The Queen's speech

[team tractor]

So harry and will are in the military and you respect them,have a look at phil the greeks medals,he fought in a war long past that not many seem to remember ww2,and the Queen was a land girl.

Not just the military bit but I have respect for what they do with charity's and supporting our troops.

My grandparents were in the war and land girl but worked until the day they died plus were very modern

Edited December 25, 2013 by team tractor

[welsh1]

Not just the military bit but I have respect for what they do with charity's and supporting our troops.

Oh dear, I think the Queen and Phil might be the patrons of a few more charities than all the other Royals put together,and have again probably used their standing to enable the charities to raise huge sums over the 60 years they have been in charge.As for supporting the troops there is no question over the Queens support for the Armed forces

[team tractor]

Oh dear, I think the Queen and Phil might be the patrons of a few more charities than all the other Royals put together,and have again probably used their standing to enable the charities to raise huge sums over the 60 years they have been in charge.As for supporting the troops there is no question over the Queens support for the Armed forces

I understand that but I feel their to old fashioned now and never on tv pushing it in the public eye

 

 

 

As said just my feelings which don't mean everyone will agree

[welsh1]

I understand that but I feel their to old fashioned now and never on tv pushing it in the public eye

 

 

 

As said just my feelings which don't mean everyone will agree

Fair enough

[Guest rimotu66]

I understand that but I feel their to old fashioned now and never on tv pushing it in the public eye

 

 

 

As said just my feelings which don't mean everyone will agree

 

Oh well that's it then, because there old fashioned and not on tv ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I vote Cat and Alfy for king and Queen, there young and on TV.

[team tractor]

 

Oh well that's it then, because there old fashioned and not on tv ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I vote Cat and Alfy for king and Queen, there young and on TV.

May I ask your age please?

Just out of curiosity

Edited December 25, 2013 by team tractor

[Guest rimotu66]

Pm me mate, this thread is dedicated to toasting Her Royal Highness the Queen.

Edited December 25, 2013 by rimotu66

[team tractor]

Fair enough

Cheers 😎

Edited December 25, 2013 by team tractor

[team tractor]

47 , should it matter?

No of course not

 

I'm 32 Friday so the same as wills so I normally find it's the older generation that follows certain things like the royal family.

 

47 is young still 😎

[overandunder2012]

 

 

Imagine if we had got rid of the Queen 20 years ago,what end would Mr blair have used HIS armed forces for,troops on the street to keep president blair in power,i shudder at the mere thought.

take it back further imagine how far president thatcher would go she was pretty cranky in her last days as pm armed forces best left with the queen

Edited December 25, 2013 by overandunder2012

[overandunder2012]

personally my favourite group of immigrants, good job they got in before UKIP did

[peejay]

 

Quite right Sir , and anyone that disagree's,,,,,,, Channel ferries sail every day

yes they do, but unfortunatley they bring more in than take out....

[hoggysreels]

Royalist ...

[poontang]

Will and Harry have my respect but an old lady with no grip on the real world who has never worked :(

Seriously what does she do ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're kidding right?

[shaun4860]

 

You're kidding right?

A lot of young people couldnt do her workload.....

 

[sitsinhedges]

A lot of young people couldnt do her workload.....

 

They could if they had an army of flunkies and advisors.

 

I actually think the queen has done a very good job given the circumstances and that Phil the Greek would be a bloody good laugh too but if you expect her to have any real power in this day and age you're going to be disappointed.

[bicykillgaz]

 

You're kidding right?

Some people are a bit ignorant and don't realise that she may live a life of privilege in one respect but she's also given up having a real life. She has over 700 official engagements a year at 87 years old, she's been told how to act how to talk and who to talk to for 60 years now. I take my hat off to her as it's not a life I'd want yet she still manages to be the patron of dozens of charities and makes public appearances for them and then has to try and fit in being a mum, grandmother and great grandmother in her spare time. Hers and her families lives are under constant scrutiny by vultures waiting for them to slip up.

[team tractor]

A lot of young people couldnt do her workload.....

 

I don't live with her but I'm guessing she wouldn't come down the workshop with me doing 60 hours a week . Maybe she might be good as a joiner 😄😄😄😄😄 guess I'll never know lol

[shaun4860]

They could if they had an army of flunkies and advisors.

