Wee Willie Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 These two comments are from the Daily Mail as posted in another thread here. I would have preferred Laura to say that I was a horrid republican as that sounds mair classy. Laura1973, Stirling, United Kingdom, 13 hours ago This is the real snp a bunch of horrible republicans , how can anyone support them , they are a bunch of halfwits I can't beleive scotland has come to this and has so many bitter bullying people God help us …and… 'If you can't pledge allegiance to the queen, one of the hardest working women ever and understand what she does for this country then resign ' This article was posted on the BBC website 26th June, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28030509 Queen's income set to rise to £40m next year 26 June 2014 The Queen's income is expected to rise by more than 5% next year after the Crown Estate announced record profits. The Sovereign Grant, which covers the costs of the Queen's official duties, will reach £40m next April. The grant is calculated as a percentage of profits from the Crown Estate, which includes properties such as Windsor Park and much of the UK coastline. Meanwhile, Buckingham Palace accounts show about a third of the grant is spent maintaining the royal palaces……. Can anyone tell me who makes these decisions? Ultimately there must be one person in government who decides these things and okays it. Since when has 'one of the hardest working women ever' owned ‘much of the UK’ coastline. Disnae lift a finger or get off her arse and she gets a cut of the income. Her son appears tae be doing no bad either. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23310584 Prince Charles's aide grilled by MPs over tax affairs 15 July 2013 The Prince of Wales is not liable to pay corporation or capital gains tax, a senior royal aide has told MPs on the Public Accounts Committee. William Nye said the Duchy of Cornwall - which provides the heir to the throne with a private income - was not a corporation and that the prince voluntarily pays income tax. Committee chairwoman and Labour MP Margaret Hodge questioned the "fairness" of the tax arrangements. The duchy estate is worth £762m. The prince was paid £19m from the estate last year and paid just over £4m in income tax and VAT. Mrs Hodge said the committee wanted to "reflect on the current arrangements to see whether or not they reflect the reality of the world today." But the royal aide said the prince's estate does not pay capital gains tax because he "doesn't have access to the capital gains. The capital gains are all reinvested in the duchy for future dukes". Mr Nye told MPs the profits were used to pay for the prince's public duties, as well as those of his wife the Duchess of Cornwall and those of Prince William, the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry. He said that if parliament legislated to prevent Prince Charles using his private income in this way it would cost taxpayers more - to pay for his official duties - and he would be free to spend his money "on his other things". Taxed twice' Paula Diggle, a senior Treasury official appearing before the committee, defended the prince's tax arrangements saying that he does not pay capital gains tax because he always reinvests any profit from sales. "If the duke were to be taxed on the corporate income of the duchy as well as his income, he would be taxed twice," she said. She added that the duchy differed to other corporations because the prince "is in the unusual position of getting all the income." The duchy estate of land and property - mostly in the south-west of England - was established by King Edward III in the fourteenth century to provide a private income for his son and heir to the throne. Conservative MPs on the committee defended Clarence House's position that the duchy is in fact a private estate, not liable to certain taxes. "If it looks like a private ducal estate set up to provide an heir to the throne and it quacks like a private ducal estate set up to provide an heir to the throne, can one assume that it might just possibly be a private ducal estate set up to provide an heir to the throne?", Richard Bacon asked. But Labour MP Austin Michell said: "What was a medieval entity... has been transformed into a business." Force government action The last time Prince Charles's representatives came before the Public Accounts Committee they were accused of performing financial "jiggery pokery" and he was said to be the recipient of the "best housing benefit scheme in the world". This time the committee is fresh from finding the tax affairs of Google, Starbucks and Amazon wanting. Graham Smith, chief executive of the anti-monarchy group, Republic, said: "Everyone has a moral obligation to pay a fair rate of tax, whether that's Starbucks, Google or the heir to the throne. "We welcome the PAC investigation and hope that this exposure of the duchy's tax arrangements will force the government to act." Earlier this month, the prince faced calls from Andrew George, the Liberal Democrat MP for West Cornwall, to "come clean" about the Duchy of Cornwall's tax arrangements. Clarence House has said public funding for the Prince of Wales fell by £1m to £1.2m in the last financial year, out of a total income of £20.2m. Now that above article was posted on the BBC website the same time this was From July 2013 the government set a limit on the total amount of benefit that working age people can get. This is called a 'benefit cap' And here are another couple of articles on Prince Charlie’s tax arrangements. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/feb/15/tax-exemptions-prince-charles-estate-duchy MPs challenge tax exemptions for Prince Charles's estate .Friday 15 February 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24814022 MPs question Prince Charles estate's tax arrangements 5 November 2013 The following article is taken from the Sun newspaper. I can remember this and I'm sure that the original offer of money was £10,000 for the use of Holyrood House for one day - the Saturday. And this was only after the staff of Holyrood House said they would lose money by closing. Again I'll ask the question - who, in government, makes these decisions that the taxpayer should foot the bill. http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3712437/Queens-40k-gift-for-Zara-wedding.html Queen’s £40k gift for Zara wedding 30 July 2011 THE Queen is giving granddaughter Zara Phillips a £40,000 wedding gift — the “hire” of one of her palaces for the reception. She will pay out of her own pocket to make up for money Holyroodhouse will lose by being closed to the public for five days while Zara marries rugby ace Mike Tindall. One final question for the noo. Does Mr. Tindall now sit with his feet up, enjoying the benefits of marrying royalty at the taxpayers expense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Simple answer no we don't need them. The reality is however they remain relatively popular. However I would expect a fair bit of reform once Lizzie passes away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speckled tangerine Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Liz looks fucking miserable most of the time. I bet secretly she really wants a republic. Without any pressure of being head of state I bet she'd tell Nicolas Witchell to f**k off to his face and probably boot most of the royal sycophants from the Mail & Express in the pie/up the arse* *delete as applicable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 No we don't need them. Fucking parasites. As a republican I think the best thing is for big ears to take over ASAP, he's the epitome of entitlement and will advance the republican cause. Once again. Fucking parasites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'm a republican but at the same time I have no personal animosity towards the royals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lambies Doos Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Somebody on pie and bovril once described them as the biggest con artists of all time.. and I would agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted May 17, 2015 Author Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'm a republican but at the same time I have no personal animosity towards the royals These articles I posted above. They are okay by you? You dinnae mind being screwed by these c**ts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'm an butat the same time I have no personal animosity towards the royals I'm a republican but at the same time I have no personal animosity towards the royalsI actually took you off ignore. More fool me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ford prefect Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'll never understand the need in people to pledge allegiance and loyalty to people who couldn't give a damn about anyone but themselves... Strange people royalists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I would happily see their funding slashed but the main problem is Tories loning up to lick theor feet clean rather than the royals themselves. David Cameron came out with some shite like "one of the main perks of being Prime Minister is getting to see this young couple (William and Kate) up close" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YassinMoutaouakil Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'm a republican but at the same time I have no personal animosity towards the royalsAye, I'm with you there. I'd vote to get rid of them in a heartbeat but Liz is a decent Head of State as far as I'm concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzz Killington Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 #nokings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I'm Brian Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 #nokings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonapersona Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'm sure there's a large swimming pool in the depths of Buckingham Palace that contains all the inbreeds who were born with flippers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LinkinFighter Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I'd like to see us get rid but I doubt it'll happen for decades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 I actually took you off ignore. More fool me. What? You're putting me on ignore because my Republicanism is not fuelled by a personal dislike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Damn, I tried to PM Granny for clear the air talks and he has literally blocked me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyAffro Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Biggest benefit scroungers in human history. The UK is such a backwards place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 Royalists are the saddest of sad b*****ds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint dave Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 First independence , then , Scottish Republic , all in good time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.