Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 6:27:31 GMT
No money from our taxes anywhere, apart from the odd billion to buy votes, and then
THE "ROYAL" FAMILY GETS AN £8M A YEAR INCOME INCREASE
Are we living in a parallel reality??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 6:48:12 GMT
No money from our taxes anywhere, apart from the odd billion to buy votes, and then THE "ROYAL" FAMILY GETS AN £8M A YEAR INCOME INCREASE Are we living in a parallel reality?? It's an 8% rise, and not 8m quid. "The Queen is to receive an 8% increase in income from public funds, after the Crown Estate's profits rose by £24m.
The Sovereign Grant, which pays for the salaries of her household, official travel and upkeep of palaces, is to increase by more than £6m in 2018/19." So, in reality, it is not a 'pay rise' for the Queen, as it covers the costs of running lots of stuff, including the wages of the staff. Are you suggesting that the staff on the various estates never receive a pay rise? The Crown Estate posted a £24.7m rise in profits, to £328.8m, in 2016/17. |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jun 28, 2017 6:52:10 GMT
No money from our taxes anywhere, apart from the odd billion to buy votes, and then THE "ROYAL" FAMILY GETS AN £8M A YEAR INCOME INCREASE Are we living in a parallel reality?? How much extra did the Treasury receive Les? |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jun 28, 2017 6:54:23 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 6:54:32 GMT
No money from our taxes anywhere, apart from the odd billion to buy votes, and then THE "ROYAL" FAMILY GETS AN £8M A YEAR INCOME INCREASE Are we living in a parallel reality?? How much extra did the Treasury receive Les? Less than they need to fund the NHS |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 6:55:26 GMT
And she owns nothing
|
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jun 28, 2017 7:10:10 GMT
How much extra did the Treasury receive Les? Less than they need to fund the NHS
so how much will the crown estate raise if we got rid of the Royals?
we can have a debate on whether we should have a Royal family or not, but everyone who I have seen bang on about the Queen's pay rise has neglected to mention the money the treasury gets and make it as if someone has just given her extra money
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 7:18:37 GMT
Less than they need to fund the NHS
so how much will the crown estate raise if we got rid of the Royals?
we can have a debate on whether we should have a Royal family or not, but everyone who I have seen bang on about the Queen's pay rise has neglected to mention the money the treasury gets and make it as if someone has just given her extra money
It's all our money. She should get nothing |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 7:32:23 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 7:40:59 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 8:46:33 GMT
Look at it this way Les. It's the Local Councils who have fecked up big time over these Tower Blocks. Why should Central Government bail them out. Let the Local Councils carry the financial can, and then maybe they can explain to their local voters just why their local taxes are going up. Aim your cannon's at the Local Councils, not Central Government. |
|
pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 19,461 
|
Post by pirate on Jun 28, 2017 9:02:48 GMT
Bloody benefits scroungers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 9:16:22 GMT
Look at it this way Les. It's the Local Councils who have fecked up big time over these Tower Blocks. Why should Central Government bail them out. Let the Local Councils carry the financial can, and then maybe they can explain to their local voters just why their local taxes are going up. Aim your cannon's at the Local Councils, not Central Government. Building Regs are a matter of law. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe these are set at a national level. If these have been broken then criminal prosecutions will follow. Added to this local government funding has been smashed and the poorest areas hit the hardest. Why make the poor pay again through increased local taxes, or more cuts in services? Of course this did not apply to the Tory Council of Kensington and Chelsea, who had £270m in reserves. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 28, 2017 9:17:07 GMT
Bloody benefits scroungers. Subtle but effective. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2017 9:51:16 GMT
Look at it this way Les. It's the Local Councils who have fecked up big time over these Tower Blocks. Why should Central Government bail them out. Let the Local Councils carry the financial can, and then maybe they can explain to their local voters just why their local taxes are going up. Aim your cannon's at the Local Councils, not Central Government. Building Regs are a matter of law. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe these are set at a national level. If these have been broken then criminal prosecutions will follow. Added to this local government funding has been smashed and the poorest areas hit the hardest. Why make the poor pay again through increased local taxes, or more cuts in services? Of course this did not apply to the Tory Council of Kensington and Chelsea, who had £270m in reserves. Yes, you are correct, building regs are a matter of law......the question is, have those building regs been broken or not. If they have, then they were signed off by the local building inspectorate, not the National, and criminal proceedings should indeed follow. The Local Council should be made responsible and should have to answer to their electorate, who can therefore vote them out. If the National Government bails them out, then they won't have to answer to the local electorate. Maybe then, the local councils everywhere will take notice to ensure this doesn't happen again elsewhere.....If laws have been broken, then I want those responsible hounded out, voted out and prosecuted. Labour or Tory, I couldn't give a toss. FYI, there are also Tower Blocks in Germany that have been evacuated as they have also been deemed to be unsafe following the London fire. |
|
|
|
Post by inee on Jun 29, 2017 12:48:27 GMT
so how much will the crown estate raise if we got rid of the Royals?
we can have a debate on whether we should have a Royal family or not, but everyone who I have seen bang on about the Queen's pay rise has neglected to mention the money the treasury gets and make it as if someone has just given her extra money
It's all our money. She should get nothing How many billions of our money is spent on overseas aid, how much is sent to the eu, it's our money and they should get nothing either. The monarchy raise more money than the take out, tourist, visitors all spend money when visiting, royal events sell out hotels ,restaurants and put a lot of cash into the economy, funny how thats overlooked all the time. To take the view it's our money is very shortsighted and surely against views you have posted in the forums, look at it another way if we all took the view it's our money and refused to spend any of it what state would the country be in, stiil gooid excuse to reopen workhouses  |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jun 29, 2017 12:57:06 GMT
It's all our money. She should get nothing How many billions of our money is spent on overseas aid, how much is sent to the eu, it's our money and they should get nothing either. The monarchy raise more money than the take out, tourist, visitors all spend money when visiting, royal events sell out hotels ,restaurants and put a lot of cash into the economy, funny how thats overlooked all the time. To take the view it's our money is very shortsighted and surely against views you have posted in the forums, look at it another way if we all took the view it's our money and refused to spend any of it what state would the country be in, stiil gooid excuse to reopen workhouses Indeed. How much would the Crown Estate raise without a Royal Family? Who would pay for the upkeep of these buildings without a Royal Family. That would be 'us' still |
|
