There are several stories going around these days, all with the same undercurrent of “how dare she?!” This is one of those stories – the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been exiled to Frogmore Cottage, which is within the Windsor Castle property, which is a publicly owned property like Buckingham Palace or Kensington Palace. As such, taxpayers pay for the renovations on those kinds of publicly-owned properties. Frogmore Cottage was in bad shape when the Queen “gave” it to the Sussexes, and an extensive renovation was fast-tracked so that it could be ready by the time Baby Archie arrived. The reno took longer than expected – they always do – but the Sussexes were able to move in a few weeks before Meghan gave birth. Still, there’s more work to do. Just because the reno was “done enough” for them to move in, doesn’t mean the reno is done! Thus, we get these kinds of stories:
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex want the taxpayer to fork out for fresh renovation work at their new home. Harry and Meghan, who are believed to have charged taxpayers around half of the estimated £3million bill to convert Frogmore Cottage in Windsor Great Park, have applied for planning permission to further upgrade the five-bed house. The couple moved into the Grade II-listed building, previously used to house royal staff, in April ahead of the birth of their son, on May 6. Now Harry, 34, and Meghan, 37, want listed-building consent for more work on the exterior, including to the doors, windows and walls.
They also want to undertake work on an outbuilding, install lighting in the garden and carry out landscaping in the house’s extensive grounds. A source said: “The Duchess is very involved in the project and wanted the final design to be perfect for them and Archie so they have called the builders back again to sort some parts of the build out. But this is not all. The couple are now looking at finishing off their garden to make it perfect for them and Archie. Lighting is a key part of the scheme not just to make the garden pretty but also for security reasons.”
The bill for refurbishing Frogmore Cottage has not been revealed but the portion picked up by the taxpayer up until March 31 is expected to be included in the Royal Family’s annual financial report next month. Work after March 31 will be in the following year’s report, but only if it is above £350,000. Buckingham Palace declined to comment but the Daily Express understands that the latest work on the exterior will be paid for from the taxpayer-funded Sovereign Grant and the landscaping will be paid for privately.
Yes, it’s all Meghan’s fault that… she wants further work done to a property which was nearly derelict just seven months ago. I mean, sure, it seems like a waste of taxpayer money, but it *always* seems like a waste of money no matter which royal we’re talking about. William and Kate had a fast-tracked renovation of Kensington Palace’s Apartment 1, and then they just let it sit there, barely in use, for several years as they lived full-time in Norfolk. It was there in Norfolk that they also did a massive renovation on Anmer Hall, and that was NOT taxpayer-funded, because Anmer sits on the Sandringham estate, and Sandringham is “privately owned” by the Queen. Still, Will and Kate didn’t pay for the reno on Anmer – the Queen and Charles picked up the bill. My point? Harry and Meghan are basically doing the same kind of sh-t the Cambridges did, only their renovations and updates are to a smaller property and they’re cheaper than what the Cambridges had done to their homes.
But really, this is all just an excuse for people to continue to police “Meghan’s spending,” because how dare SHE spend money or have nice things or wear designer clothes or use a friend’s private plane or live a renovated home, right?
Photos courtesy of Avalon Red and Backgrid.
I think it’s all obscene, but, they say the royals bring in a lot of tourist dollars, so…it’s England’s business not mine.
I can’t with “the tourist dollars”. And it’s the first comment.
Totally. They Royalists are so good at making it look like the Royals are financially worthwhile and it would be really good to get a proper, impartial look at that.
To be fair, everyone WAS mad that William & Kate spent so much on their Kensington Palace home so why shouldn’t they get mad when it’s Harry & Meghan too? It is insane that we have people on the streets and so many kids having to be fed from food banks (all issues that Harry & Meghan claim to care about deeply) and they can spend an obscene amount of money on things like this. It’s out of touch and pretty hurtful when you see what so many people have to deal with.
I always found this argument to make no sense. Like sure, tourists want to see Buckingham Palace and stuff like that. But they’d still do that no matter if the royals were abolished or not. Doesn’t change the history of the building. Tourists also still visit the Tower of London despite them not imprisoning people there anymore.
I think it’s notable that the landscaping is being funded privately. To me it suggests the other renovations are necessary while the landscaping is for pleasure.
I’ve read that the place had a lot of issues structurally, so work was probably needed to make it inhabitable.
And in the long run, it will be better for the property to keep the place up. It may be used as a residence, but it’s still an historic building that is worthy of preservation.
The same goes for Buckingham Palace. Royals or no royals, that place is filled with history, and so should be taken care of.
I agree with both of you. Especially Lauren. These buildings, which is love to see in person one day, need upkeep and it only makes sense to have tenants to help keep them inhabitable and in use.
The problem is when it’s frivolous renovations. But who decides what is frivolous and what isn’t ????
I think it’s more damning that they were content to house the staff in these structurally deficient , unsafe buildings but now that royals are living there- it MUST be done immediately!
I can’t imagine how expensive it is to renovate those old buildings, particularly if they haven’t been kept up.
I do it for a living and it can cost a bundle when done as proper historic restoration and not the kind of gut rehab you see on HGTV and in magazines (although architects & designers can make sure that costs a bundle, too).
Any time any public building gets restored, the public complains, and a lot of times this is offset by having historic places — like Windsor Castle of Buckingham Palace — open to public tours at least some of the time. Personally, I think anyone who pays UK taxes should get free admission to state-funded museum properties. I know the argument against that is that the costs of maintenance are said to far exceed the funding from the state. Yet all the Smithsonian museums in the US are free — to everyone.
Backto Frogmore: The royal family obviously has ample wealth to pay for renovation and decorating projects at residences that are not open to the public, including the private apartments at Kensington Palace and, yes, Frogmore. The security costs are fair to charge to the state, IMO, but if I were a UK taxpayer, these costly “lifestyle” renovations — if reported accurately — would annoy the hell out of me. Which is, no doubt, why the press keeps harping on it.
Every house in my neighborhood is listed in the national Register. We joke about forming a renovation support group because the cans of worms you find is just incredible.
Lol our house just turned 30 this year and I complain about repairs and upkeep!
Work to doors, windows, and exterior walls sounds more health and safety and less purely cosmetic or unnecessary. Maybe it’s still drafty or noisy. How very dare they want to feel safe and comfortable in their home!
How dare they want to have a nice yard like most everyone else!
Most people don’t have gardens tho. Keep up the mental gymnastics!
I think that’s true, but I also think a lot of this work is being done for security and privacy reasons.
you can be safe and have a home that doesn’t cost millions.
yes. the average person can. The average person does not have death threats and paparazzi stalking them. Nor does the average person have employees conducting surveillance for “anonymous sources said” leaks to the media. If you are globally famous your security needs are different than Sue Smith down the street.
I seem to recall plenty of negative stories around the Kensington reno, especially when Kate had the whole place repainted after a few months.
Paint, but also new fixtures, fabrics and furniture to match the new interior.
And don’t forget moving the tennis courts over a few yards for a better view.
However, I will say that the only one-sidedness about these two here has actually made me like Meghan a little less? 🤷🏽♀️
Dee, you’re too easily influenced by reverse psychology, then. Like who you like and own it! Don’t let others’ opinions affect your own!
She changed a whole colour scheme from purple to IIRC a more neutral colour. At least the taxpayer isn’t paying for ‘security’ renovations to Doria’s home unlike Katie Keen’s parents who got £1millions work of upgrade work done in the same of ‘security’ – the reason given what that W&K spend a lot of time there. We paid for a nice new driveway, landscaping, renovating the stables into self contained apartments, repairs to the roof, upgrading electrics etc..
