descendents and junior members.

I also believe that the children of Princess Alexandra, the Hon. Lady Ogilvy, and Sir. Angus, the children of HRH Duke and Duchess of Kent, the children of HRH Prince and Princess Michael of Kent are the same in that regard.

All the grandchildren of the Queen and Duke are as well members....titled or not.

But such is the beauty of debate and difference of opinion. How spirited of all us to engage in it.

But we are getting a little of base with the forum's purpose here.

So back to the Civil List discussions.

Take it away Elspeth... :)

You are free to differ, and of course can regard them as such on a personal level, however, officially your position is not correct As Nowregiene has correctly pointed out, membership in the RF is limited to those with the syle of HRH, which is limited to the children and grandchildren of the monarch in the *male-line* as per the letters patent issued on 1917. The purpose of this was to limit the size of the Royal Family (the reason why Lady Louise isn''t a Princess).

The children of Richard, Edward of Kent, and Michael are not royal. And the children of Margaret, Alexandra, and Anne mot certainly are not either, as titles *and* rank are generally derived from one's father's side, and the husbands of all of these women were not royal.

His Lordship · #**120** 06-10-2005, 12:23 PM

Officially??

I take it you work or are related to Her Majesty?

LOL......I think we the people can be more snobbish and rigid about right and wrong, official or not official, than the royals.

Sorry Sean...they are all part of the extended royal family.

So we have a matter of opinion...that's fine by me.

So the children may not have titular dignity....that does not make them royal.

Little Marius is an exception as he was not born to anyone in the Royal Family but came by virtue of his mother's marriage to be a member of the King's family.

And I think he is doing a great job at it! :)