General Chat

Our Sovereign does this man more good than his MP.

Money well spent Maggie :-D

Also, the Queen actually contributes money to the UK.
The Queen, Prince Charles and other members of the Royal Family have private incomes from their private landed estates and financial assets - and they
all pay tax (unlike some big firms and oligarchs), and yes, the UK has to pay their security bills, - but then don't we pay these for MP's?
The Royal Family costs the country about £1 per person a year.

To be fair I can't comment on the views of those in Nunavut.....maybe someone else on here can??

Caroline ...........

I think the situation in PQ as you know it, and BC as I know it, is pretty much the situation all across Canada.

The direct line of the monarchy is well thought of, revered and even loved.

No, I think you've confirmed what I thought the situation in BC might be but as I wasn't 100% sure I thought I'd leave it to someone who actually knew something about the area first hand to comment on. I can comment on Quebec as I have first-hand knowledge of the area. :-)

Caroline .............

I've suddenly had an attack of selective blindness. ;-)

I see you referring to BC , and then saying that many people in PQ "do love the Queen and Royal family as noted on their visits, and those that don't well they don't even want to be part of Canada so not exactly a vote against the Queen."


Not sure what you were referring to, nor what caused your laughter, but I would say that there are many more in BC who love and revere the Queen, and many other members of the Royal Family, as witness the visit by William and Kate with their 2 children a couple of years ago.

Can I answer any more of your questions???

:-D :-D Best laugh I've had all night...oh hang on it's serious not a joke??

Um we have the Queen as Head of State and no we don't pay for them directly but we pay for the Governor-General and as already said for their visits. I'll let Sylvia comment on the BC part, as for Quebec well many do love the Queen and Royal family as noted on their visits, and those that don't well they don't even want to be part of Canada so not exactly a vote against the Queen.

How about you "worry" about dear old Blighty and leave us out of it :-)

I don't think it is possible to get around the basic fact that Oz, NZ, Canada have decided to share a Head of State with the UK and do not contribute towards the running costs. The quality of the monarch and their family is not the issue. There are multitudes of people who have pointed this out inc citizens of these countries.

The historical reasons are easy to understand. Some of my GF & father's rellies fought under the flags of ANZAC and Canada leaving only white gravestones or no known place of burial. The survivors are still there in numbers of course.

Nevertheless time moves on. A big chunk of Australia traces its roots back to Ireland and were never friends of the British crown. Not long ago there was a referendum on becoming a republic which did not pass but could well do so in future. A large proportion of the population of B.C. and Quebec do not have much in the way of links with the British Crown either. Nor do the native peoples who are yet again getting the thin end of the wedge so as to please US tar sand companies.

It can hardly be argued that the governments of Oz and Canada have been a howling success this last 30 years. Maybe a native head of state could be a start on change.

Meanwhile the close cultural , family and economic links we have are fine with me. Just that a more hard headed approach and less flag waving could be a better. A good start would be to improve on the current farcical visa arrangements.

There is nothing which upsets people so much as facts that do not align with their point of view, big & little Trump being excellent examples.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjWh7OFnfTo

But you'd be talking to yourself then Sylvia :-D

You could always scroll past Rollos comments, as I'm sure many do, otherwise he'd be reported for his 'language'. Apart from that I agree with you.

Your opening words were polite Sylvia, not the words I would use ;-) :-D :-D :-D :-D

Rollo ...........


stop talking out of the back of your head.

Canada, Australia etc do not contribute directly to the support of the Royal Family in the UK, why should they???

But they do support them by paying the vast majority of costs when a member of the family is on an official tour in the country.

Even if they make an unofficial visit, as Harry did many times before getting engaged to his now wife .............. every visit he made involved security costs for Toronto police etc that were not paid by the UK.

I'm not a monarchist, but I have a great respect for many members of the Royal Family and for what they stand for.


I despise your views and your know-it-all attitude ................ I wish it was possible on this site to be able to avoid reading postings by other posters.


EDIT:- I mean block out certain posters, not everyone ;-)

Under QE2 the UK Royal Family has morphed into a gilded version of the Kardashians with well paid sinecures and lux housing all round for jobs anybody could do eg flying helicopters.

The more serious jobs of state have long been abandoned though properly carried out by all but one of the other C20 monarchs.

There are plenty of indications that Charles and William take a wider view of the responsibilities of the monarchy. The Queen going on and on may well spell an end to the monarchy altogether.

Apart from the usual culprits such as Bild and Hello dull, serious (and expensive ) central European business newsletters are discussing the poss. of E. abdicating sooner rather than later.

If Canada, Oz are so keen on the monarchy why don't they pay some of the bill ? The PMs actually like the status quo 'cos with an elected head of state their wings would be well and truly clipped.

In recent years photographs of the Royal Family have omitted the younger

sons and the daughter, focusing on HM the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh,

Princes Charles, William and Harry, and their wives plus of course their children.

Windsor 1 - 6

Caroline ............. I think you're right. She's going to let Prince Charles do many of the things she's still doing, and then take it easy like Philip.

I believe it's not so much abdication than handing over more and more duties as required. She's always been very anti abdication.

Rollo ......


............ that rumour is also being heard over her, but even more .............. I've seen it mentioned in English newspapers, so it is being reported in the UK, for anyone who still reads a newspaper ;-)


FWIW ....... the rumour is that she is considering stepping down on her 95th birthday.

By which time hopefully, the "rumour" that Kate would like another child will have come true, and Harry and his starlet bride will have dropped out the top list of Royals. They can then go and do whatever they want without impacting too much on what is left of the majesty of the monarchy.

Europe's always been 'awash with rumours' about the royals.

Although not reported in the UK Europe is awash with rumours that the Queen is considering abdication. All move up one.
:-0

Thank you for your contributions, he's proving to be a good Father too.