I've my 7.5 piece commemorative China ordered..... do they still do that kind of tat for royal occasions lol..?
blood line wise I don't think its very royal at all>>>>>hewitts boy and some yank..........shame people fall for a sham
Remember when Blair got rid of the Royal Yacht because it was a ridiculous expense, then within months suggested he should have a plane like the Yanks have Airforce 1. Missing the irony that it would cost as much as 5 times the cost of a Royal Yacht.
Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher spring to mind any time an elected president of the UK is suggested....
Tourists would still come if we weren't funding the royals though. After all it's not actually the royal family they come to see, it's the palace, etc.
one shall never mention how ones once second in line to the throne is amazingly similar to a ginger fellow with actual hair unlike Charles and wills. one expects one to do the same.
The tourist industry has actually argued otherwise to a point....however, So you'd maintain the buildings then; the bit that costs almost a third of the annual budget paid by tax payer.... oh and keep staff on to run them as tourist attractions, security for contents worth more than in most museums etc etc. Those savings are quickly going down and we still haven't added the cost of either the direct replacement or cost added to the budgets of existing departments to cover the tasks reassigned. The Crown estate would still exist without the monarch. ..its not just managing a few palaces ...its half the UK coastline, forests, agricultural land etc . It's part of the fudging of figures ... it's what takes the annual cost of the royals from 37m to 200-300 million.
Read somewhere a while ago that the Queen owns forests, thousands of acres of countryside, vast swathes of buildings in the big cities, real estate in New York, parts of the actual coastal waters(amongst other things), not sure the country/crown estate own as much as her. Although I'm probably totally wrong altogether.
