GABIT attendees thread

[lame moose (mocha)]

what responsibilities does the queen actually have. does she have a say in political decisions or is the position just show? i was wondering, who pays for all the overly extravagant stuff for the royal wedding. does the royal family pay for it or do the people of the UK foot the extravagant bill?

[lame moose (mocha)]

i'm sorry, that sounded kinda negative. i didn't mean it that way. i just haven't had any coffee yet and i'm curious how all that stuff works. i'm sure if a president in the us got married while in office , they would find some way to make the people foot the bill(probably some really sneaky way,but they'd do it).

[discodiva]

It's been very interesting watching the build up to the Wedding from a completely different perspective, whilst on vacation here in and around the Vancouver area....everyone has been so nice about it and it's garnered almost as much news as the other two Very Important Events going on atm, the Election and the Stanley Cup Playoffs!...

Although being woken up at 2 a.m. to watch the proceedings live hasn't endeared my darling husband to me much!!...

But thank you Canada, for your wonderfully respectful and very kind coverage of our little bit of "pomp and circumstance"...


Deeds xx

[samcarterrules]

Hey everyone,

Lots of wedding chat, I have to say I didn't watch any of the royal wedding, I'm not big on the royals so have been avoiding the TV.

How is everyone doing btw?

Julia(samcarterrules)

[Cagranosalis]

what responsibilities does the queen actually have. does she have a say in political decisions or is the position just show? i was wondering, who pays for all the overly extravagant stuff for the royal wedding. does the royal family pay for it or do the people of the UK foot the extravagant bill?

It might have been that way in times past but we're a lot more objectionable about paying for freeloader royals these days. Several years back some of the royals - right up to the top level - had their automatic allowances slashed or removed completely and, since then, there's been a much bigger emphasis on them paying thier own way.
As I understand it, the wedding itself is being paid for by the royal family (and presumably the bride's family in some part too). But the bill for the protection (extra policing) and the public services provided for it is footed by the taxpayers. I guess that's fair enough since without that they'd probably have to do it in a private chapel somewhere and we'd not all get to be part of it. Events like the royal wedding are very community cohesive events so it's worth it for the feel good value, IMO.

As for the Queen. Although she has no political affiliation / sway herself, she does have to give formal "royal assent" to laws passed in the UK. Essentially this means she can veto a law even if the House of Commons and the House of Lords if they have already agreed a law is to be passed. In reality, it's extremely rare that this happens. I think the last time a monarch veto'd a law was 1700 and something.
Upon a general election being declared, our parliment is dissolved. Once the new (or possibly previous) party is elected, the leader of that party must go to the Queen to fomrerly ask for permission to form a parliament. Again, it's really more a formality because - modern times - nobody's been refused but technically it does still stand.
There's a number of other constitutional roles she fulfils too, but, again, largely ceremonial these days. Most of the monarchy's "power" has long since been reallocated into a democracy. I think the Queen's true value really lie with the affection or respect which many Commonwealth citizens hold for her; face it, royalty is a huge tourism draw to the UK, especially at times like this when everyone wants to be there.

[EH-T]

We do pageantry better than anywhere else in the world! The trees in the abbey were a fabulous idea. They softened the starkness of the stonework. Catherine looked stunning and radiantly happy. They make a lovely couple.

With regard to the princes living priveledged lives. They are both serving officers in the military. William is a search and rescue helicopter pilot flying to help people who get themselves into trouble. Harry served for ten weeks in Afghanistan, and only had to return home when the stupid (foreign) press announced he was there. He came home to protect his fellow soldiers who would have been endangered because he would be a target. He was not happy.

Yes they are rich, but they don't hide themselves away in their palaces. They get out there and work in the military and for charities in their down time.

Mumsey
Enjoying the day.

You absolutely do!

There is, of course, a long military tradition with the royal family. Let's not forget that (then) Princess Elizabeth worked as a mechanic during WWII.

It's been very interesting watching the build up to the Wedding from a completely different perspective, whilst on vacation here in and around the Vancouver area....everyone has been so nice about it and it's garnered almost as much news as the other two Very Important Events going on atm, the Election and the Stanley Cup Playoffs!...

Although being woken up at 2 a.m. to watch the proceedings live hasn't endeared my darling husband to me much!!...

But thank you Canada, for your wonderfully respectful and very kind coverage of our little bit of "pomp and circumstance"...


Deeds xx

You're welcome.

I think we in Canada have a different view of the royal family and British tradition than some others. Our country grew out of both the French and British colonization of our country. However, we never fought the British to become our own country, it was an evolution rather than a revolution. Our system of government, our laws and our courts are all based on the British system (with some exceptions in Quebec) so we owe much to the Brits. While we are very proud to be Canadians, most of us are also proud of our roots and traditions.

