Home & Garden1 min ago
Should The Taxpayer Continue To Fund These Minor Royals?
52 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.//Have we ever been asked if we’re prepared to pay? //
I don't think anybody's ever bothered to ask - as it is, no political party with even the remotest chance of gaining power has ever campaigned on a republican platform. if a party were to do so at the next election, what are the chances of them being returned to power?
I don't think anybody's ever bothered to ask - as it is, no political party with even the remotest chance of gaining power has ever campaigned on a republican platform. if a party were to do so at the next election, what are the chances of them being returned to power?
I have no qualms about this whatsoever. Harry is NOT minor royalty, he is heir to the throne's son. It is Beatrice and Eugenie who could be classed as minor royalty. I like Harry and Meghan and think she gets far too much carp thrown at her. I'm looking forward to the christening pictures next month.
They've been very lucky. The Queen has gifted them the house (how many of us have that luxury?). I feel that improvements are down to them not us.
Also, they have made it clear that they wish to move away from Royal roles (very sensible), but will retain titles although basing themselves outside the UK (!!). They are rich in their own rights. I do understand that the property was due for renovation anyway (which we would have paid for) - but, come on - it was free!
Harry has made it very clear that he wishes to dissociate from his Royal role - that's fine but it means that 'NO' we should not fund him.
Also, they have made it clear that they wish to move away from Royal roles (very sensible), but will retain titles although basing themselves outside the UK (!!). They are rich in their own rights. I do understand that the property was due for renovation anyway (which we would have paid for) - but, come on - it was free!
Harry has made it very clear that he wishes to dissociate from his Royal role - that's fine but it means that 'NO' we should not fund him.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.