I don't get all this hype about the royal wedding?

[-:Undertaker:-]

You know my stance on the EU. I believe that done the right way the EU can be a very good thing. It sure isn't perfect at the moment, but if we can get the right people to restructure it i believe the benefits for Europe would be huge.

The EU cannot be reformed and anybody who has remotely looked at the subject will see this, if you are going to be supportive of the expensive and rather useless European Union whilst criticising the British Monarchy (which is only a small cost to the British people, one we do not mind paying) then you should at least look into the EU and understand what the concept is and what its final aim serves to be.

But thats another - vast - subject.

I'm not disagreeing with paying some money for people who represent your country at all. A wedding however doesn't have to cost what the royal wedding costs, does it? If our preseident tried to be even a fraction as extravagant for her wedding, you would have half the country out on the streets protesting. In fact i'm not sure because i can't remember it ever happening, but i'm pretty sure that the taxpayer wouldn't pay for weddings for any politician or the president.

Because the President is political, the Royal Family are not - one of the benfits of having a Royal Family which gives us the stability we need as opposed to a political head of state which only servees to provide instability, see France and its numerous failed states. I agree to an extent on the costs, while I don't mind paying for them - I think it would be much more healthy for the monarchy to raise its own funds from the Crown Estates rather than being on the Civil List.

It does at present, raise more money than it takes anyway.

[Chippiewill]

I think the money issue is a matter of priority, I am not going to be missing that few million pounds whilst we leave many, many more at the footsteps of Brussels.

[ifuseekamy]

I thought the royal family get all their money from the taxpayer anyway so why does that make a difference? Unless they have some other source of income i'm unaware about?

Yes, like all wealthy families they own their own land, and lots of it too. There's the duchies which are worth a few hundred million and are subject to income tax. There's the Crown Estate which is worth a couple of billion and the money from that goes directly to the Treasury. I believe on these exchanges the Queen receives the civil list (which is a bit less than the US President or other heads of states get, to whom it'd have to go with or without a monarchy anyway). The wedding was paid for by Charles, I think the only thing the taxpayer would've paid for is policing, naturally.

[Chris]

I guess the hype was because it's a tradition and it's probably something that will be talked about in years to come, just like previous royal weddings.

[Mathew]

Because the President is political, the Royal Family are not - one of the benfits of having a Royal Family which gives us the stability we need as opposed to a political head of state which only servees to provide instability, see France and its numerous failed states.

You honestly can't be saying that the Royal Family are politically neutral? Sure, they might say they are... but obviously they're going to be Conservative and save money for the country. Hey, surely the proof is on their list of wedding invites? David Cameron, Nick Clegg, John Major and Margret Thatcher all received invites; Tony Blair and Gordon Brown didn't. Good on them I do see where you're coming from though in terms of being "political" or not (as opposed to political parties). Interesting and I agree.

Britain is one of the few countries who even have a monarchy these days and I actually found it quite amazing today to see the amount of support and pure passion that millions of people still have for their Head of State. Today reminded me of the World Cup, Diana's Death, 9/11 and perhaps time of War; the whole country just bonded together and it was simply impressive. Sadly, the Americans don't have that. Sure, millions saw Obama's inauguration... but perhaps those opposed to his political stance would decide not to.

The taxpayer paid £20 Million today for security and that is all. The rest was paid for by their parents. When you think about the amount of money being dished off to the EU and foreign countries, I honestly can't think of many ways in which £20 Million could be put to a much better use.

[GommeInc]

You honestly can't be saying that the Royal Family are politically neutral? Sure, they might say they are... but obviously they're going to be Conservative and save money for the country. Hey, surely the proof is on their list of wedding invites? David Cameron, Nick Clegg, John Major and Margret Thatcher all received invites; Tony Blair and Gordon Brown didn't. Good on them I do see where you're coming from though in terms of being "political" or not (as opposed to political parties). Interesting and I agree.

Labour has always come off as a party that doesn't like the Royal Family. Blair was hated as far as I am aware, and Brown wasn't really that amazing to be considered useful and worth inviting. It's hard to explain, but I can't remember a time I've seen Brown talk to the Royal Family

Britain is one of the few countries who even have a monarchy these days and I actually found it quite amazing today to see the amount of support and pure passion that millions of people still have for their Head of State. Today reminded me of the World Cup, Diana's Death, 9/11 and perhaps time of War; the whole country just bonded together and it was simply impressive. Sadly, the Americans don't have that. Sure, millions saw Obama's inauguration... but perhaps those opposed to his political stance would decide not to.

The taxpayer paid £20 Million today for security and that is all. The rest was paid for by their parents. When you think about the amount of money being dished off to the EU and foreign countries, I honestly can't think of many ways in which £20 Million could be put to a much better use.