I personally have great respect for the Queen. She has dedicated her life to the service of her country and the Commonwealth of nations. We do our jobs and go home, we can retire at a reasonable age but she is always the Queen. Her role is more than ceremonial, I think with her incredible experience she has been a valuable asset to British Prime Ministers and others. She has always been a support to the armed forces and has done tremendous charitable work. I share her view that there is value in the Commonwealth and I wish our leaders would be better followers of her example.

While I have much less respect for Prince Charles, I do give him credit for being a leader in terms of organic farming and green living. William and Catherine have set a good example by declining wedding gifts and instead encouraging their guests to donate to a list of charities. BTW, Catherine had a mostly middle class upbringing and I note that one of her charities is an organization to stop bullying as she was bullied as a kid. I hope they continue to shine the light on charitable giving.

[Cagranosalis]

Sorry for the double post...

When she was crowned she made a pledge to serve her country for the rest of her life. She's obviously taken that vow very seriously

Actually, now that the wedding is over I won't be surprised if she does give up the throne to Charles. It's a tough job to do, and at her age she deserves some time off Charles deserves to be given the job that he's been training for all his life

I can't see it myself. As you say, it's a job for life. I think it's possible she may step back and Charles, essentially become Prince Regent but she won't abdicate I don't think. And Charles definietly won't. Things he's said in interviews implies he's not about to "step aside" for William regardless of what the public might think. He's also as good as said that he thinks Camilla should be queen consort when he does become king. Again, not a popular decision for a lot of people but, constitutionally he's right - she should. As uncomfortable as it makes some people feel, she is actually the Princess of Wales and the wife of the heir to the throne so perfectly entitled to take her place by his side.

Anyway, all things considered, if the queen lives as long as her mum (over 100), she'll be our longest serving monarch; She's only got another 5 years before she beats Victoria. I reckon she's going for that record myself! If she does - accidents and illnesses aside - she could be the very last of our long-reigning monarchs, because Charles is already in his 60s and William would likely be in his 40's before he even becomes first in line!

[penjab]

For the crown to go directly to William, 16 different governments around the world who are still part of the monarchy would need to pass acts allowing it- so Charles is most likely next. As for the queen, she is 85. but remember her mum lived to 101 so Charles may be quite old before he gets his turn

Charles could abdicate in favor of his son...in my opinion that's what he should do. William is much more popular than Charles and with so many people down on the monarchy these days...they need all the help they can get.

[Skydiver]

Elizabeth became queen quite young, in her 20's, after her father died unexpectedly.

she also, she was not originally raised to be queen...her uncle, George, should have been. but he abdicated to marry Wallace Simpson, so her father Albert was king (the movie, The King's Speech). So elizabeth wasn't really groomed from birth 'you will be queen'. So she had a more 'normal' upbringing, (as in service and devotion to country).

charles, on the other hand, was raised to be King...and seemd to have a not so good attitude (I do think, after Diana, he changed a bit, or has seemed to)

William was raised to be 'normal'. He went to mcdonalds, he learned just how fortunate and 'good' he has it. And he's also learned the hard way just how bad life can be, in dealing with the press, etc.

I've heard that he's determined that Kate won't be treated like his mother.

Kate is an older woman (as in 29 to Diana's 19 or so) and has been dealing with the press and paparazzi for the better part of 10 years....so Kate knows what she's getting into vs Diana who was kinda tossed in and expected to swim.

[NZNeep]

I know it was over the top and all, but seemed more like a real family wedding- compared to the arranged marriage feel of Charles and Diana.

[hisg1fans]

We do pageantry better than anywhere else in the world! The trees in the abbey were a fabulous idea. They softened the starkness of the stonework. Catherine looked stunning and radiantly happy. They make a lovely couple.

With regard to the princes living priveledged lives. They are both serving officers in the military. William is a search and rescue helicopter pilot flying to help people who get themselves into trouble. Harry served for ten weeks in Afghanistan, and only had to return home when the stupid (foreign) press announced he was there. He came home to protect his fellow soldiers who would have been endangered because he would be a target. He was not happy.

Yes they are rich, but they don't hide themselves away in their palaces. They get out there and work in the military and for charities in their down time.

Mumsey
Enjoying the day.

I think I would have to agree with you there. I've only been able to see photos so far, and the pageantry is outstanding!

[hisg1fans]

[/color]

it might have been that way in times past but we're a lot more objectionable about paying for freeloader royals these days. Several years back some of the royals - right up to the top level - had their automatic allowances slashed or removed completely and, since then, there's been a much bigger emphasis on them paying thier own way.
as i understand it, the wedding itself is being paid for by the royal family (and presumably the bride's family in some part too). But the bill for the protection (extra policing) and the public services provided for it is footed by the taxpayers. I guess that's fair enough since without that they'd probably have to do it in a private chapel somewhere and we'd not all get to be part of it. Events like the royal wedding are very community cohesive events so it's worth it for the feel good value, imo.

