In b4 the myth that the monarchy brings in more money from tourism than it uses.
(Tip: That statement is false).
If the crown estate has already made £285 million profit, then they've basically already paid for it.
As plenty of others have said, i'm sure it brings in more money via tourism than it will cost to do the work.
Wait, I was too late.
Also doesn't the queen have billions worth in property? i'm not exactly sure why this money has to come from the taxpayer....(Cause it always seems that it does when it's anything that requires spending, uh oh gotta get taxpayers to front it despite my billions!).
Not quite about things anymore.... feels a bit like it's a troll. BRB working my 6.50 hour zero hour contract job (Which she endorses thank god! /sarcasm), queen needs a refurb though! glad to pay towards that!
Don't care about the queen or the royal family, but it is a national landmark, and it would be a shame for it to fall to ruin. Even the froggies have pumped money into the old royal palaces in France as they understand the importance of heritage and history.
I mean that is true, it's a national landmark, I just get confused.... she gets to live there why doesn't she front the bill? may be a national landmark but it's not like we live there (I mean that's not entirely a valid point we don't all live at stone henge but I'd pay for it's upkeep sure). More my point being it's not as if the monarchy don't have enough money to sort it out.... oh poor them all those billions!
What about all the other historical sites around the UK I don't think the govt funds the upkeep of all of them do they? correct me if i'm wrong, normally they charge to see places and the money goes towards the upkeep. Why is the monarchy any different?
Also with all the austerity cuts to hard workers, police cuts etc, they can't sit there and be serious about this? surely?