Grendel
Well-Known Member
She spends the whole of July to October in Scotland and the Two months then in winter at Sandringham. So half the year she’s never in London.
From what I’ve read she spends most Monday-Fridays there in the private quarters.
is this from the same newspaper?
wouldn't be surprised to see Johnson go after the Lords. Time has come for a massive look at the Lords. A 2nd house is fine to balance a democracy but not one that's based family, religious positions or basically "grace & favour appointments depending on who is in govt".He’s not going to get the nominations so I think he’s just throwing stuff hoping something gets him attention now.
To be fair to him, I think looking at the constitution as a whole (HoL, royals, bill of rights etc) is needed and I think the Tories are planning some stuff. But all this “ask the people” stuff is vague nonsense to avoid coming up with a popular policy. And Brexit should’ve shown us direct democracy isn’t always a smart idea.
Supposed to be both from the Mailis this from the same newspaper?
wouldn't be surprised to see Johnson go after the Lords. Time has come for a massive look at the Lords. A 2nd house is fine to balance a democracy but not one that's based family, religious positions or basically "grace & favour appointments depending on who is in govt".
had a look - negative story the Mail, positive story the Express.Supposed to be both from the Mail
Not so sure. A lot of critics on both sides of the Commons.Look at it? He’s more likely to fill it with people sympathetic to him and his policies.
Not so sure. A lot of critics on both sides of the Commons.
Also since the 2018 reform not so easy for a govt to do. 15 year terms for appointed peers, "2 out, 1 in". Aim was to get the number down to a cap of 600 members
Heard about this one on 5Live this morning. But some commentator said that everyone loved Meghan when they were dating, and to the wedding and beyond. It was only when they they started displaying self-destructive behaviour and that not in keeping with royal protocol that the proles turned against her.
I took it to mean at the City game!
School the boy how they like. Don't think private education did much for Harry. Had to get special help to scrape 2 A levels.It looks like they want to be financially independent for the money coming in but slightly less independent for the costs going out. No posh school for the boy either home schooling is preferable
School the boy how they like. Don't think private education did much for Harry. Had to get special help to scrape 2 A levels.
This financial business is obviously heavily reliant on who they are hence the numerous trademarks they have registered.
Royal family want to keep her sweet. Let's face it any divorce from Harry will make this seem like a picnic. Books, exposés etc
Not sure how well that reflects on you if she needed "Special help" to get byHalf of what you pay for at private school is “special help”. My first GF was privately educated and came out with grades she wasn’t capable of in a million years.
Not sure how well that reflects on you if she needed "Special help" to get by
Oh that's just a sneaky way to get her on topShe was fit, but once I’d tried and failed to explain gravity for the tenth time I decided she wasn’t for me
The press have been largely supportive compared to others who have gone before. They want a rock star lifestyle and adulation with no criticism - it’s not tenable. Fly round the world and flaunt opulence and then lecture on the impact of flights on climate change and then look shocked at the vitriol - seriously
Agreed.
A lot of people are keen to compare the press coverage of Megan compared to other royals. One example is about avocados with it being one of Kate’s favourite foods as well as Megan’s. With the coverage a lot more negative to Megan.
The difference isn’t ethnicity. The difference is that Megan and Harry will happily preach about climate change, whilst flying on 4 private jets in 11 days (including to a climate change summit). The impact of increased demand for avocados is causing a few issues such as deforestation and crime.
Then there’s stuff like raising their children ‘gender neutral’, stepping back from senior royal roles whilst wanting to keep their expensive security teams. Elizabeth II is a model constitutional monarch/royal family - they are to be seen and not heard in the public political realm.
Then, you’ve got this line about them wanting to ‘try’ to become ‘financially independent’ with their unbelievably privileged background is a bit of a slap to the face to millions of ordinary people.
They’ve been vocal, that’s fine. But, the press is always going to call out hypocrisy.
The more baffling part is that people are apparently fine with millions going to people for doing jack shit until they cross a line
I don’t disagree.
The monarchy has its uses, but I’m a republican by nature. In fact, before this and the Prince Andrew scandal, the monarchy was in a strong place. Now, with all this and with a potential king who has abused his his position in the past to influence policy as Prince. The monarchy is possibly about to face a crisis it may not recover from.
My favourite argument against a republic is ‘President Blair,’ ‘Johnson,’ ‘Cameron’ and so on... Yet, the archaic nature of the monarchy would mean had Prince Andrew had been born before Charles, our next king could’ve been associated with a paedophile.
Say what you want about any politician, left or right... at least they’re elected and can be sacked the next election.
Come the revolutionIf the monarch effectively has no power or influence they have no purpose
If they actually do have power or influence the role shouldn’t be inherited
Come the revolution
Wouldn't take much to change public opinion, and events like Harry's current actions may not help. It's currently supported as much because the Queen's known how to play the role - she keeps out of meddling, says little at all and even less that's controversial, and does what she's told. Now tbf Charles (now he's older!) and William *seem* to have been brought up in that tradition, but a false move or two and the institution could rapidly shed its support.even millennials in the latest poll voted overwhelmingly to keep its - its going nowhere
Wouldn't take much to change public opinion, and events like Harry's current actions may not help. It's currently supported as much because the Queen's known how to play the role - she keeps out of meddling, says little at all and even less that's controversial, and does what she's told. Now tbf Charles (now he's older!) and William *seem* to have been brought up in that tradition, but a false move or two and the institution could rapidly shed its support.
That's not what I said.The poll was done after this incident
Wouldn't take much to change public opinion, and events like Harry's current actions may not help. It's currently supported as much because the Queen's known how to play the role - she keeps out of meddling, says little at all and even less that's controversial, and does what she's told. Now tbf Charles (now he's older!) and William *seem* to have been brought up in that tradition, but a false move or two and the institution could rapidly shed its support.
That's not what I said.
Harry & Megan "threat" to do some US chat show and attack the Royal family and they could well bury themselves.Wouldn't take much to change public opinion, and events like Harry's current actions may not help. It's currently supported as much because the Queen's known how to play the role - she keeps out of meddling, says little at all and even less that's controversial, and does what she's told. Now tbf Charles (now he's older!) and William *seem* to have been brought up in that tradition, but a false move or two and the institution could rapidly shed its support.
Harry & Megan "threat" to do some US chat show and attack the Royal family and they could well bury themselves.
They know Royal family aren't going to go on "Oprah" etc. to defend themselves.
"Wash their dirty laundry in public" and my money would be on a backlash from British public.
Should the views of the readers be blamed on the publishers though?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?