@DU, The UK taxpayer has every right to be extremely upset about every shilling spent on the Middleton’s home.
A gold plated piano in Buckingham Palace or the White House does not bother me BUT a nice new driveway, landscaping, renovating the stables into self contained apartments, repairs to the roof, upgrading electrics etc for the Middleton’s home is pure grifiting and very disgusting IMPO.
@Bay, from what I recall the house needed work done to it and was one of the reason the previous owner was selling it. I don’t think he could afford to do it all. The Middletons like to front that they are multi-millionaires, they could have paid for the upgrades themselves but then again, they could actually afford to buy the property and someone had to help them out.
The Mids have never ever been as wealthy as their PR would have us believe.
If they ever sell it then they need to pay the taxpayer back, with interest. The Mids are grifters just like the ones in the WH.
One of the forums tracked down two foreign mortgages for the previous Middleton house. They got rare planning permissions to expand their garage into a set of apartments/space for security officers (royal influence?). Once that was secured, the value of the property went up a big chunk. In the blink of a eye, they moved to the new house and sold the old house for much more because of those permissions.
I remember that story, they were very quick to sell the old place once that planning permission was secured. Didn’t the Fail run a story with the mortgage application for Mid Manor and it showed debt? Either way they struggled to buy that house and they got help from somewhere/someone.
Not sure what the problem is given that the property was neglected for a while. So I can imagine that both the inside and outside would need work.
That’s why the home was given to Harry. It needed repair. The RF is sneaky.
Now they can blame the needed maintenance on the spendthrift Meghan.
Oh this again…
Remember back? KP had renos to a high cost. Then they had to be redone because everything was too purple. That was the reason. Too. Purple.
The renos to Kate’s parents home so she could live there with George for 6 months was over a million and tax payer funded.
Anmer is private, but the queen still gets public funds allocated to private funds to pay. Sometimes at the cost of public services. Remember that whole mess when she needed more funds to heat her castles so they tried shutting public services that helped those with disabilities get to and from jobs?
And the Anmer perfectly lovely kitchen torn up. And the tennis court. And the swimming pool. And the seizing a farmers land to make room for all of this.
Meghan has a long way to go if she’s to be painted so terribly.
And the ugly orange roof tiles on Anmer Hall that Kate put on. And the kitchen had JUST been redone.
The roof was retiled with the same type of tiles that were originally on the house before they weathered. The new tiles will weather to look exactly like the tiles they replaced. It was pure tabloid nonsense that they put an orange roof because they liked the look of it.
Ainsley
The tiles put on the roof were said on all accounts to be sort of tacky. Artificially aged and obvious in that appearance. Vs. Any other sort of tile that would appear weathered within a year or so naturally. She had to remain within a certain exterior guidance and those tiles would have been acceptable.
It was a design seen only on nouveau rich homes… considering the area… this was noticable.
That kitchen was hideous. I am not going to shade them for ripping that out.
Megan – was it this kitchen? I liked it and thought it was a pretty, unassuming one. It gave off a nice country vibe, perfect for where they were.
I’d have to see pics of the new one before I concluded if the old was uglier. But I certainly don’t think they needed to rip it out entirely. I don’t care for HGTV kitchens. I can just imagine Kate putting in some faux antique kitchen in its place.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2673507/Ripped-gleaming-38-000-kitchen-Duchess-Cambridge-Prince-William-didnt-want.html
That was the 38,000 pound kitchen from the professional kitchen designers who were living there at the time.
I don’t care how much it cost, white cabinets with natural pulls scream Home Depot DIY.
Apparently they hired Ben Pentreath to do the redone kitchen, so it must be hideous. There is no way it looks better than the old.
It’s particularly sad because the previous inhabitants were forced out early ahead of their lease for William and Kate, and they stated themselves they were proudest of the kitchen at Anmer and hoped the Cambridges would enjoy it.
Of course she had it ripped out.
If that’s the kitchen that was torn up, then I kind of understand why they did that. I wouldn’t find that kitchen functional at all. There’s not enough work space by the stove and the sink is kind of tiny and I’d find uncomfortable to use. The island is also really far from the counter top, which to me would be irritating.
I thought it was stupid to rip it up when I first read about it, but seeing the kitchen, I kind of understand.
I’m aware the tiles were necessary for the listed property but they were still hideous, lol. They *did* make it look like a Barratt home. Was the orange necessary? Silly to me, if so. Anyway, I wonder if they have weathered completely by now. Can’t find pics which are reliably new.
Lauren – you don’t need to rip out an entire kitchen to make those particular changes…
It’s a pretty kitchen, I personally would love it. But I’m not a kitchen person anyway because I hate to cook.
My point on the kitchen is this.
It was new and functional. Highly livable. This renovation was just cosmetic spending. Vs. Needed updates on frogmore. If Meghan ripped out a kitchen after the last leasers stated how much they hoped she’d love it they would burn her in the press.
I love the kitchen in the link. My personal taste? Not really, but it’s lovely for the country and when I’m not spending my own money… no need to rip it all out.
Did William really spend his private money on the Middleton’s home in Buckleberry? How in the H*LL could UK tax payer money be spent on the Middleton’s private home.
@Ainsley7, you are so correct! Anmer hall is a listed property so the roof tiles are required to be as close to identical replacements as possible. Frogmore Cottage is also a listed property so replacing all those windows will not be cheap as one cannot just go online or down to Home Depot to get replacement windows for a listed property. I know as I am going through this now with a property on the USA National Historical Register which is equivalent to Listed Building status in the UK.
Its rumoured he dipped into his inheritance to give them the a cash sum to buy it as they were struggling to get a mortgage on it.
Not sure if it’s the same or similar in the UK, but in the US the Secret Service pays for necessary security updates to places where the First Family spends a lot of time. So I could see the justification for spending some public funds for “security” in Bucklebury.
Melissa
The renovations on the Middleton’s new home were tax funded. Security fencing. Bomb proof doors and windows. A building for extra staff and security. A new primary and secondary kitchen to support number of staff. And a wing for Kate and George + nanny.
None of it was private. Over a million.
To William being rumored to help them financially… this is why it came out.
The Midds applied for a loan in a foreign bank. For a brief moment their financials were exposed. Not much liquid and a double mortgage on the home they wanted to sell. No way they could pay cash so suddenly.
Wiki says it was built in 1801. I assume it needs updates, and these stories remind me of Michelle Obama getting flak for updating the White House dining room and living areas.
Which EVERY First Lady is known to do. It is their home for four years. I would do the same.
Double Comment
Triple Comment
First Families also get a personal stipend to redecorate their personal living quarters in the White House. Some presidents spent very little…ie the Carters and some over spent and had to pick up the very costly cost overruns personally…..ie the Reagans.
Actually, the privately funded White House Historical Association pays when the first families redecorate.
@SallieT, Thanks! I knew it was something like that. I knew each POTUS family gets X amount to redecorate private quarters but I did not know which agency issued the check. For some crazy reason I was thinking the White House was operated under the US National Parks System.
BTB: the National Park Service does manage the White House; I’m a parkie and know someone who worked there for a good number of years. My guess is that the historical association is a partner organization, meant to raise funds to help with maintenance.
