Daft Old Duffer is back with his weekly column. This week he shares his view of the Royal Family. Ed
With the Royal Wedding looming close, we’re beginning to see once again all the heat arising over whether or not we should pay to keep the Royals in being.
A glance at the VentnorBlog Discussion Forum (Prince and Playboy) will reveal Big Ears, armour clad, brandishing his shining sword and declaiming ‘Avaunt ye varlets. Stand forth and give battle if ye so whist. I stand for the honour of Her Majesty!’
A fine figure of a roly-poly gnome with pointy ears and a strong smell of mushroom.
Long held views
Personally I have held much the same opinion on the matter ever since seeing, on the newsreel, shots of a rather fanciable Princess E. driving her ambulance around blitzy London.
And that is that, on the whole I think I would plump for keeping them.
Simply because if we cancelled the show, we would end up replacing them with some other Head Of State. Someone to host all those international banquets, shake foreign hands, open things, and generally be cheered.
Just as in all those other countries that have given their royalty the chop. And that Head Of State would invariably require far more spent on pomp and circumstance than do ours.
To protect or pamper
Take France for example. Just transporting their President across Paris to his favourite garlic sandwich eatery involves more shiny limousines, outriding motorcycles and honking horns that you can shake a stick at.
Likewise the Pres of the USA. Listing all the United states presidents who have been successfully shot at proves that the train of immaculately suited and dark-glassed gunmen, following in their ridiculous black cars are utterly useless as body guards. And are there solely – and expensively – to demonstrate to the admiring throng just how important the Pres is.
Whereas our Queen and her hubby could arrive on a tandem and still be worshipped and cheered and flag-waved at. (Now there’s a thought to cherish – Queeny and the Prince of Grump on a tandem).
Much the same can be claimed for the State households in general. Nobody spends more on swagger than the republican French, unless it be a gaggle of African dictators. Or the Russians.
Would it be cost-effective?
So ridding ourselves of the Royals could cost us more, I think, not less. Buck House would have to be ripped out and extensively refurbished for our new President, for the same reason all accommodations, however richly furnished have to be entirely done over each time they are transferred from one Government department to another. (Ours not to reason why. Ours but to pay up and grumble – respectfully).
As for all those priceless paintings and the dinner services and the uniforms and tapestries and rooms full of unused furniture – ‘our heritage’.
We’d just have to fork out millions to transform one of the other palaces into a museum, display the junk and then probably be charged an entrance fee to look at it.
Where would be the money go?
Then there’s all the expensive grooming each successive Head Of State would require. Not for them the luxury of always wearing the same hat, often resprayed, like Our Liz. Nor keeping to the same uniform he was demobbed in, like Dukey.
If I’m wrong and there was to be a saving, moreover, it would go on another death-dealing missile left to rust until, it became obsolete. Not to us tax payers.
And then there’s that essential self discipline. The discipline so instinctive to our beloved Majesties but which others would have to be expensively coached into. The discipline that stops them scratching their bums in public no matter how intense the itch.
Or have you never wondered about that strained expression on Edinburgh’s face?
