I'm not so sure that the PM wouldn't prefer doing the PR stuff, for the political benefit. "See what good things my government is doing for you?"
Even allowing that those monarchical functions are worthwhile, they certainly don't justify the expense of royalty maintenance. Buckingham palace - really?
What's the relative cost, e.g. with the US president?
IMHO there are other costs related to our monarchy that are probably easier to query than Buck House (and others).
It's an ego trip for them (and the less they get of that the better). They should spend as little time as possible in situations that feed the feeling that they are important people. He who would be first amongst you should be servant of all, not some kind of over-exposed master of ceremonies.
Buckingham palace has been around for a while. Most of the palaces are maintained as interesting old buildings - the fact that they are used as royal residences and places for performing ceremonies of one sort or another is as much directed at sucking in the tourists as anything else. It's certainly no sillier than the US White House.
Are you Australian by any chance?
Not going to attempt to deconstruct this one, then, Bill? As you did with Message-ID: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com I mean. Best quit while you're behind. You only exposed the extent of your cognitive decline last time anyway.
<snipped obscure link>
I didn't "deconstruct" your second story about an imagined interaction between you the Duke of Edinburgh, I just highlighted it's more implausible elements. "Deconstruction" would have involved some discussion of the message that you were trying to convey, which seemed to be that some people take the UK royal family a little too seriously.
Strange. Here was I thinking that I was pointing out yours. "Solid gold coach" indeed!
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required