Another Royal Wedding and it’s only costing £2m. Rejoice

[nmc]

Likely the result of a revenge fuck as Phil was bound to be doing the stable managers missus.

Phil was doing Nanette Newman - allegedly of course.

 

[nmc]

Their mother doesn't get anything off the taxpayer, their father actually works really hard and is directly responsible for this country's businesses winning a lot of contracts.

I know people don't like to hear or think about this stuff, but it's true.

Is that Air Miles Andy you are referring to? Not sure what he knows about business but he certainly pokes his nose into quite a few things around the world - travelling first class, staying in 5 star hotels and claiming expenses. Lucky sod!

 

[bluealf]

Fair enough. Hope you are having an enjoyable Sunday.

It has raced by as per usual, it is a good job I am off all of next week, unfortunately it is jobs in the house holiday week :(

 

[hilts]

There was one case in which a women filed a lawsuit stating she was forced to have sex with Andy. Does that not make him a rapist?

No

 

[hilts]

Never watched a royal wedding and never will but if the 2p it cost me this week helps pay for it then fair do’s. If it helps the economy and more importantly upsets the class warriors and envy crew it’s cracking value for money.

 

[Blue Hefner]

I’m not interested in the Royals and/or thier weddings but here’s the thing - they are the Royal Family, they can pretty much do what they like. That wedding could have cost 20mil and short of a revaluation, there’s nothing we can do about it. That’s how a monarchy works

There are far more important things that people an actually effect, which I’d suggest the people moaning spend their time and effort on

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

We'll make a lot more than £2m back from mad tourists wandering over for it and the desperate foreign media who come to take pictures.

Me? Not remotely interested.

I would like my share to come directly in the form of a Treasury Bond - no fuckin' cheques please!

 

[halfmist]

A question for all the Bowers and Scrapers on here. Are you happy to subsidise all the extended Royal Family, many you would never even heard of let alone recognise, in their grace and favour homes, in the various Palaces in Central London. If these homes were commercially let or sold off the Royal Family would not need a taxpayer subsidy.

 

[urban genie]

A question for all the Bowers and Scrapers on here. Are you happy to subsidise all the extended Royal Family, many you would never even heard of let alone recognise, in their grace and favour homes, in the various Palaces in Central London. If these homes were commercially let or sold off the Royal Family would not need a taxpayer subsidy.

Don't worry when universal credit kicks in , these benefit claimants will see their funds cut massively shirley

 

[Henkeman]

A question for all the Bowers and Scrapers on here. Are you happy to subsidise all the extended Royal Family, many you would never even heard of let alone recognise, in their grace and favour homes, in the various Palaces in Central London. If these homes were commercially let or sold off the Royal Family would not need a taxpayer subsidy.

That isn't really how it works. The income from the Crown Estates is handed over in its entirety to the Treasury, and run as a separate business. The Sovereign Grant is a function of the performance of that. The more minor royals if they get an income at all get it through the Duchy of Lancaster, not via subsidy from the public purse - that was abolished many years ago.

None of these means you have to approve of it, but it's not the case that they get voted an allowance every year.