 

I actually think the queen has done a very good job given the circumstances and that Phil the Greek would be a bloody good laugh too but if you expect her to have any real power in this day and age you're going to be disappointed.

Nobody really thinks she has any real power.......do they?

 

As said by bicykillgaz, no matter how many "flunkies" you have, to that amount of work is still hard going no matter what your age

 

[krugerandsmith]

Well just listened to Her Majesty,and a lovely speech.

 

I raise my glass," the Queen"

 

I am not a Royalist. Having said that I firmly believe in Democracy and peoples right to choose..... So can I suggest that all royalists pay say £300 pounds each per year into a fund to provide their future health and wealth. Collected maybe through council rates. ...For those non Royalists nothing.

Survey carried out at Airports a couple of years ago asking tourists if they had come specifically to see the Royals only 0.3% said they had.

Paris without the Royal family attracts as many overseas visitors.

[Gimlet]

 

I am not a Royalist. Having said that I firmly believe in Democracy and peoples right to choose..... So can I suggest that all royalists pay say £300 pounds each per year into a fund to provide their future health and wealth. Collected maybe through council rates. ...For those non Royalists nothing.

Survey carried out at Airports a couple of years ago asking tourists if they had come specifically to see the Royals only 0.3% said they had.

Paris without the Royal family attracts as many overseas visitors.

 

That's the opposite of democracy. By the same logic I should have a tax refund. I detest this government just as I detested the last one and I did not vote for any of them. Why should I pay taxes to fund them? The nation would disintegrate with such selectivity.

The point of a constitutional monarchy is a head of state, a representative of us as a nation, who is above partisan politics. The alternative is a republic and a president. Under a President Blair or a President Cameron I would be as disenfranchised as others would be by a President Thatcher. I would cease to recognise myself as British during their tenure.

Politics divides people. Our Monarch is a representative of what we have in common.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Gimlet

[overandunder2012]

 

I am not a Royalist. Having said that I firmly believe in Democracy and peoples right to choose..... So can I suggest that all royalists pay say £300 pounds each per year into a fund to provide their future health and wealth. Collected maybe through council rates. ...For those non Royalists nothing.

Survey carried out at Airports a couple of years ago asking tourists if they had come specifically to see the Royals only 0.3% said they had.

Paris without the Royal family attracts as many overseas visitors.

if the royals went do you think your taxes would go down? i doubt it no i think keep the royals theres a lot worse they could be spending you tax pounds on

[poontang]

 

..... So can I suggest that all royalists pay say £300 pounds each per year into a fund to provide their future health and wealth.

 

Where on earth do you get that figure from?

 

It cost each taxpayer 52p last year to fund the royal family.

 

Just to put a little bit of perspective to things, last year the British government spent over ten times the amount it gives to the royals on 'aid' to Syria.

Edited December 26, 2013 by poontang

[Twistedsanity]

She has the power to disband parliament at her fingers yet she continues to sit on a pile of taxpayers money whilst successive governments destroy this country and drive it deeper into debt , her "subjects" will die in the tens of thousands this winter as they do every winter through starvation and cold whilst her and her family hoard wealth and taxes, I believe the politically correct term would be " Not fit for purpose" ( unless you only think of her as a shiny hood ornament for Great Britain plc in which case she is perfect for the job) we did away with slavery and peadophillia along with leeches , trephining and mercury as medicine , about time the freeloaders went the same way , you can think of it as progress if you wish when the millions of pounds the royals cost us every year goes to save the lives of people's elderly relatives every winter

[welsh1]

Until 1760 the monarch met all official expenses from hereditary revenues, which included the profits of the Crown Estate (the royal property portfolio). King George III agreed to surrender the hereditary revenues of the Crown in return for the Civil List, and this arrangement persists. The Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom, with holdings of £7.3 billion in 2011.[4] It is held in trust, and cannot be sold or owned by the Sovereign in a private capacity.[5] In modern times, the profits surrendered from the Crown Estate have exceeded the Civil List and Grants-in-Aid.[2] For example, the Crown Estate produced £200 million for the Treasury in the financial year 2007–8, whereas reported parliamentary funding for the monarch was £40 million during the same period.[6]