The Obama’s actually paid for the renovation to the kitchen & dining spaces themselves because much of the renovation was to accommodate Michelle’s mother. They were a class act from top to bottom. I still get pissed when the Trump stan’s attack them. Mostly because “their boy” is a treasonous, Justice obstructing, racist, misogynistic bigot who is destroying the country!
As for Meghan, she is a divorced biracial American. They will never let it go. Look at Wallis (clearly Wallis was much different) but she was vilified to the end. Truth be told she saved the world. If Nazi loving Edward had stayed on the Throne it would have been a disaster.
There is a difference between necessary renos – like turning Frogmore cottage back into a home – and the huge waste of money renos the Cambridges did on Anmer, like removing and re-installing a huge ass kitchen that had just been renovated, and moving tennis courts around for funsies.
It’s all obscene though, spending money like it’s going out of style, especially when your life is bankrolled by taxpayers….ugh.
I get the criticism of 1A because the bill was absolutely massive, but Anmer sits on private property and the renovation was paid for by Charles. I think there it was their prerogative to do what they wanted. The first thing I would have done is rip out that Ikea-esque kitchen.
Ah yes, back to Seven Kitchens Kate. The five at KP (family, staff, nursery, etc.) plus the two at Anmer.
It was a mix of taxpayers, Duchy, and Charles personally at Anmer. Including moving the tennis court a few feet, taking land from the farmer next door, for the $100,000 new tennis court. Because the old one was blocking W&K’s view. The new pool and glass pool house. Making the old coal/wood storage into an apartment for the nannies.
Interesting, because Telegraph reported that the renovations at Anmer were paid for privately.
and this is what really gets my Yank goat….no one knows who paid, how much they paid and to whom checks were written to because there is no transparency.
If Charles paid and he doesn’t care then I don’t care. And no need to bang on about duchy funds because there are no complaints when Charles spoils the royals we like.
@Monicack, I hope you made you post sarcastically and tongue-in-cheek. LOL! LOL!
It’s known many of these buildings have fallen into disrepair, it *should* be common sense that windows and doors will require updates for energy, security, comfort etc., but yea, it will be twisted into a jab at the pushy, spendthrift Duchess.
My guess is it’s what the American federal agencies call ‘deferred maintenance’. There’s so doggone much to maintain & not enough $$ (or staff) to do it, so the maintenance can gets kicked down the road.
A GAO report of a couple of decades ago explained that, at least for the Forest Service, part of the problem was that engineers are in charge of managing facilities $$ and that engineers like to build things, they don’t like to maintain things.
When they say they are doing work on things like doors and windows, that just seems like a practical matter to me.
I’m sure the renovations are expensive and if the British people have a problem with that, that’s valid. But I’m assuming anyone complaining had a similar complaint about Will and Kate.
.
Security needs pretty much limit them to a crown property, all of which are historic and expensive to renovate. I suppose they could build a new house on the Windsor grounds, but that would be expensive as well.
Andrew & Fergie did that and it did not turn out well.
If any of this has a grain of truth? I’d say it is related to security upgrades which would include the garden/yard, lighting, fences. Replacing windows with bulletproof glass. Paps who took photos of workmen at the house. A drone was flown over the house and grounds, illegally because of flight paths, and the pilot wasn’t caught. The white nationalists trying to kill Harry as a race traitor. The white powder-filled envelope sent to Meghan.
Given how relentless the Meghan stalkers are, the security needs to be upgraded beyond what was expected. One of them flew to NYC to scream at Meghan outside the baby shower hotel. Concealed her face with a scarf to try to hide her identity from police. Same one went to Windsor the day the press was there for the birth, getting way-too-close photos of Frogmore Cottage which she posted online.
There is only a short (waist height) picket fence separating the yard at Frogmore Cottage from areas the public can access year-round at Windsor from the Long Walk. One of the Meghan stalkers posted photos of how close she was able to get and how easy it was to photograph into the windows of the house. During the recent Frogmore House garden days? Regular garden visitors posted online they were able to get right next to the short fence at Frogmore Cottage.
The house is so exposed, it strikes me as an odd choice, but perhaps they really wanted to be at Windsor.
Yeah, the security costs, IMO, should not be included as “renovations.” IDK. the house went from housing staff (right?) to housing two working royals who are very much in the public eye and one has been subjected to an abusive smear campaign over the past year. They need the security.
I can’t believe that there are lunatics out there who follow the Duchess of Sussex around like that. Megan and Harry must fear for their child. Racism IS a mental illness. If they are spending the money on security, there should be absolutely no problem. For those ‘taxpayers’ (although I’m sure that most of the loudest complainers are American women) don’t want to spend the money, perhaps they should think about how much a state funeral costs.
@kerwood, American women, such as myself, have no problem spending money. We just want complete transparency something the BRF family does not like to give and the Daily Fail cannot give. How the UK spends their money is none of my business but The Daily Fail loves to rag on Meghan AND KATE and drag them fully clothed in designer duds through a gutter full of polo pony muck for supposedly making decisions regarding their home renovations that I bet that had no say-so in making. Meghan, Harry, Cathy and Bill are not setting the budgets for the work that is being done nor have they been given a blank check signed by the QEII or the BRF AMEX Card with no limit as The Daily Fail makes every journalistic effort to imply.
@BayTampaBay, But Americans have no skin in this game. So why clog the message boards of the Daily Mail and The Sun with their opinion on how British tax money is spent? It just makes it easy for certain people to say that Megan is unpopular, when she’s mostly unpopular with American women who resent the fact that a biracial woman took away ‘their prince’. AS IF.
@kerwood, Americans post on blogging sites because they CAN; The Daily Fail as well as The Guardian is open to all. Most of the Daily Fail posting is from paid posters IMPO. The Guardian almost never says anything about Meghan or any other Royal for that matter other than QEII.
Most USA women have no opinion on Meghan because they are not Royal watches. The few that do have an opinion, outside or Royal watching, is due to fashion blogging sites and what Meghan wore where.
Meghan is not unpopular in the USA; she is just another Royal. Meghan is not Diana 2.0 or Fergie 2.0 with regards to the USA.
it is only American White women who are evil toward Meghan. And it is not all of them. Middle Aged conservative white women seem to have the most animus toward Meghan. Meghan has gained millions of fans among African-American women. Many of them defend her as part of Sussex Squad on social media. Meghan is only unpopular among a subset of white women.
The Daily Mail, always on the look out to make money, has very successfully expanded itself into the American market, and has a dreadful tacky TV show aimed specifically at Americans. All this adds up to a sizeable American community who are becoming increasingly invested in what goes on in the UK.
It seems to me that the buildings should undergo routine maintenance, which might reduce some of these extensive and expensive renovations.
It is rumored the QEII is tight with her purse and public monies. Therefore, she does not like to do routine “repairs and maintenance” until it absolutely must be done.
Waiting until the last minuted may put off spending money for 10 years but in the long run it usually ends up costing more money. This is my personal experience dealing with repairs, maintenance and renovations but I do not own a London palace, a Scottish castle or a Norfolk country estate so maybe I am 100% wrong.
I live in an old house and you are absolutely correct. We have an annual maintenance schedule for our house. Every year something is being done. You can ignore things until they break, or you can do constant, low-level maintenance to keep everything in top shape. Either way, you’re spending money, and at least with preventative maintenance, there are few large $ surprises.
The Queen got criticized for the renovations to BP, William & Kate got criticized for their renovations, so it’s fairly reasonable that the Sussexes get criticized too. This is taxpayers money after all for their own personal use, and like every public figure that spends taxpayers money then of course the costs should be scrutinized. While I don’t always agree with every criticism thrown at members of the royal family this one however is valid.
For the record the BRF is one of the most secretive at revealing their actual costs compared to some of their European counterparts. It’s quite alarming what they are allowed to get away it & keep secret.
Their exemptions from FOI requests (Sovereign Grant, Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall) all need to be removed.
No Shit!!!!
My house is a hundred years old, once you start you uncover all sorts of things that HAVE to be repaired. Maybe one tenth of our renovation expense was cosmetic and we are just now facing up to exterior work. We’ve been working on it for a year, which is 4 months over schedule, working with excellent knowledgeable contractors. Believe me it’s NOT MEGHAN’S FAULT.
Our planned 10 month reno took 20 months. Good luck! You’ll love it when it’s done, eventually.
I feel your pain.. almost four years into our fixer upper we have spent so much time and money on structural things …roof, windows, electrical, hvac etc.. and only now are we tackling things that will bring me pleasure like the kitchen.. so that would be four years with a often non working high-end built in fridge that we often couldn’t use and couldn’t replace without ripping out walls (and starting the full kitchen Reno we are finally doing) so we ended up using the spare in the garage for the last year. How come it all gets done in 7 weeks on those tv shows?
Woman of color living the royal life is the trigger.
Why can’t they let this woman enjoy her maternity leave in peace?
Skin colour.
And we have a winner!!
Leaving Meghan in peace does NOT sell new$paper$ or attract $$$ generating click$ for The Fail, The Dim and The Slow.
I’m sure she’s enjoying it. I highly doubt she’s worried about criticism of this sort.
Odd logic. No one enjoys stalking, smear campaigns and constant criticism for every move they make.
Oh come on, there were multiple stories in all the papers about the ridiculous spending for 1A and the tennis court shifting. William and Kate were not exempt or given better treatment than H&M. Even the DM gave it the whole ‘taxpayer’s money’ angle. This is a perennial and relevant debate in the UK where millions use food banks and Grenfell families still live in hotels.
The Meghan love seems to warp reality here…
@TeddyPicker, IMPO this not about Meghan or Cathy. This is about the government not being fully transparent (or not forcing the crown to be fully transparent) about who i$ paying for what, exactly how much i$ being out and to whom it i$ being paid.
Fair point and I agree with you – there needs to be reform. But I think it’s also fair to scrutinise those that enjoy the convenience of not having to disclose their spending in the meantime.
@TeddyPicker, Could not agree with you more.
The fact that everyone here is listing a million and one renovations that Will and Kate got bad publicity for is proof that this is nothing new. Royals always get bad press when they spend money, whether it’s for clothing or renovations or expensive vacations. None of this started with Meghan and she’s certainly not going to be exempt from it.
Although it should be noted that the article being quoted here was equally about Harry and Meghan, not just Meghan.
Absolutely @TeddyPicker.
While I loathe with a passion the overtly racist treatment that continues to be meted out to Meghan by pondlife elements of the UK press, not every criticism of her (& Harry) is race-based. As UK taxpayers, we have every right to know where and what our money is being spent on where this ridiculously entitled and pampered family is concerned and, like it or not, that includes expensive refurbs to the private homes of all those – Meghan and Harry included – who live within that entitled, pampered bubble.
There needs to be far more transparency here, not least because the woman at the head of this family is richer than Croesus and provenly tighter than a miser’s purse.
I’ve heard on the radio that the British economy is doing pretty well right now. Why are the British politicians not held accountable for “food banks” and “Grenfell” issues, etc? Why are british people not voting for politicians who would make those things a priority instead of wailing about the royals who actually bring in tourism money?
Lol British politicians are most certainly held accountable for food banks and grenfell. The prime minister got a tonne of shit for not meeting the victims and the conservative government is always criticised for not caring for the poor or disadvantaged at all. Food bank usage has increased over the course of David Cameron’s government and so have the number of people who are homeless and there have been endless discussions on the failures of current and past governments.
The tourism money argument always annoys me. Buckingham palace isn’t even in the top ten tourist attractions and if the monarchy were abolished tourism I’d argue tourism would actually increase. The British public have every right to criticise the monarchy and its existence, especially since they’re mostly responsible for Britain’s extremely classist society which needs fixing if we want to go towards an equal and actually fair society.
Is it really Megan love or people appropriately calling bull shit on everything being laid on Megan as her fault? Hmmm
For me it is: “people appropriately calling bullshit on everything being laid on Megan as her fault”.
Double Comment
HM and Kate got plenty laid at their feet for the cost of renovations to Buckingham Palace and 1A. This is not exclusive to Meghan.
THE BRITISH TAXPAYERS DO NOT PAY FOR ANYTHING BUT SECURITY!!! The Brits are either clueless on how their government was formed or they just like to LIE. They pay for security….That IS ALL!!!! American pay more for Trumps golf outings than the Brits pay for Security!
So what you’re saying is that it is…. fake news? Or is it a witch hunt?
Sad!
The majority of the income given to the royals does not come directly from taxpayers (what is this American obsession with taxpayers?) But the majority of the income given to the royals (including that for Harry and Meghan, now) comes from the Crown Estates, which belong to the Crown, which is a complicated concept that is not the same thing as the Queen and essentially boils down to the British people.
And before the inevitable debate, yes, I know what I’m talking about, I’m a solicitor, I’ve studied UK public law and it is very clear that the Crown Estates do not belong to the royals as private property.
One of the many things that needs to change is them being able to duck FOI requests about the money. Everything from Sovereign Grant to how many times Kate uses the taxpayer helicopter to fly over to visit her Mummy.
@nota – totally agreed.
I also think they should be given a budget for security for private times. They are not responsible for being in this position, so I’ll give them a little leeway. A reasonable budget for them to go on vacation, but after a certain amount each year, they are required to pay security costs themselves. No more $500,000 honeymoons and babymoons in the Seychelles and Maldives on the taxpayers money.
The Queen pays for the helicopter from the Sovereign Grant (her percentage of the Crown Estates).Taxpayers pay ZERO for Kate to fly and see her Mum!!
@Tina, DISCLAIMER: I am a stupid yank. Now that that is out of the way….
“Similarly, in normal English reading comprehension, “the Brits” means all British people. (sigh)”
It seems to me, If you live on the island of Great Britain you are British or one of the “Brits”. If you are native to N. Ireland, I do not see how you can be British because you are not a citizen of Scotland, Wales or England.
I ask a Welsh friend if he considered himself British and he said, “yes, of course”.
I ask a Scottish friend if he considered himself British and he said, “Scottish by birth and British by end point of a rifle barrel”. The Scot was joking but he takes much pride in being 100% Scottish.
Would you please be so kind to clear up for all us Yanks exactly what British means?
Controversy has surrounded the Duchy of Cornwall and its tax status for years. They way they have been setup means that neither of the Duchies pay corporation tax and neither TQ or Chuck are obliged to pay income tax, although Charles voluntarily pays income tax on the Duchy of Cornwall after official expenditure has been deducted. How it is actually run is a bit of a secret.
After the death of The Queen Mother, the National Audit Office investigated the RF accounts and this is what they said about the Duchy of Cornwall:
“national audit office concluded that there were “obscurities and potential conflicts of interest” in the accounts of the Duchy of Cornwall”
Media reports say that MPs want to know more about ‘the claim of Camilla’s personal upkeep as a tax deductible item. This included hair, clothes and jewellery even though she undertook very few public duties.
