Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s refurbishments cost taxpayer £1m
- Thread starter Ilikeitblackplease
- Start date
This and people forget that the royal family give way more to the gov then they take out.
I'm a little skeptical of that claim, can you explain to me how that works?
They can have my money twice over. Great PR for the country which keeps us in the World news which means more visitors. Not sure exactly how much the Royal family cost me in tax last year but probably better value for money than the pound I spent last year so my local council could build a Boules court/ring/whatever by the local council building so the head of the council could run his Boules team from.
You can't put a price on an institution at ends with a basic concept of equality.
Plenty of things we could do which could make money, it doesn't make them desirable (like a shaky economic argument to keep them is a good enough justification anyway).
Personally, I think the entire Royal Family is a national embarrassment - still living in an age of kings & queens in this day & age is beyond pathetic.
Just to note, switching to a straight standard republic isn't a great solution either - the entire idea of a head of state which bleeds money from the population is stupid - if anything it should be a position voted in with no benefits, not to some scum-bag politician - but to people who have made great contributions to society (scientists, life-savers, artists, great thinkers or philanthropists) - people who embody the values we aspire to attain as a society.
Plenty of things we could do which could make money, it doesn't make them desirable (like a shaky economic argument to keep them is a good enough justification anyway).
Personally, I think the entire Royal Family is a national embarrassment - still living in an age of kings & queens in this day & age is beyond pathetic.
Just to note, switching to a straight standard republic isn't a great solution either - the entire idea of a head of state which bleeds money from the population is stupid - if anything it should be a position voted in with no benefits, not to some scum-bag politician - but to people who have made great contributions to society (scientists, life-savers, artists, great thinkers or philanthropists) - people who embody the values we aspire to attain as a society.
Last edited:
Why?
"Her Majesty actually paid the Treasury £190.8m in 2006/07 from the income from the Crown Estates"
Her Majesty gives about £150ml a year to the UK gov of the time. That's her own money.
Second thoughts you're a British person and know nothing of the royal family!
Getting somewhere towards the roof repairs then.
Generally, I think people saying 'worth it' in this thread are failing to distinguish the difference between the royal family being beneficial in financial terms, and the unnecessary expenditure on their behalf. If they are profitable, make them more profitable. I refuse to believe that further gains couldn't be made from the royal family, tax or otherwise.
I think you're failing to remember that the queen gives the UK gov more money than what is given back.
Asking for an explanation of a statement is a natural thing to do isn't it?
I actually imagine the real figures are far more complicated than that, just a quick google eludes to the cost of £40mil being the just the direct cost, once you factor in non-direct costs like security etc it already rises to £180M.
Not saying they aren't a net contributor, just wondering if anyone actually knows..once you factor in lies,damn lies, statistics and accountancy
Why is that so surprising to you, I have no interest whatsoever in the royal family or history *shrug*
But I don't wish them any ill, I quite like Charles, he's a bit odd, but then he's had an odd upbringing, so it's not surprising
I think in the case of Kensington Palace that The State is the Landlord and in any building, the Landlord is responsible for repairs....William and Kate are decorating the apartment at their own expense, just like any other tenant. If you want the Royal Household to be responsible for everything to do with the Crown Estates, then give the Crown Estates back to them and remove public funding.
We would be a lot worse off financially mind.
Last edited:
About 52p.
That's misleading as that's only the Sovereign grant / everybody in the uk?, when you factor in other costs such as security etc it increases, and then you could argue it should only be divided by tax payers, since it is funded from the public purse, which would increase the costs again.
Even so, it's only a few quid each, maybe a tenner.
Unless of course Deuse is right and they are a net contributor themselves, then they cost us nothing. Who knows.
I take it that this is before the £100ml+ from the Crown Estates. So really the answer is nothing.
Last edited:
Directly?
Regardless I still think they should pay more considering they have more money than most mortals can fathom by just being born.
Give a toss. The royals bring in multi millions of £'s to this country every year which is then chugged back into welfare, nhs, roads, services etc etc etc that we all benefit from.
I'm not going to do the sum but it probably cost me about .4p. Oh no whatever will I do?
I'm not going to do the sum but it probably cost me about .4p. Oh no whatever will I do?
Its not misleading as the security costs would apply to anyone at risk in the UK, it is a cost inherent in their position as Head of State and would be (arguable more if you believe some sources) the same if we had a republican head of State...those same security costs apply to Members of Parliament and other people tasked with high profile occupations for the State. The Security is part of the costs associated with their occupation and since when do costs associated with a persons occupational expenses, paid by what is effectively their employer become the responsibility of the employee? If we only divided it by a certain demographic of taxpayers (only income tax payers) then it is still under £1, if we include all taxpayers (including associated taxpayers such as VAT, Inheritance, Corporation tax etc) then it is about 52p.
If we removed the Crown Estate agreements and stopped funding the Royals as per that agreement, then we would be worse off and the Royals would be vastly better off.
Last edited:
In that example it is less than nothing as the Royal Household now receives a set percentage of the Net Revenues of the Crown Estates (currently 15%) and nothing else....so technically the State is 85% better off because of the Crown Estate arrangements.
Right, as usual a load of tosh to obfuscate the issue.
There is a total cost to the state incurred by the Royal Family being there. Of course this includes ancillary costs such as security, upkeep of the palace and whatever else.
Your ramblings about employer/employee are pretty irrelevant and who said anything about it being the responsibility of employee...the associated costs of an employee are included in the total cost of that employee to the employer. The same way the 'wage' paid to the Royals is only part of the total cost to the countries purse.
Actually it is you that is obfuscating the issue, not I.
The costs of Palaces etc would exist regardless of the Royal Family...as the costs and indeed the profits from the Palaces etc are the responsibility of the State (under the Crown Estate agreements) they can not be attributed to the Royal Family personally.
The security is associated with their role to the State (effectively as employees, the State being their Employer) so as you say, those associated costs are the responsibility of the State, therefore cannot be attributed to the Royal family personally. If instead we take them simply as citizens then, also they are entitled as citizens of our society to protection from the State..do you attribute a cost responsibility to each individual who need to use the Police or other form of protection (armed forces etc) as a burden upon the State? No you don't because those costs are part of the responsibility of society.
The total cost of security for the Royal Family and other VIPs (such as MPs, Public Figures visiting Heads of State, and so on) is currently £128m, the exact breakdown of how much of those costs are associated with the Royal Household are unknown. The Royals, Police and Whitehall are currently in the process of limiting State supplied Security to only members on Public Engagements and the core members of the Royal Household such as The Queen, Philip, Charles and his Sons, the review should be complete this year if I remember rightly.
Last edited: