Queenie – “I want more”


Well I can’t keep my mouth shut about this. The Queen has privately asked for more (tax-payers) money for the maintainance and upkeep of her official residences and for her official duties. Royal staff have called for a VAT exemption on payments for services given to the Queen and I hear that as things stand the Queen’s reserves will be gone by 2011.

Ok, the buildings belong to the state anyway so it’s our obligation to maintain them. But her subjects are feeling the credit squeeze too. The running costs of our own humble little abodes are increasing and we arehaving to make cutbacks and tighten our belts. Is it not reasonable to expect the royals to lead by example – to consume less and to budget more?

And I hear that her royal almighty feels that she needs more money to carry out her official duties – her official duties being, as some would argue, a service to the British public. Yes and there are millions of public servants in this country who provide a service to the public and they are having to accept pay-freezes.

Does anyone else find it utterly absurd that one of the richest women in the world is asking for more money? Personally, I think it just goes to prove how ignorantly out of touch the royal householders are with the real world. At a time when the economy is faltering and the country is facing a deep recession, when high levels of unemployment and house repossessions are likely, to ask for more money is not only insensitive, it’s bloody offensive.

From the Republic:

Britain is facing serious financial challenges, people are losing their jobs, the country is getting heavily into debt, yet all the Queen can think about is grabbing more of our hard earned cash.

Suffice to say I’m relieved that the Treasury has thus far refused this ludicrous plea and what’s more, I say let the royal family, as a publicly-funded organisation, go bankrupt. It’s one business that this country can survive perfectly well without.

It’s ok, the bolting hutches of beastliness won’t become paupers overnight. They have huge personal assets, probably much more wealth than we are aware of.

And just so you know, I reject the tourism arguments.

Advertisements

8 responses to this post.

  1. Royalty, gosh! When I see their family pictures – I mean any royal family – my blood curdles in my veins. And every time one or two or more new members add to the photo.

    And I think how much people have to work to upkeep this regiment of do-nothings.

    Reply

  2. My feelings too Jose.

    Reply

  3. Maybe we should get rid of the politicians, who all sound the same anyway, and re-instate the Queen as almighty ruler of the land. We could pay our taxes in organic, back garden tomatoes.

    Reply

  4. Posted by Curtis Powell on September 29, 2008 at 1:46 am

    We should all bear carefully in mind the constitutional safeguards inherent in the monarchy: In England while the Queen occupies the highest office of state; no one can take over the government. While she is head of the law, no politician can take over the courts. While she is ultimately in command of the Armed Forces, no would-be dictator can take over the Army. The Queen’s only power, in short, is to deny power to anyone else. This sentiment was borne out by the actions of King Juan Carlos of Spain who, in order to prevent a right-wing coup personally took control of the armed forces and singly handedly saved democracy in Spain.Winston Churchill one of the greatest democratically elected leaders of all time was of this view

    ”If the Allies at the peace table at Versailles had allowed a Hohenzollern, a Wittelsbach and a Habsburg to return to their thrones, there would have been no Hitler. A democratic basis of society might have been preserved by a crowned Weimar in contact with the victorious Allies….This war would never have come unless, under American and modernising pressure, we had driven the Habsburgs out of Austria and the Hohenzollerns out of Germany. By making these vacuums we gave the opening for the Hitlerite monster to crawl out of its sewer on to the vacant thrones.”

    Second, as an historical fact the loss of monarchies has rarely benefited the “people”. Russia under Nicholas II, with all the survivals of feudalism, had opposition political parties, independent trade unions and newspapers, a rather radical parliament and a modern legal system. Its agriculture was on the level of the USA, with industry rapidly approaching the West European level. In the USSR there was total tyranny, no political liberties and practically no human rights. Its economy was not viable; agriculture was destroyed. The terror against the population reached a scope unprecedented in history. The monarchy is a political referee, not a political player, and there is a lot of sense in choosing the referee by a different principle from the players. It lessens the danger that the referee might try to start playing. Much of modern constitutional theory has been an attempt to, however awkwardly, replace the monarch. An elected President who tries to step above politics, like the French President, is no substitute for a King who has stepped in by right of inheritance. Still less is an active politician, like the President of the United States, a substitute. We can damn the Government and cheer the King.

    Reply

  5. I don’t completely disagree with your interesting assessment Curtis. I just wonder whether the citizens of Nepal would agree with you.

    There is still a reliance on a monarch not abusing their power, just as there is with a President. Maybe a computer at the helm would be the answer … but lets not call it Hal. 🙂

    Reply

  6. as an american, I’ve always been intrigued with monarchy. I have wondered how the subjects feel about having a queen or a king.

    and, I’ve wondered if a person can be qualified to run a country, just because they lucked into it by birth. on the other hand, we’ve proven time and again, that being elected by the people does not necessarily qualify someone, either. hmmm, I wonder what the answer is…

    wouldn’t it be nice if our leaders had to live the way we do, without servants, and nightly dinner parties for 100 people? just to experience they way life really is? maybe they’d be more in tune with us, and more considerate toward us. or maybe the privileged gene would still win out.

    Reply

  7. I think the ‘privileged gene’ would still win out. The Queen occasionally pops into someone’s from living room for a cuppo tea, but it’s always a staged affair.

    Her grandsons William (future king) and Harry have always been keen to find out a little of what so-called real life is about. But they can only do that so far as they are mean to have round the clock security protection. Occasionally the princes manage to shake their security detail off!

    The future king/queen is trained in the art and duty of leading the state as soon as their dummy falls from their mouth. Part of this involved military training, which both Princes have been doing over the last 2 years. They have been trying to out do each other on achieving real battle experience.

    A lot of people in the UK see no reason to continue the monarchy but just as many see a reason for keeping it, so they won’t be going away any time soon.

    Reply

  8. I don’t buy into the “alternative would be worse” argument but in any case, it should be up to the people to decide.

    Monarchy is an undemocratic system of power and privilege. We try to teach our children about the values of meritocracy and then ask them to pledge allegiance to the figurehead of an hereditary system.

    The British royal family have no real powers but they cost the country millions and millions of pounds each year. They are not good value for money and at a time when the country is facing a financial crisis, to ask for more money is grossly irresponsible and downright selfish.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: