The Cambridges took a £5,000 helicopter ride after the Queen’s garden party

152975PCN_PrincesStretchMGS012

Here are some photos of Prince William doing some yoga stretches over the weekend before he and Prince Harry played polo for charity. I’m not sure why the British press is making such a big deal about William stretching? Stretching is good for you! And polo is very athletic, and you could really hurt yourself. It’s good to stay loose and stretched, so good for William and his team for taking it seriously. You can see more of William’s yoga poses here.

Meanwhile, the Cambridges are still slammed for their costly and unnecessary helicopter habit. Several months back, the British press went on the attack about Kate’s ridiculous need to take £3,000 helicopter rides to and from Norfolk and London, especially given the fact that the Queen takes thrifty train rides rather than helicopters. Kate was also criticized for taking a helicopter to Scotland for what seemed like a quickly thrown-together event to push back on the criticism that she’s lazy. Well, guess what? Yes, William and Kate took a helicopter from London to Norfolk last week at exorbitant cost just so they could get home after attending the Queen’s garden party.

After a strenuous afternoon at the Queen’s Buckingham Palace garden party, it seems that the prospect of a draining journey home on a packed train or a long ride in a car was all too much for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. So the Royal couple opted instead to be whisked back to their Norfolk estate in a luxury helicopter – a ride that cost taxpayers thousands of pounds.

Our exclusive picture shows a casually dressed William and Kate sauntering across the grass to board a Sikorsky S-76C that had landed close to their London home, Kensington Palace, on Tuesday evening. The privately hired helicopter then flew them the 100 miles to Anmer Hall on the Queen’s Sandringham estate in just 45 minutes – and at an estimated cost of £5,000. The £8 million aircraft, which is described as ‘the true luxury express of the skies’, boasts a six-seat leather-upholstered cabin and a top speed of 180mph.

Buckingham Palace refused to comment on the cost of the helicopter, which was hired from Oxford VIP charter company Capital Air Services. But Martin Benetar, director of private charter company Charter-A, which leases a helicopter identical to this one, said it will have set taxpayers back £15,000 for the day. The helicopter was used by Princess Anne for two Royal engagements in Portsmouth before it flew William and Kate home. At a day rate of £15,000, the three trips each cost an average of £5,000. Mr Benetar said: ‘It’s an £8 million vehicle and doesn’t come cheap. They cost about £3,000 to hire per hour, plus there is the cost of fuel and pilots.’

By contrast, the Queen regularly joins ordinary travellers by catching the train when she goes back to Sandringham. She takes the train from King’s Cross to King’s Lynn, most recently last December when she and the Duke of Edinburgh bought £54.90 first-class tickets. The cost of a one-way first-class train ticket on the Great Northern service from King’s Cross to King’s Lynn has now risen to £55.40. Should William and Kate have been accompanied by five security officers, the total cost would have been almost £390. But the journey would have taken two hours longer than their helicopter ride. The couple would also have had to be driven to King’s Cross, a journey of about 25 minutes, before boarding the train for the one hour 55 minutes rail trip to King’s Lynn. They would then have to be picked up and driven for about 25 minutes to Anmer Hall. Alternatively, driving all the way in one of the Royal Range Rovers would take at least two hours and 45 minutes and cost £40 in petrol.

Norman Baker, a member of the Privy Council and former Liberal Democrat Cabinet Minister, said: ‘This is an outrageous waste of public money. At a time when everybody else is tightening their belts, it seems members of the Royal Family are loosening theirs and the public are having to pick up the bill.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“After a strenuous afternoon at the Queen’s Buckingham Palace garden party…” Love it. Yes, the poor sausages were just so exhausted after they were forced to interact with peasants for a few hours that they just could not take the train! Could you imagine how grueling that would be for them? I would also imagine that Will and Kate had to take the helicopter FROM Norfolk just to attend the garden party, for reasons. Reasons involving Workshy Will’s tantrums and Charles and the Queen’s need to “encourage” the Cambridges to do a bare minimum of work by bribing them with taxpayer-funded helicopter rides, multi-million renovations and wardrobes worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.

152975PCN_PrincesStretchMGS002

152975PCN_PrincesStretchMGS013

Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

116 Responses to “The Cambridges took a £5,000 helicopter ride after the Queen’s garden party”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Clare says:

    ‘This is an outrageous waste of public money. At a time when everybody else is tightening their belts, it seems members of the Royal Family are loosening theirs and the public are having to pick up the bill.’

    THIS

    Why do they need a multi million pound home in London, then, if not to stay overnight after a desperately exhausting few hours sipping tea and making small talk, while having their every need taken care of? Oh no, one must fly back to Anmer – sod the peasants picking up the tab.

    • minx says:

      I don’t wade into these Cambridge posts very often, but IMO the ENTIRE royal family lives varying degrees of shameless unearned extravagance. The Cambridges are just the most recent and obvious example of that systemic problem.
      Yes, I’ve heard the claims that the Queen, Anne and others all “work” i.e., show up at charity events, etc. Nice “work” if you can get it. For this they are lavishly rewarded and kept like pampered poodles. Sorry if I sound cynical but “working royals” is an oxymoron.
      I’m American, not British, so obviously I have no say so in the matter. And I know I’m hardly the first to complain about this.

      • Vava says:

        Minx. Yes.

        These royals have no idea what real work is.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Royal work is definitely not like work for the rest of us. Nevertheless, the others are showing up between 300-600 times per year, while the Cambridges barely make it over 100. Since most of the other “workers” are elderly pensioners with health problems, there is no excuse for W&K’s laziness.

      • Goodnight says:

        It’s not the same as the 9-5 grind, but the Queen and her husband are over 90 and do hundreds of engagements per year, including overseas travel. I think that qualifies as work. Nobody can question the Queen or Prince Phillip’s lifelong dedication.

        I do hate that my money goes towards Will and Kate. I don’t mind it going towards the Queen, since she’s the monarch and she works tirelessly. I don’t mind it going towards Charles, since he’s the heir. I don’t think it should go towards anyone else.

        I like the tradition of the monarchy, but certain things need to change. Will and Kate shouldn’t be funded by the public.

  2. Birdix says:

    I have a wealthy friend who has a helicopter just to avoid So Cal traffic. They are all over the skies in Orange County, it’s annoying. I think this is a generational thing, in addition to (in So Cal) a flashy fun new money thing.
    But why no grief for Anne?

    • epiphany says:

      I imagine your wealthy friend pays for his own helicopter? If the Cambridges paid for the ride, I don’t think anyone would bat an eye; the problem is, the British taxpayers paid for it. I just can’t fathom why their advisors – or the Queen, for that matter – continue to allow them to make these PR blunders.

      • Very annoyed says:

        Perhaps Kate insists on being kept in style?

        I never heard such stories about William before his marriage.

      • Birdix says:

        Yes, it is a shared helicopter so he owns a portion of it (and thinks of himself as quite frugal for doing so!). But doesn’t it seem a bit random what ruffles feathers? Sure, live in palaces, wear wildly expensive clothes, take lavish trips, but … you must be frugal with transportation, because after all we’re paying for all this! To them, for better or worse (actually I’m sure it’s worse), this’d be considered a “rounding error” in the amount they spend each year. I doubt they even think twice about dropping 5K. The illusion that they are just like any normal people is ridiculous.

    • Lucrezia says:

      Yeah, I’m wondering about Princess Anne too. Based on their “3 trips” figure, she’s still stuck in Portsmouth without a ride home?

      • justme says:

        Princess Anne works ceaselessly unlike K & W . By the way a year ago , I was told Princess Anne was on a commercial flight first class with a family friend of ours and P.Anne refused to interact with any of the flight attendants. When they addressed her she would turn to her entourage and ask them to speak for her.
        To be rich and royal… you play by a different set of rules

      • LAK says:

        Anne has a London home. Since 3 trips are listed, the presumption is that she was flown to/ from Portsmouth and she stayed in London.

        Further, Anne works which means any extravagance on her part is overlooked. The cambridges? Not so much.

      • Pedro45 says:

        @justme, I hate stories like this. She may have been born “royal” (I am American and don’t believe in royalty) but true class is how well you treat everyone. Anne failed.

    • astrobiologiste says:

      Anne has an incredible work ethic and as far as I know, she is well-liked by the people. She also has a reputation of being thrifty (and is known to recycle clothes she used 30 years ago!) That is probably why they won’t begrudge her a helicopter ride or two.

    • bluhare says:

      If the helicopter had already been leased for the day, then I guess it was no big deal to take these two home. If £15K had already been spent, at least they got one more trip out of it.

      That is as kind as I can be. Because it didn’t save them much time at all really. There was rush hour train and car traffic to contend with, it’s true, but they’d have had a first class car to themselves on the train, right? So they wouldn’t have had to interact with the great unwashed for the rest of the day anyway.

    • Joannie says:

      Because Anne is unattractive. Lol. Does anyone know for sure they didn’t pay for the helicopter themselves? Perhaps it was flying in that direction anyway.

  3. Senaber says:

    Oh poor sausages! Their time is just so terribly valuable you know… Adding two hours to their journey is just inexcusable. Why, they have children!!!! No parent has ever taken a 2.5 hour trip when they have children and cheese toast that need attending!!!!

  4. HH says:

    “Royal Range Rovers” – HA! I’d like to see what’s in that trim package. ;)

    Pop Sugar had a photo album that celebrated the couples wedding anniversary. A couple things stood out for me. 1) They managed to squander a TON of goodwill. 2) Kate seems to have regressed. Looking at the ramp up/princess preparation engagements after the wedding announcement and through the Canada tour, she appears very engaged and present. Maybe that was all show, but she’s certainly gotten worse, except for her public speaking where she’s made some minor improvements. Unless that time was all a ruse, there definitely seems to be some problems going on.

    Also, photos of me doing yoga / working out are pretty much my worst nightmare.

    • Tourmaline says:

      I agree HH looking a pix from 2011 and even 2012, she seemed a lot more lively.

      • HH says:

        Right?! Looking at those very first years she seemed MORE comfortable than now. It looks like she’s gotten less sure of herself as her job has progressed. Did she become disillusioned because she didn’t realize what was expected of her? This always seems like the most plausible, yet, simultaneously most invalid excuse given their extensive courtship.

      • Tourmaline says:

        Would wager that since she’s had kids she feels a lot more hassled about having to do royal duties? The same kind of engagements that the senior female royals in every royal family in Europe do even though they have kids (and generally they do much more than Kate). I could see Kate looking at her moneyed friends with little kids and feeling resentful that they can live the lives of country aristos while she has to occasionally pull on an expensive frock and go meet the masses. Just don’t think Kate has the grit or the core feeling of duty/responsibility to overcome her desire to be wrapped in cotton wool. Guess she should have married a Van Cutsem or Van Straubenzee if she wanted the lifestyle without the duty.

      • HH says:

        I guess? I mean, she had her two year ramp up period. Then, at the end of that period, she became pregnant with George. After the birth, she needed enough time to enjoy motherhood (fair enough). Then, we have Charlotte. Now, it’s just about being a mother and not creating certain expectations (Irish guard cancellation). Basically, we see that this will continue until they absolutely must step up, which means when Charles is King.

        I also think there’s merit to the argument that her marriage isn’t shaping up to be what she thought. Perhaps she thought certain things about Will would change and they haven’t. There just seems to be a difference in Kate’s overall personality since her dating and early marriage days. She seemed more lively and more sociable with his friends. And now, she’s over all of that. I think motherhood is part of the puzzle, but there seems to be something more.

    • Pam says:

      She didn’t regress, she had two kids. Of course she is going to do less.

      • notasugarhere says:

        She barely worked for the two years before the first baby came along, so kids-as-excuse doesn’t work. All of the other royal women managed to have babies and manage a few hours of charity work (royal engagements) per week.

        Sophie Wessex nearly died having Louise. She still did more engagements the year she was pregnant and the year after Louise arrived than Middleton has ever managed in a single year.

        If KM wants to stay home full time (and fire the two nannies), they have to support themselves. Otherwise, the expectation of 10 hpw of “work” is not asking too much.

      • Goodnight says:

        There is no ‘of course she’ll do less’ because she has kids in the BRF, or any other European monarchy. Compare Diana’s work schedule in the years following the birth of Will and Harry to Kate’s. Compare the Queen’s, when she had her kids. In fact, compare pretty much any royal woman who has children’s schedule to Kate’s and there are no excuses. It’s been a part of the job for hundreds of years. You have kids, you keep working.

        It would be pretty ridiculous to expect women with jobs to work less hours just because they have kids. Maternity leave is one thing, but most workplaces wouldn’t take too kindly to ‘welp, I have kids now so of course I should be working fewer hours’.

  5. Starlight says:

    Definitely no holes in those socks – actually he was doing the exercises with a group of polo blokes so funny how the newspapers just pick out him on his own. Kate must have him in the gym a lot look – no tummy. As for the helicopter it’s laziness really as the train would have been easy but they do seem to want to keep a very low profile. A bit like bunnies putting their heads out of the burrow then popping back in quickly for the two baby bunnies. I think they under estimated the fox, Mr Baker, who sounds very angry.

    • Birdix says:

      I noticed that too–he’s relatively flexible, and in the more yoga-ish poses, looks like he has some experience (good lines). I was a little surprised given all the talk of his laziness and cheese toasties. (Who is Mr. Baker?)

  6. Red Snapper says:

    What’s the big deal? Kate spends more than that for a single dress. You guys are just jelly that you’re not going home with the Sun God that is Will.

  7. LuluPolly says:

    So, what’s up with monarchy? Do they actually make any impactful policy decisions, or are they consulted in any way by Parliament? Or are they tax-payer supported celebrities? Like, reality show celebrities because, obviously, they don’t make movies or music.

    • Kris says:

      They are tax-payer supported celebrities that the British are too stupid to get rid of

      • Tina says:

        This, from a person whose country is poised to elect Donald Trump to the presidency. (If not, please do let us know which enlightened country you come from).

      • SpareRib says:

        They make us a heck of a lot of money through tourism. The Yanks just can’t get enough and will pay huge amounts of cash to see castles/palaces and the changing of the guard. Every Brit pays 20p a year towards the monarchy but we get a lot more back. Not that I’m a fan. We can still rake in the money without them spending ridiculous amounts of helicopters etc. So if you’d like to know why we still have the monarchy, its all thanks you you and your spending habits.

      • MinnFinn says:

        SpareRib – Surely you jest. You don’t really believe you keep the BRF for the benefit of Americans.

        Another way to look at what you pay for your BRF is that is the price per royal official engagement annually is about 250,000 pounds per visit.

      • Megan says:

        No, Tina, we are not poised to elect Donald Trump president. Trump is poised to win a party nomination but still faces a general election in which he is far behind in the polls.

      • LAK says:

        SpareRib, we pay alot more than 20p.

      • Tina says:

        @Megan, the most recent polls are as follows: Rasmussen has Clinton +2, NBC News/WSJ has Clinton +3, and ABC News/WaPo has Trump +2. I know that polls don’t mean much this far out and I don’t think Trump is going to win either, at least I hope not, but he is by no means “far behind in the polls.”

        The point is, no one in the US is entitled to call the British people “stupid” for keeping the monarchy, given all the stupid things the US retains, like the second amendment to the constitution.

      • LuluPolly says:

        I don’t think the British are stupid at all. Maybe the RF are like the Kardashians. Most normal people don’t care or endorse but it’s become representaive of your country’s worst values.

      • Megan says:

        Tina – if I were going to make a point about American politics, I would not point to polls from media organizations owned by Rupert Murdoch and Jeff Bezos.

      • Tina says:

        @Megan, I get my US poll guidance from Nate Silver. He says not to look at any one poll in particular as they all have their biases, but overall trends can be noted. And overall trends have Clinton and Trump close together. The organisations who commission the polls aren’t the problem here.

      • Megan says:

        @Tina The popular vote and the electoral college are separate entities. In order to win the actual election, Trump would need significant gains in the states Romney won, plus pick up a few Democratic strongholds. Relying on opinion polls to disect a presidential election misses the real story on the votes needed to win.

      • Tina says:

        @Megan, I understand how the system works, which is why I said I ultimately don’t think he’s going to win. But you said above that he was “far behind in the polls,” which simply isn’t true.

        Having a royal family isn’t the most logical thing in the world, but all countries have their quirks. Calling the British people “stupid” is neither accurate nor polite.

      • Megan says:

        @Tina – I did not call the Brisitsh people stupid. It is incredibly impolite to suggest I did.

      • Tina says:

        @Megan – Many apologies if my post could be read to suggest that you made that statement.

      • bluhare says:

        It was Kris — the header post in this string — who called the British stupid for keeping the monarchy.

      • Kate says:

        The UK’s historical Royals and the related buildings and landmarks bring in some tourism. The current royals attract a handful of loons each year who go to the UK specifically to stand behind a barrier and wave at the Queen, but that’s about it. They are not a tourism draw, some of their ancestors are.

        Ditching the monarchy would bring in more tourism. Royal residences could be fully opened up to the public.

        Versailles is one of the biggest tourist attractions in the world, and it’s been free of royals for centuries now.

    • LuluPolly says:

      I would love to see GB’s castles and palaces. I have zero interest in seeing the Royal Family. Didn’t realize the were monetarily tied together.
      As a “Yank”, I do not believe I have ever once had a converstaion with a fellow “Yank” about GB’s Royal Family. I only see them on this site so that got me curious.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Same here. As a Yank, l wouldn’t travel to Britain with the expectations of having tea with the royal family. I want to see the palaces, castles and the gorgeous country. I’d also hightail it to the lakes district and the moors, with detours to Wales, Cornwall and Scotland. I doubt my path would rub elbows with the royals at all.

      • kori says:

        The irony is that with the BRF in existence the tourist areas actually suffer. Of the residences that would belong to the government if there wasn’t a monarchy, only a sliver of the rooms are open to the public. Windsor, Buckingham palace and Kensington palace could make even more money if more was open. This happened when additional areas of BP became open during the summer months–drove even more tourists. And a number of unused residences are now offices to support the monarchy–they could be opened as well.

      • Jib says:

        France does just fine with tourism and we know what happened to their monarchy!

    • Megan says:

      Now in its 1,259th season, the BRF is the longest running reality show in the world. The Princess Diana storyline was the most popular. The Duchess Kate storyline was expected to be a big hit, but it’s lackluster performance has been rescued by Prince Harry, who recently emerged as a fan favorite. Look for a lot more Harry in season 1,260.

    • Devereaux says:

      They *are* consulted on legislation which directly effects them as landowners. A privilege not given to ordinary landowners btw. There was a bit of a scandal a few years ago when it was revealed that both Charles and the Queen had vetoed legislation.

      http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/14/secret-papers-royals-veto-bills

      And they aren’t subject to FOIA. Like they’re James Bond or something *eyeroll*.

      Also, they are the only governmental department whose budget cannot be cut. By law, the sovereign grant cannot be less than it was the previous year. It must either remain the same, or rise. Nice, eh?

      This is the mythology of the Monarchy as I have observed, as an American living in the UK: (do take it with that bias in mind).

      Weekly the Prime Minister meets with the Queen to go over plans for what is called “Her government”. This is the mythology of the Windsor’s. That they (unelected Royalty) are the People’s representative. And that the Politicians (elected by the people) are somehow -not. Being required to bow to the “People’s representative” is labelled as humbling, and necessary for the Politician’s ego. That, whatever the Politician may do, they will always be temporary and thus subject to the (so-called) “People’s representative.”

      I do not understand it. But we (USA) have our own problems, so I will not judge the nation for keeping the Windsors. Only side eye the financial arrangements and remnants of power seemingly retained from the 13th century.

  8. The Original Mia says:

    Whats’s funny is that their children were driven home that same day, but Mumsy and Daddy couldn’t complete the same journey.

  9. Megan says:

    I think the bad press Kate got over the helicopter rides is why she skipped the Irish Guard event. If she can’t take the helicopter without getting grief she just won’t show.

    • Melly says:

      Well that’s not really logical because if she was worried about getting bad press, she wouldn’t skip the Irish Guard. She got WAY worse press for skipping the Irish Guard then she ever got from taking tax funded helicopter rides.

  10. Izzy says:

    Useless. Utter rubbish, those two.

  11. Very annoyed says:

    London – Norfolk is about a distance of 190 km. Or: a 2,5 – 3 hours ride in a car due to traffic and speed limits.
    Yes, Kate and William should have done that in a car.

    Oh, and by train it is about 2,5 hours at a cost of Pounds 52 (off-peak) to Pounds 103 (1st class anytime).

    Helicopter speed ranges between 190km/h and 230km/h. Go figure. They wanted to save about 1,5-2 hours of time at a cost of a very nice monthly wage of Pounds 5.000.

  12. Tourmaline says:

    Those pictures of him doing stretching/yoga moves on the grass in his white trousers are EVERYTHING.

    Apparently Prince Harry was the only player who didn’t stretch out on the field before and he left the game early for a pulled muscle in his back.

    I read an item from Adam Helliker at the Express last month that the Queen really needs knee surgery. But she is reluctant to do it anytime in the next few months because she has too many engagements and doesn’t want to miss them! And Prince Phillip just had to cancel an engagement yesterday on doctors orders (Princess Anne was going too so she will take care of it). Really. But I guess if the Queen and Prince Charles don’t want to tell these nummies to step up to the plate….

  13. Megan says:

    The Daily Mail is the source that described the event as ‘strenuous’, and they have been writing anti-Will and Kate pieces for ages now. So I wouldn’t take the word strenuous as meaningful. They’re just using loaded words to put across that W&K are lazy.

  14. Bridget says:

    I know it appears to be their Polo outfit, but I couldn’t imagine doing yoga in white jeans and a belt.

  15. Green Is Good says:

    If Wills used his substantial inheritance from Princess Diana to fund these helicopter rides, that would be fine. But this blatant waste of taxpayer money is offensive .

    Even Marie Antoinette would say “Bitch, you better watch your head.”

  16. Nic919 says:

    Will seems to have used the helicopter again over the weekend because he was spotted at a horse show near Amner with Kate and holding George in one photo which would have been in between the polo matches that were nowhere near Amner.

    • bluhare says:

      I wondered about that. I’ve seen a couple of references to him being at that horse show, but photos of just Kate and George with other people. If he went, that’s a lot of helicoptering about on his free time. Unless the polo people paid for it? No idea.

  17. Moon says:

    Very Marie antoinette.

    “Let them eat Jaffa cake.”

  18. TyrantDestroyed says:

    I love the photo under the title, is like if Bill is laughing at us and saying: “You can call us lazy and snobs but at the end of the day us who laugh last, laugh longest.”

  19. Citresse says:

    And William must look hot while flying around on helicopters so it appears per the latest report, Rogaine and/or hair transplant surgery is next…. then mini facelifts etc…. just wait, all of it billed to taxpayers.

  20. Liberty says:

    Marketing Head Mr. Wallering “vastly enjoyed” his recent ride on Marketing’s new luxury helicopter, The Widget One, following the annual employee picnic, a ride aimed at promoting the new Family First policy.

    Reported Cath M., “The view from up there was pure astonishin’, as you is more like a great lightweight hot air balloon, ain’t you, yet, you can enjoy a glass of champers too! I was ever so grateful to get the ride as me mum likes me home to watch the telly with ‘er of a night. Mr Wallering’s copter is another of ‘is big top ideas, we was even able to toss down some sweets to the humble country folk, so it counts as an hour of work too, and that means I get me early Friday! No one knows how hard we works in Marketing of a day and so to see Mr Wallering relax on his way ‘ome so he can think more thoughts or read a comic is worth it to the Firm, to my way of seein’ it. He says by putting’ him and ‘is family first, or even just mostly ‘im as the case might be, he is protectin’ his delicate wisdom and energy for a bigger moment when ‘is skills as they are may be needed for something. We was both refreshed! an’ I ‘ad time to wash me hair. I ‘ope other departments of the Firm can get a copter, everyone else looks so tired and ‘as the grumps today, you know, which quite spoils it for me and Mr Wallering.”

  21. Cerys says:

    Typical of the couldn’t care less attitude displayed by the Dolittles. Poor Maria must have had to make the journey by car with the children. So much for being normal, send the kids and staff by car while we take the chopper. Something I do every day. Lol

  22. Starlight says:

    Children probably had to be home, fed and asleep by 6 and aren’t they discouraged from travelling together for security reasons. Which does make you think why they couldn’t have stayed at KP Referring to my last post the fox that was a tongue in cheek. Reference. to Mr Norman Baker who is part of the privy council and a liberal mp who stressed it was a waste of tax payers money. The newspapers seem to note every detail of expenditure.

  23. Tris says:

    On another note, why black socks?

  24. Karen says:

    Royalty was interesting back in the times when Kings chopped the heads of their wives or tried to marry their own nieces or faught in wars. Now BRF are just boring.

  25. Kate says:

    It’s astonishing how tone-deaf these two continue to be. It would be so easy to shut down this type of criticism (like, you know, take a car home), and it’s like they’re trolling the public by deliberately being this wasteful and stupid. Perhaps it’s best that they continue to do so little, since they would probably drain the public coffers by continuing to insist on having such extravagant high-priced perks like vacuous celebrities every single time they deign to appear in public.