Making the news today....

[Mark J]

5 minutes ago, waterbuoy said:

Sorry to bring a touch of reality to the table but FYI:

 

All of the operating profits from the Crown Estate Scotland coastal 'portfolio' are given to the local authorities via an agreement reached with COSLA (Convention of Scottish Local Authorities) - the authorities whose coastline generates the greatest revenue receive the largeer shares which, in some cases, can be between £1million and £2million a year - to be spent on projects targeting coastal communities.

 

South of the border (ie England and Wales) then the income is passed directly to the piublic purse by The Crown Estate (TCE), though TCE also have a number of initiatives by which coastal communities can apply for funding directly.

 

The Crown Estate is effectively a land management company, managing land and assets owned by 'The Sovereign' (not the Royal Family) on behalf of the public. It dates back to 1760 when George III (who was financially inept) passed the Crown's assets to Parliament in return for an annual stipend - this became the Civil List.  Over the past 10 years TCE have generated an income of over £4 billion for the public purse (aka the 'consolidated fund') which is passed to the Treasury.

That's fair enough. To me it seems a bit daft to give someone >£85 million in a sovereign grant when they have the capacity to earn it themselves with the land they stole (own). 

[waterbuoy]

7 minutes ago, Mark J said:

That's fair enough. To me it seems a bit daft to give someone >£85 million in a sovereign grant when they have the capacity to earn it themselves with the land they stole (own). 

The primary purpose of the Sovereign Grant is to pay for the upkeep of the castles and palaces, plus the travel to and from official events etc - hence the dropping of the Royal Train to save money.

[Mark J]

8 minutes ago, waterbuoy said:

The primary purpose of the Sovereign Grant is to pay for the upkeep of the castles and palaces, plus the travel to and from official events etc - hence the dropping of the Royal Train to save money.

Why don't they pay for it themselves? 

They could easily sell a castle or two and still have plenty of bedrooms, if they're skint. If Queen could find 12 million to help her sex pest son, I'm sure they can sort their own mortgages. 

Edited June 30 by Mark J

[waterbuoy]

Because the buildings are not theirs to repair - they belong to 'The Crown' which is more than the monarchy - it includes (I think) the church, the judiciary and the government.  The Royal Family own a very small number of properties - I think just Sandringham and Balmoral - which are not publicly funded.

 

So far as selling a castle or two is concerned - they are prevented from doing so by various acts of parliament - not least because they are not theirs to sell!

 

Rest assured I am no fan of most of the Royal Family, I was merely pointing out that the coastal revenue does go back to those of us who do live on the coast etc.

[Steven P]

29 minutes ago, Mark J said:

That's fair enough. To me it seems a bit daft to give someone >£85 million in a sovereign grant when they have the capacity to earn it themselves with the land they stole (own). 

 

Though 85 million or 4 billion, I reckon the tax payer does OK from the 'land they stole'

[Mark J]

12 minutes ago, Steven P said:

 

Though 85 million or 4 billion, I reckon the tax payer does OK from the 'land they stole'

I think they should each pack a pillowcase of belongings and get a job. It's backwards to fawn over a royal family. 

 

[Mark J]

43 minutes ago, waterbuoy said:

Because the buildings are not theirs to repair - they belong to 'The Crown' which is more than the monarchy - it includes (I think) the church, the judiciary and the government.  The Royal Family own a very small number of properties - I think just Sandringham and Balmoral - which are not publicly funded.

 

So far as selling a castle or two is concerned - they are prevented from doing so by various acts of parliament - not least because they are not theirs to sell!

 

Rest assured I am no fan of most of the Royal Family, I was merely pointing out that the coastal revenue does go back to those of us who do live on the coast etc.

But aren't the royals the heads of the church, judiciary and parliament? 

It was definitely the Queen (Regina) vs me in court in 1996.

Edited June 30 by Mark J

[Oldfeller]

I met prince Charles once, before he was king, he struck me as somebody who would do a job, any job, to the best of his ability, extremely interested in my job at the time, and I got the feeling he derived a great deal of enjoyment and contentment being even for a brief few hours in the middle of nowhere with ordinary people doing manual work,It's my belief and observation he was more able and willing to do that job than any of us would be to attempt his, even more so now he is king, he became very close friends with an old fellow [now sadly deceased] who treated him with respect and even gave him some instructions on the job,which he gladly  took part in, and corresponded with him long after his visit.

 

Edited June 30 by Oldfeller

[Stubby]

8 hours ago, sime42 said:

 

Were you boweled out or did you get the runs? 

I got a stain in my crease . 

[Capetown]

Erin Patterson: Jury starts deliberations in mushroom murder trial

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

They will decide whether Erin Patterson murdered relatives with beef Wellingtons laced with toxic mushrooms.