But when questioned on this matter, Charle’s private secretary Michael Peat resisted giving detailed answers.
He claimed the duchy’s arrangements had been secret for 700 years and outsiders had no right to know about them, but apparently MPs remained unconvinced – it is claimed.’
Charles has also used the Human Rights act to sop people having access to his tax returns.
So when we Brits say that we are paying for Katie Keens FUG McQueen outfits, we are as Chuck is claiming its a tax deductible expense.
When it comes to taxes, Chump ain’t got nothing on the RF and their tax avoidance/scamming.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/935295/Prince-Charles-tax-avoidance-royal-news-royal-family-duchy-of-cornwall-queen-mother-latest
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/10148901/Prince-Charless-duchy-taxes-questioned-by-MPs.html
Casey20, “The Queen” pays for none of this. The Crown Estates do not belong to Betty Windsor, they are taxpayer property. The percentage that is used for the royals is exempt from FOI requests when every penny of that should be open to public scrutiny.
One of the former posters on here (LAK, bluhare?) figured out all of W&K’s personal helicopter travel is now paid by the taxpayers. It doesn’t have to be work related, just whenever Kate wants to fly from Anmer to Berkshire to see Mummy the taxpayers pay.
@Bay, lord, you’re putting me in front of the firing line here 🙂 As a matter of geography, English, Welsh and Scottish people are British because we are all on the island of Great Britain. (French people who live in Brittany (little Britain) are Bretons as well as French). Politically speaking, it’s a bit different. England and Wales have been aligned politically for a long long time, and Wales is very small, so whilst some Welsh people may not love English people, most Welsh people are generally happy, or at least OK, to consider themselves British.
Scotland and England joined together in the 1707 Act of Union, which united us politically, but now many Scots want to go it alone, especially after Brexit (I do not blame them in the slightest). Many Scottish people will very reluctantly call themselves British if necessary, but their identities are very firmly Scottish.
Northern Ireland is a whole different kettle of fish. As a matter of geography, Irish people are not British. Politically, however, many Northern Irish people are very proud to be British (as they are part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) and others do not consider themselves to be British but only Irish. Under the Good Friday Agreement, Northern Irish people are entitled to UK and Irish passports and can choose either (or indeed, both).
@Tina, Thank you! I knew you had it in you. What you wrote is what I generally thought but wanted a UK person to get it posted for all to read, study and reference.
Looks like the Northern Irish really lucked out with this BREXSHIT mess as they can get Irish/EU passports and continue to move around the continent as they please. Bet many people are now trying to prove they have the “right-to-be Irish”! LOL! LOL!
@Nota – I think the easiest way to explain it is this.
1 – The Crown Estate hands over ALL profits direct to the Treasury (thus the money being ‘owned’ by the tax payer)
2 – The Treasury then calculates how much TQ’s gets as per the Sovereign Grant
3 – Its the TREASURY that PAYS the Sovereign Grant money to TQ NOT the Crown Estate meaning that she is being paid taxpayers money as it comes from the Treasury
I pinched this great explanation from Republic.org.uk:
“The Crown Estate is the property of the Crown. The Crown is a national institution under the full control of our parliament.The Crown Estate says they are:
“owned by the Monarch in right of the Crown. This means that the Queen owns it by virtue of holding the position of reigning Monarch, for as long as she is on the throne”.
In other words, the Queen owns it as much as Theresa May owns 10 Downing Street, which is not at all. The official wording about the Queen owning it ‘in right of the Crown’ is a bit meaningless. By any measure of ownership, it is the property of the Crown, not the Queen. The Queen isn’t involved in its management, can’t control the land or sell it, can’t refuse to allow the income to go to the treasury or change the current arrangements for ownership.”
The Crown Estate is FORMALLY ACCOUNTABLE to the British Parliament NOT The Queen.
As we know the RF are largely exempt from paying any type of tax, however they can still claim tax back as expenditure (esp via the Duchies) – see my post above about Chuck and the Duchy of Cornwall. Former employees etc.. have been saying that the RF have been claiming personal expenditure as tax deductibles for years but due to their status we can’t get access to their personal tax records to prove it.
@Bay, it’s not just Northern Irish people, there are lots of people in England, Scotland and Wales with an Irish parent or grandparent. Applications for Irish passports have skyrocketed since the referendum. (I have Irish ancestry but it’s too far back for a passport, sadly).
@Tina, speaking of Passports…I am sure Meghan is up to her XXXXX in alligator doody regarding her citizenship. If ever CB and/or Kaiser post a relevant article, I have a long tale to tell regarding Boris Blojo Johnson, his dual citizenship with USA, his selling of a non-homesteaded property, the USA Department of the Treasury-Federal IRS and a reporter for the New York Post. It is some great tea to spill.
Tina: Crown Estate doesn’t belong to the British Taxpayes. It belongs to the Monarch. However it is not private property. The short version is George III was lazy and did not want the responsibility of funding the government. An agreement was made between the Government and George that basically set aside property (that was own by the Monarch at the time) that would be managed by an independent commission. The Monarch receives a portion of the revenues yearly and the remaining amount is used to run the Government on behalf of the Monarch. The agreement also states that the Monarch must review yearly how the Government spends it revenue, ie the budget. This is the Crown Estate.
The Crown Estates belong to the Queen in right of the Crown. That means that they belong to the Crown, i.e. US, the British people. The Crown is not the same thing as the Monarch. It is a corporation sole, a complicated concept. (The Wikipedia article on it is actually pretty good). I cannot stress this enough, the arrangements for the Crown Estates are between the government and the Crown, not the Monarch.
When the Queen wanted more money to pay for the repairs to Buckingham Palace, she had to ask Parliament for it. Parliament is in charge of the Crown Estates, and they say how much money the royals get. If Corbyn becomes PM, one of the items on his list is, no doubt, reducing the amount that goes to the royals. Every penny of income from the Crown Estates that is not spent on the royals goes to the Treasury and is spent on the same things as money from general taxation – the NHS, schools, the police, the armed forces. The Queen has zero power over the Crown Estates beyond the amount that the government says she will receive.
Crown Estates is all about the Monarch ..Brits should understand how their government was formed. Americans feed off the British who complain about the cost of the Royal Family to the taxpayer…..which the Brits seem clueless about!
The words, “Crown” and “Monarch” are similar, but they have different meanings in English law. Similarly, in normal English reading comprehension, “the Brits” means all British people. (Sigh).
Tina: The Crown is the Monarch not the British People. You can go to the Crown Estates website for more information. When the Queen wanted additional funding she was requesting funds beyond the agreement which is why she had to go to Parliament. She can’t just go to the Crown Estates and ask for more money. Again it’s not what the Government says she receives it is what George III agreed upon because he was to lazy to run his government.
@Casey20, Tina is correct The Crown in legal terms is the people/the nation not the Monarch.
DU: The “Crown” in terms of The Crown Estates refers to the Monarch. For your review.
https://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/en-gb/our-business/our-history/
One more thing: Charles foots the bill for Meghan/Harry from his duchy. The cost of the renovations to their home we want know until Charles and TQ publish their annual budgets. I can say this that based on their prior budgets they tend to “play around” with the numbers. …most of it isn’t itemized but put into huge buckets.
That link says, as I said above, that the Queen owns the Crown Estates in right of the Crown, and as DU says, the Crown refers to the Executive and the Judiciary as well as the Monarch. It distinguishes Crown Land from the Crown Estates, but does not say anywhere that the Monarch and the Crown are the same thing (because they are not).
And Meghan and Harry will be funded from the Crown Estates going forward, not the Duchy of Cornwall. The ownership of the Duchy is a little less clear-cut than the Crown Estates, but Charles does not own it privately nor can he sell its assets, he is merely entitled to the income as Duke of Cornwall. (The Crown Estates and both Duchies are regulated by Parliament).
@Casey – what a weird thing to dig your heels in about. Tina and DU are both British, I’m pretty sure they know what they are talking about.
Funding for Meghan/Harry: I haven’t read anything that stated PC wouldn’t continue to fund them. Have you? Please don’t forget the Queen also has the Duchy of Lancaster (which is privae like Cornwall) and a host of other private investments. Like I said we want know how the Sussex’s are funded until TQ and PC release their annual budgets and I doubt if it will be crystal clear.
Tina: ok first it was the Monarch refers to the people now it’s something else. Ok directly from the source; “The Crown Estate is though owned by the Monarch in right of the Crown. This means that the Queen owns it by virtue of holding the position of reigning Monarch, for as long as she is on the throne, as will her successor. Responsibility for managing The Crown Estate is trusted to us, under the Crown Estate Act, and the Queen is not involved in management decisions.
By contrast, the Queen also has private assets, which include Balmoral and Sandringham, and are hers to deal with as she chooses. But by no means all of what is commonly called Crown Land or Crown Property forms part of The Crown Estate.
In the UK “the Crown” is used not only to describe the Monarch, but also the Executive and the Judiciary. Thus properties owned and managed by Government departments are also Crown Property; these have nothing to do with the funding of the Monarchy or The Crown Estate.
So you are confusing Crown Property with the Crown Estate
Receipts on the Duchy of Cornwall… It is Private and owenership is VERY clear:
The Duchy of Cornwall is a private estate established by Edward III in 1337 to provide independence to his son and heir, Prince Edward. A charter ruled that each future Duke of Cornwall would be the eldest surviving son of the Monarch and heir to the throne. The current Duke of Cornwall, HRH The Prince of Wales, is the longest serving Duke in history. The revenue from his estate is used to fund the public, private and charitable activities of The Duke and his children.
Source: https://duchyofcornwall.org/about-the-duchy/
I was wrong about H&M’s funding, I thought the Queen was taking over funding entirely. But sources I have now seen (Times, Express and Guardian) said that they would be funded by both HM and Charles. No one knows what the breakdown will be between Sovereign Grant, Cornwall and Lancaster, and I agree that the accounts will not tell us much about it. (The Duchies are “private Estates,” but they are not owned privately in the normal sense of land ownership. HM and Charles are given the income under the terms of the documents setting out the Estates, but cannot sell the underlying assets of the Duchies as a regular private landowner could).
And I’m not confusing anything about the Crown, you just don’t understand the concepts involved. And I’m done trying to explain them.
Tina: No need to snipe. I can read and comprehend. The words are written in plain Eng!ish that even my 11 year old can understand speak for themselves. Otherwise show your sources. I’m not a lawyer but I have an advance University degree in Microbiology so please defend your point.
If you’re actually interested, here is a link that will assist with the concept of the Crown: https://www.blackstonechambers.com/documents/183/What_the_Crown_May_Do
@Tina & DU,
“When the Queen wanted more money to pay for the repairs to Buckingham Palace”
How in the H*LL did Buck House get in such bad shape to begin with? It cannot be from a lack of funds because Buck House has been open, just like The Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Studios, and charging admission for 25+ years.
I know this for a fact because I paid twice to see Buck House on two different days in the same week.
@Bay – TQ opened BP to the paying public to fund the repairs to Windsor Castle after the massive fire. The issue with those repairs that are happening at the moment was that the money from the summer opening was never going to cover it – the whole Palace is getting completely done over. The Palace is in a bad way and TQ kept moving money around to pay for other things like Amner Hall and KP App 1 for the Cambridges – the Palace actually said that money that was put aside for upgrading the heating in BP was used to pay for renovations the Cambridges wanted (can’t recall wether it was for KP or Amner).
The Crown Estate and Duchy of Lancaster do not belong to Betty Windsor personally. Likewise the Duchy of Cornwall is not the private property of Charles, otherwise DIana would have gutted it in her divorce settlement. Established to fund “the instrument of government” which does NOT have to include the monarchy. If the monarchy ends tomorrow, the Windsors get Balmoral and Sandringham (private property) but not the Crown Estates or either Duchy.
Only Charles and Camilla should be funded out of the Duchy of Cornwall at this point. All others should be out of the sovereign grant. Tina, I think the new office staff for Harry and Meghan is co-funded out of the SG and Duchy of Cornwall. That mid-year change shows me they wanted to get Harry and Meghan away from William’s control quickly, that something really did happen behind the scenes. I expect their “work” funding to start coming out of the SG in the next few years.
All of this should be open to full FOI requests and reporting each year, instead of being under special protections where the Windsors get to hide how they spend the money. They used those taxpayer funds from the Crown Estate to fix up Anne’s private estate years ago! Someone should be investigating what happened to the millions that was designated for BP upkeep through the years but seems to have been misdirected elsewhere.
BayTampaBay, once Charles becomes king, I see him pushing BP to be open as a museum 300+ days a year. He doesn’t want to live there anyway.
notasugarhere: The Duchy of Cornwall and Landcaster are both private. They belong to the Prince of Wales and Monarch respectively. So when TQ passes on Charles as the Monarch will control Lancaster and William will control Cornwall. It passes on to title holder. Married ins can’t touch them and neither can the Government. TQ doesn’t have to share with the public she gave into public pressure and now it’s just done. Remember the Sovereign Grant or Crown Estates a!located to the Monarch is a percentage. So if the revenues generated is great the Monarch takes home a hefty sum and vice versa. From my understanding when Windsor went into disrepair the Crown Estates revenues was at a low. But who knows, TQ may have used the money elsewhere.
As far as Harry/Meghan IMO there’s a lot going on: As long as they stayed at KP, William/Kate had control. Basically William was the boss. Which made ZERO since because TQ is the Boss. So by moving away from KP they have more freedom and let’s face it less leaks!
Final comment: The Royal Family is very wealthy! So much of their wealth is hidden from the public. The British people really have ZERO control over the RF. The only thing they can do is shame the Royals, which they do but are misguided on how much control they have.
@Tina, DU, Casey20 & Nota,
Thank you for all your posting today. I have learned so much.
Prince Charles is full of sh*t. The Monarch must live at Buck House. Can you imagine the POTUS not living at the White House as his official resident. When QEII goes to big Jewel Vault in the sky, I would like to see Bill & Cathy Cambridge stay at KP-Apartment I and The Princess Royal or D&D of Sussex move into Clearance House.
With regards to to the Duchy of Lancaster, I would have no problem debating that the Duchy of Lancaster is the personal property of the Monarch as the Monarch is the senior living descendant of John of Gaunt the first “ROYAL” Duke of Lancaster due to Lady Blanche.
If we ever have this debate, bring several boxes of cheap wine and a large picnic hamper from Harrods because I think it will take all day. LOL!
LOL I’m sure the Windsors love it when people believe those properties are private. All the shenanigans they’ve pulled, the benefits they’ve taken, the ducking and changing of laws to conceal the facts regarding ownership and use of the income.
They are not and never will be personal Windsor property.
@nota, LOL indeed. Personal private property owners have to pay tax on all estate income. Personal private property owners can sell any of the estate assets freely. Personal private property owners don’t have specific parliamentary statutes regulating their Estates.
And @bay, if the Duchy of Lancaster was personal property, Edward VIII would have taken it with him when he abdicated. George VI had to compensate him for Sandringham and Balmoral, which are truly private property. The Duchies aren’t.
Discussion has been great. I’m not sure if we agree or disagree but it doesn’t matter, its the engagemen that counts. So we can agree to disagree on this issue. BayTampaBay: I agree on BP.
Tina: Info from the Republic website would be anti-Monarch but info from the Royal sites would be pro Monarch…LOL. The only thing I would say about those calling for a Republic is be careful that they don’t lead your country into something worst than Brexit.
Notasugarhere: I belive the 700 years of secrecy. It is said the Queen has a Coutts ATM in the basement of BP….The Monarch’s true wealth is probably beyond what anyone of us can imagine. She somehow has convinced people she’s a tupperware Queen yet her wardrobe budget has to be in the mid six figures annually and she treats her guest to $3000 bottles of wine!!!
Tina said: “And @bay, if the Duchy of Lancaster was personal property, Edward VIII would have taken it with him when he abdicated. George VI had to compensate him for Sandringham and Balmoral, which are truly private property. The Duchies aren’t.”
@Tina, everything with the BRF and $$$$ is complicated. I did not say I was correct! LOL! LOL!. Sandringham & Balmoral were/are 100% privates properties. My argument would be that the Duchy of Lancaster is an entailed estate. However, this is a debate for another day!
The term crown is the equivalent to what “the state” means in republics so the Crown estates belong to the concept of the Crown and not the monarch personally. There is no private ownership at all. The Crown is a constitutional fiction which is embodied in the current monarch.
The Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster are a bit trickier since they weren’t dealt with specifically when the Sovereign Grant was created but it could be strongly argued that since they are considered Crown bodies and therefore exempt for taxation they are not privately owned. I am sure it would make a great constitutional case if someone had the cojones to make an application to the relevant court.
That most recent first paragraph from my American friend is positively presidential. And @nic, none of this is decided. See https://www.blackstonechambers.com/documents/52/A-G_for_the_Prince_of_Wales_v_Bruton.pdf (and no, I don’t work for blackstone chambers, they’re just the best at public law).
And @bay: you can’t entail an estate on a woman.
@Tina, Just for discussion nothing else as you are the resident expert! LOL! LOL!
What about the Dukedom of Marlboro and Blenheim? Is that not an entailed estate? If the Queen is the Duke of Lancaster, would she not get the estate. If the monarchy packs up its tent and moves to Monaco tomorrow, would the Queen not still be The Duke of Lancaster? I am going to do some research on the Duchy of Lancaster and the termination of the Civil List by enrolling in an online course at the University of Wikipedia for starters so I can keep up!
I find this all so fascinating especially the quality of the debate and debaters.
@Bay, ah yes, you’re quite right, but the Duke of Marlborough title was granted its special status through a Special Act of Parliament, it’s not a normal entail. And the main difference is that in its special semi-Salic status, the Duke of Marlborough title continues the general entail requirement that the title passes as a matter of seniority (eldest child), it is just (in limited circumstances) permitted to pass through the female line. The Duchy of Lancaster, in contrast, always passes to the monarch, not necessarily the eldest child of the previous Duke. If it passed to the senior person as personal property, Edward VIII would have been entitled to retain it upon the abdication.
What would happen if the monarchy was abolished? The last time we abolished the monarchy, in 1649, Parliament passed an act abolishing kings and disabling the king’s issue from the Crown and its possessions, including the Duchy of Lancaster. Many Crown and Duchy lands were sold to pay for the war. As a landed estate the Duchy ceased to exist although Cromwell did preserve the jurisdiction of the County Palatine of Lancaster. The Restoration of the monarchy in 1660 included the return of the Monarch’s succession to the Duchy.
Nowadays, there would be a negotiation between the Monarch and the government of the day, and almost certainly a court case if a Corbyn government, for example, tried to take it off them without compensation.
Digital Unicorn, have you seen the new Keanu meme? Check Twitter for keanuwtm.
Aaaaaah – that has soo made my Friday. *imagines him walking into the US state banquet and kissing The Queen who’s wearing her matrix shades*
She was a boss in that hot pink outfit and shades at the D-Day event on the 6th, wasn’t she? Where were all the protests about how royals aren’t allowed to wear sunglasses at work? Oh that’s right, it is only against protocol if Meghan does it.
OEII rocks! What else can one say!
I think the British people have every right to question how taxpayer money is being spent but the problem is most of these articles are misleading. Every year HM gets a specific amount of money that can only be spent on home renovations and improvements so if that money isn’t spent it just goes back, so Harry and Meghan aren’t getting extra taxpayer money for the work they’re getting done. These complaints about spending also aren’t Meghan being singled out, this happened with Kate when they were renovating Anmer Hall and tabloids started calling her two kitchens Kate so this is just what happens. The real problem is the sexism because in both cases the women are singled out as the ones overspending when they have husbands who are also presumably helping to make these decisions.
I agree that it is sexist to suggest that it’s the women who are making these decisions, but the Queen can spend the Sovereign Grant however she likes once it has been allocated. She doesn’t have to give any of it back if it isn’t spent. The government can choose to allocate more, as it has done when it increased her income from 15% of Crown Estate income to 25% to pay for the Buckingham Palace repairs, but the government is not getting involved in individual kitchen decisions at Anmer or Frogmore.
I was reading about this and there’s actually money given to HM that is specifically for home renovations and improvements that can’t be spent on anything else, so it’s money that HM can’t use to do whatever she wants.
@Tina & DU and all other posters,
The whole British Nobility system is sexist and will continue to be until the laws are changed to stipulate that all titles and attached estates go to the first born regardless of gender. I really believe that Kitty Spencer should be the next Earl-Countess Spencer in her own right and NOT her younger brother.
@Sipping, that’s the case for the part of the Sovereign Grant allocated to the Buckingham Palace repairs, but it doesn’t seem to be the case for the rest of it. The accounts and framework agreement make for interesting reading (as is the confirmation that the Sovereign Grant managers must follow the government-mandated “Managing Public Money” guidelines.)
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719582/SovereignGrant2017-18_Final.pdf
https://www.royal.uk/sites/default/files/media-packs/sovereign_grant_framework_agreement_-_2018_final.pdf
@Bay, I agree, and we’ll see what happens in the case that’s been brought before the European Court of Human Rights (not part of the EU).
@Tina, Julian Fellowes of Downton Abbey & Gosford Park fame has talked about this and said the same thing I have stated as his wife would be heir to a title (Earl Kitchener, I think) if said title could pass to a female.
Also (Thank you very much Sir Fellowes), there is Lady Mary Crawley, who could not have the title of Earl of Grantham, but is running the estate as if she were the Earl.
TALK ABOUT F*CKING SEXIST!
“Buckingham palace declined to comment but the Daily Express understands………. ” Article is straight from the writers imagination and assumption of what could be happening at FC.
” Meghan and Harry want the taxpayer ” the portray of the royals and taxpayer money gives the impression that the royals wake up in the morning and line up at some government office asking for money for their use. While the source of their money maybe mostly the tax payer, Iam sure they have private funds for their own use.