As for the queen. Although she has no political affiliation / sway herself, she does have to give formal "royal assent" to laws passed in the uk. Essentially this means she can veto a law even if the house of commons and the house of lords if they have already agreed a law is to be passed. In reality, it's extremely rare that this happens. I think the last time a monarch veto'd a law was 1700 and something.
Upon a general election being declared, our parliment is dissolved. Once the new (or possibly previous) party is elected, the leader of that party must go to the queen to fomrerly ask for permission to form a parliament. Again, it's really more a formality because - modern times - nobody's been refused but technically it does still stand.
There's a number of other constitutional roles she fulfils too, but, again, largely ceremonial these days. Most of the monarchy's "power" has long since been reallocated into a democracy. I think the queen's true value really lie with the affection or respect which many commonwealth citizens hold for her; face it, royalty is a huge tourism draw to the uk, especially at times like this when everyone wants to be there.

I would have to agree with you on the value of the royal family. Just how many American tourists have traveled to the UK and gone to see Buckingham palace, etc. I went to see it myself. My Mom made me take her when she came over to see me in college. I think she came to see the palace not me!

I've met Princess Anne and a couple of other "lesser" royals in the UK and some pretty high ranking royals from European countries. They all have been very hard working people. Yes, they do have family money. But, most of the time I was around them, they were thinking only of how to use their positions and/or money to help better their country and help their people. It was mindset completely unfamiliar to me being an American. One friend, a Dutch Count (who didn't have a car in college because he coudn't afford it) explained how, just like all groups of people, some are good, some are bad, and some are really bad. Most fall in the good category and are tarnished by the very bad category. I try not to generalize groups of people, but base my opinion on the actions of individuals. I've always been impressed with William and how he has handled himself in public, even as a boy.

I remember watching Charles and Diana's wedding. We had a dog named Duchess after Diana. While I would never support a hereditary monarchy in the US (nor do I support the idea of the so-called "American Royalty" of the Kennedys), I can see the value of the monarchy in the UK. From the outside, it seems the country has found a way for democracy and the monarchy to co-exist. I'm sure there are people who live throughout the UK and Commonwealth who dislike the monarchy.

But, I have to tip my hat at something that has lasted 1000 years. Being from a country that has only existed in written paper for a little over 500 years and is only 225 years old, I find anything that has lasted 1000 years to be truly remarkable. The UK has a high standing in the world and has had for many a century. That is something to be proud of.

I live near the first US President George Washington's home of Mount Vernon. On the tour, the guides tell the story of how visiting dignitaries to Mount Vernon were amazed at how simple the President's house was. George even had the wood siding carved to look like blocks and painted white to look like stone because he felt a little self-conscious about being compared to the extravagance and pageantry of European powers. His wife, Martha is the one who told him to not worry. The new US was the gold standard of ideas and freedom, not fancy houses. Even today, the White House in Washington, D.C. is a much simpler and a much smaller home/place of business for the head of state than in most countries.

But, because I'm in a different country, doesn't mean I can't appreciate the pageantry and celebrations of others. There is enough bad news in the world, we need a little good news and hope now and then and I think the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge pulled off a very good day. I just hope they are happily married for a very long. I hope that for every wedding I watch, not just because they are on TV.

I've enjoyed seeing the photos, and that cake was astounding! I've helped my sister make several wedding cakes and that was an engineering marvel! The dress was stunning, the bridesmaid dress too. I half expected Harry to pretend to have forgotten the ring, maybe he did, I haven't seen any videos. I thought wearing the red uniform was a nice touch by William to honor those in Afghanistan.

[rderoch]

I know it was over the top and all, but seemed more like a real family wedding- compared to the arranged marriage feel of Charles and Diana.

Over the top compared to a normal wedding, but compared to some high society weddings, I thought it was rather understated. At least from what little I've seen in video clips and pictures. I loved her dress. It was simple and classic. And William was positively dashing in his uniform.

[/color]

I would have to agree with you on the value of the royal family. Just how many American tourists have traveled to the UK and gone to see Buckingham palace, etc. I went to see it myself. My Mom made me take her when she came over to see me in college. I think she came to see the palace not me!

I've met Princess Anne and a couple of other "lesser" royals in the UK and some pretty high ranking royals from European countries. They all have been very hard working people. Yes, they do have family money. But, most of the time I was around them, they were thinking only of how to use their positions and/or money to help better their country and help their people. It was mindset completely unfamiliar to me being an American. One friend, a Dutch Count (who didn't have a car in college because he coudn't afford it) explained how, just like all groups of people, some are good, some are bad, and some are really bad. Most fall in the good category and are tarnished by the very bad category. I try not to generalize groups of people, but base my opinion on the actions of individuals. I've always been impressed with William and how he has handled himself in public, even as a boy.

I remember watching Charles and Diana's wedding. We had a dog named Duchess after Diana. While I would never support a hereditary monarchy in the US (nor do I support the idea of the so-called "American Royalty" of the Kennedys), I can see the value of the monarchy in the UK. From the outside, it seems the country has found a way for democracy and the monarchy to co-exist. I'm sure there are people who live throughout the UK and Commonwealth who dislike the monarchy.

But, I have to tip my hat at something that has lasted 1000 years. Being from a country that has only existed in written paper for a little over 500 years and is only 225 years old, I find anything that has lasted 1000 years to be truly remarkable. The UK has a high standing in the world and has had for many a century. That is something to be proud of.

I live near the first US President George Washington's home of Mount Vernon. On the tour, the guides tell the story of how visiting dignitaries to Mount Vernon were amazed at how simple the President's house was. George even had the wood siding carved to look like blocks and painted white to look like stone because he felt a little self-conscious about being compared to the extravagance and pageantry of European powers. His wife, Martha is the one who told him to not worry. The new US was the gold standard of ideas and freedom, not fancy houses. Even today, the White House in Washington, D.C. is a much simpler and a much smaller home/place of business for the head of state than in most countries.

But, because I'm in a different country, doesn't mean I can't appreciate the pageantry and celebrations of others. There is enough bad news in the world, we need a little good news and hope now and then and I think the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge pulled off a very good day. I just hope they are happily married for a very long. I hope that for every wedding I watch, not just because they are on TV.

I've enjoyed seeing the photos, and that cake was astounding! I've helped my sister make several wedding cakes and that was an engineering marvel! The dress was stunning, the bridesmaid dress too. I half expected Harry to pretend to have forgotten the ring, maybe he did, I haven't seen any videos. I thought wearing the red uniform was a nice touch by William to honor those in Afghanistan.

Are there any true monarchies left? I know there are still some countries with royal families, but do any of them truly rule anymore or are they figureheads.

I don't know about most folks in the states, but I think the history is the main attraction for me (plus I found out I have royalty in my family tree, I'm like a 20th cousin of Prince William ) Of course, history is why I find all of the UK (and many other sites in the world) so fascinating. So far, England and Edinburgh are the only places I've been outside of North America, and I just LOVE the respect for history that they have. To walk through castles and churches that have stood for 500, 700 or a 1000 years is just awe inspiring. We do have some history here, the oldest sites of course are Native American, and there are buildings in New England that go back 300-400 years I think. But sadly, I haven't made it to the east coast or the southwest yet. I'm sure I'll get that same goose bumpy feeling when I finally make it to those places.

I don't understand the lack of reverence for history that many in this country seem to have. My ancestors were the first land owners in this area, and about 20 years ago the last piece of the original family farm was sold and turned into a strip mall. It had already been in the family for 175 years, though the house was the third house built on the property. The first log cabin is now in the historic park. The original farm house had burnt down. It still makes me very sad. And too many historic buildings are just left to rot until they become hazards and then they can justify tearing them down, so they can build another characterless concrete building. All in the name of "progress".

[lame moose (mocha)]

i have royal blood in my veins too. my great,great,great,great,great grandfather was an indian chief -blackfoot tribe. if i ever get married(don't hold your breath waiting) the ceremony will be at my church-informal attire required and the reception will be at "Chuckie Cheese" buy your own tokens.

[donamac]

what responsibilities does the queen actually have. does she have a say in political decisions or is the position just show? i was wondering, who pays for all the overly extravagant stuff for the royal wedding. does the royal family pay for it or do the people of the UK foot the extravagant bill?

The royal family pays for most of it and Kates parents pay for Kate's and bridesmaid's gowns and some other odds and ends. But I heard someone (a commentator) say security was paid by the government (taxes?).

I really enjoyed the wedding (woke myself up at 3:00am and turned on my tv and watched for a couple hours before falling asleep again.) Loved the music especially. There is something wonderful about the hymn Jerusalem I have always loved after being at the "Proms" in 1970 and sitting in the audience wishing I knew the words so I could sing along. Our hotel was right around the corner from Royal Albert Hall and i just wandered in wondering what the "show" was all about. One of my favorite memories from my first trip to the UK--England's green and pleasant land--just the way I could describe how England was that year in June--seeing it from the train to Scotland. I loved it!