The issue I have with all these repairs is that there are so many properties to maintain. And the royal family doesn’t even stay in one place for very long, so the next time they decide to move, taxpayers have to pay for renovations again! Britain should have one main property like Kensington Palace for the royal family to stay in and if they choose to live elsewhere, they need to cover the cost of repairs. If it’s unrealistic for all families to live together, then they need to cut down on the quantity of people in the Royal family
They are cutting down through attrition and aging. Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and Princess Alexandra? They have their homes at KP or SJP paid by the taxpayers as they’re working royals. After they pass, Charles will keep streamlining. I expect SJP will no longer house working royals, and they’ll be moved to smaller spaces at KP or BP.
The government also needs to investigate costs related to Balmoral and Sandringham. Philip worked hard to make those self-sustaining estates, but what about security? If the royals choose to live on those private properties, they should have to pay all the security costs personally while they’re there. As Anne should have to pay the security costs for her personal estate and Andrew should pay security for his Swiss place. Otherwise, live in the government housing that is provided and taxpayers will pay security costs only on those government properties.
They didn’t choose to be born royal, nor do they get to choose the level of protection they need. And since working royals don’t have paying jobs, they would soon run out of money way to pay for security.
They can choose to live in government property where security is paid by taxpayers. They choose to spend months of every year living on their massive private estates, secured with taxpayer funds? Nope, I’m happy to carve that line in the cement. They are government employees, they have government housing. Choose to live elsewhere and they have to pay all the bills themselves.
The Queen IS filthy rich but she just won’t tell. She could easily pay for the security of her whole family and it wouldn’t even DENT her fortune.
The thing is that Royals like Andrew do hardly work for the costs they cause. Also I don’t quite see in how far Eugenie or Beatrice work – neither private commercial (aka work for your money) nor royal work.
But somehow the taxpayer is supposed to pay all the bills for them? Doesn’t seem right to me as they are just the GRANDCHILDREN of the monarch and I doubt that their father prince andrew does any kind of royal work.
Imagine the US taxpayer had to pay for the grandchildren of former POTUS Obama. Would be weird, right?
Andrew does 300+ engagements a year. Edward and Sophie combined are 400-500 hundred.
Beatrice and Eugenie are not funded by the Sovereign Grant, nor do they receive taxpayer security.
Gia: It’s apples and oranges. Two completely different types of Governments.
Megan, Nota is only talking about a handful of royals in her posts. I wouldn’t take that seriously lol. So, the royals you like, get to spend millions of public money, without question, but the ones you dislike need to stay within the guidelines lol. Doesn’t work that way. It’s either all of them , or none.
LOL at the try, ZL, but you haven’t been paying attention. Try reading what I’ve written about loads of these royals, the difference between working royals and family members, and the need to decrease costs.
Nota, people have blinders on. They are not looking at Frogmore as a security risk for all those racist kooks out there. I am glad that renovations are being done to Frogmore to keep the peeping Toms RR at bay.
Too bad Frogmore was such a s**thole to begin with. It was inadequate for their needs in every way and it’s far too exposed. Meghan is a huge paparazzi target in addition to the nutjob racists and they need to secure that place asap.
That place was save since BEFORE they moved in.
Else they wouldn’t have moved in. 😉 Royal protocol.
Read that – Andrew`s Royal Lodge is a residence of 30 rooms plus 8 separate residences for the staff
Edward`s Bagshot Park is a residence of 57 rooms.
Frogmore Cottage must seem just that, a cottage. That being said I think the move to Windsor was a very smart move by Harry and Meghan. Apart from being close to London, having top schools for fufure children just a short distance away and offering them some them privacy, their high profile guests can visit without anybody being the wiser. I am almost 100 % sure they will have some sort of residence in London, and thank God it will not be at KP.
I have been to Kensington Palace and I would never wish to live there. Having a constant stream of strangers walking a short distance from your home, day in, day out when you are that high profile is IMO a night mare scenario. Worst located is the Cambridges home. Add that to the other nightmare of living almost next door to your relatives. No, no, …
Frogmore Cottage is a modest option. In future years, will they move to KP? They might, after the Gloucesters and others retire or pass away. There will be big shifts in who lives where (BP, KP, SLP) through attrition and cost-cutting. And the 10 years of BP renovations are causing temp moves for royal apartments and staff offices too.
Nota, do H & M own Frogmore Cottage or does it belong to the throne? Can they sell it or will it to their child/ren?
That’s the difference between generations. When you are the sons of the queen, you’re going to have a grander home than a grandson. I’m sure when the queen is no longer with us and Charles is king, Harry will have a nicer home than Louis. It’s the way it is.
Royals must get a beating in the press over their spending habits because else they get out of control. They are basically supported by the taxpayer who graciously lets the Royals have some money from the Duchy of Cornwall which isn’t owned by Charles but by the taxpayer who also owns all its profits but who lets the Royals have some of it.
Will and Kate got a beating over their expensive renovations.
Only fair that henry and Meghan get one, too.
I don’t even care, I love Meghan. She is stirring s*it up. The anger towards her is baffling. She wasn’t even around for Trumps visit with the BRF, but his opinion of her was the most coverage that was scandalous. I was cracking up.
People have every right to criticise their renovations. Everyone criticised Will and Kate’s renovations, rightly so – it’s been years and it’s always brought up. It’s really unsettling when people are telling us we can’t complain about our money being used to fund personal properties, especially when we KNOW the Royals can fund this work with their private wealth- they CHOOSE not to. Many people don’t even have the money for a deposit for a home in this country! It does leave a bad taste when you realise your hard earned money goes to a bunch of scroungers who do have more than enough, a billion times over.
Well, at least the figures will be coming out very soon. Everyone will be able to see who spent their share of our millions! At least the made up stuff will stop because each couple will be listed with their amount. Lots of private plane/helicopter use; haute couture straight from the syndicate; jewellery, bespoke galore, and money they do use for their private lives, all up in there. Lovely.
ZL: How much did you pay for the renovations?
Because of freedom *from* FOI requests for Sovereign Grant and Duchy of Cornwall, most of those things are bundled into generic costs. Including Kate’s use of the helo to go visit her mother. It isn’t broken out by work vs. private trips or by individuals. We get a generic X amount spent from the Duchy for work related expenses – bundled together and covering all six of them together (Charles, Camilla, W&K, Harry and Meghan).
Maybe there should be a RoyalExit vote too.
Couldn’t all the money that the tax payers spend on the royals be spent elsewhere making improvements?
These people spend more money on traveling, housing and clothings than they’re able to raise for charities.
There continue to be comments about the UK taxpayer paying for RF home renovations, clothes etc. Yet not a single Brit that post here has shown proof that indeed they pay taxes toward any of these things. We know they pay for security for the RF it is documented but nothing else. Brits please show proof in your laws, otherwise stop with the myths! If the Brits spent nearly 5 million on a home for Meghan they would be out in the streets protesting…they don’t protest because they spend ZERO toward her home and clothes.
Read the rest of the thread. Money doesn’t have to come directly from taxpayers to be our money. The Crown Estates belong to the nation. Plenty of evidence has been provided up thread, in particular the Sovereign Grant framework agreement and the confirmation that its managers need to follow the government’s official “Managing Public Money” guidelines.
If they didn’t renovate, the headlines would scream: “Meghan lives in squalor” and liken it to Grey Gardens. Talentless hacks throwing red meat to the classless, trashy trolls.