For some reason I decided to cut your post. I felt the exact same thing in your second paragraph - it was great seeing the British socialising so freely with one another AND from people all around the world. I've never seen a country welcome others in so freely and happily It's like the Royal Family promote unity and world peace

[Eoin247]

The EU cannot be reformed and anybody who has remotely looked at the subject will see this, if you are going to be supportive of the expensive and rather useless European Union whilst criticising the British Monarchy (which is only a small cost to the British people, one we do not mind paying) then you should at least look into the EU and understand what the concept is and what its final aim serves to be.

But thats another - vast - subject.
.

Personally i believe it can be reformed. Wheter it will or not in the end, I don't know.

Because the President is political, the Royal Family are not - one of the benfits of having a Royal Family which gives us the stability we need as opposed to a political head of state which only servees to provide instability, see France and its numerous failed states. I agree to an extent on the costs, while I don't mind paying for them - I think it would be much more healthy for the monarchy to raise its own funds from the Crown Estates rather than being on the Civil List.

It does at present, raise more money than it takes anyway.

That's not true. Our president is not a member of any political party and isn't supposed to voice political views. She's really just a face for Ireland and signs in laws.

As i said paying to some extent sits all right with me. But paying so much needlessly for a wedding? Is having such an expensive wedding compared to a much smaller and less extravagant one justified?

[Mathew]

As i said paying to some extent sits all right with me. But paying so much needlessly for a wedding? Is having such an expensive wedding compared to a much smaller and less extravagant one justified?

Of course it's justified. Tens of millions of people will have tuned in to watch the Royal Wedding today. My family are friends with quite a few Americans and a lot of them woke up at 4am this morning to watch the wedding. Heck, when we visited St. Augustine (Florida) last February, a lady there was asked us if we were "excited for the Royal Wedding" - she admitted that "us Americans are probably more interested than you guys"

How many times do you get news coverage and TV figures like that? In times of crisis is the answer - 9/11, London Bombings, Diana's Funeral, War. It's time to relax and enjoy a good day of a united country rather than moaning where your money has gone. There's 63 million people in this country; remember only £20 Million was spent.

The benefits of merchandise would have been huge too. It's a truly important, "royal" occasion

[-:Undertaker:-]

You honestly can't be saying that the Royal Family are politically neutral? Sure, they might say they are... but obviously they're going to be Conservative and save money for the country. Hey, surely the proof is on their list of wedding invites? David Cameron, Nick Clegg, John Major and Margret Thatcher all received invites; Tony Blair and Gordon Brown didn't. Good on them I do see where you're coming from though in terms of being "political" or not (as opposed to political parties). Interesting and I agree.

Being a supporter or a member of the Conservative Party does not make you fiscally conservative, afterall the Conservative Party is the party which signed us upto the most costly treaties we've ever had to endure throughout our entire history and not just in terms of money, but in terms of independence and political sovereignty; joining the EEC in 1972, signing the Single European Act, the Maastricht Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty. This of course isn't mentioning the increases in foreign aid (37%) and the continuation of Ed Milibands £18bn a year Climate Change Act.

But thats another issue, although that does need to be made clear. Now as the the views of the Monarchy, i'm not quite sure what they are but the Queen has made some very strange comments in the past regarding the surrender to the IRA a few years ago and the issue of multiculturalism - as Peter Hitchens points out here. I believe Mrs Thatcher once said of the Queen that she was a SDP type, but we can only hazard a guess.

The point is that the Monarchy avoid becoming embroiled in political issues which provides us the stability that other nations such as France (now on the Fifth Republic) can only dream of since abolishing their own Imperial/Royal families.

Personally i believe it can be reformed. Wheter it will or not in the end, I don't know.

If you believe that then you are wasting much of your time as is anyone who attempts to follow that path, all the while your national sovereignty is being eroded piece by piece and you are paying a heavy financial price for it.

That's not true. Our president is not a member of any political party and isn't supposed to voice political views. She's really just a face for Ireland and signs in laws.

But she can, being a politician, become embroiled in political affairs and can be dogged by political factions. The same applies for the Czech President of whom I have great respect, who does hold a political role but faced claims from the opposition of being unconsitutional a few months ago - those are the kind of situations you end up in when you become a Republic.

As i said paying to some extent sits all right with me. But paying so much needlessly for a wedding? Is having such an expensive wedding compared to a much smaller and less extravagant one justified?

I'm not fully on what the wedding cost, but the posts above seem to highlight that the cost to the taxpayer was minimal. Besides, when Ireland joined the disasterous Euro a few years ago didn't your politicians lay on a series of bland celebrations? at least with the monarchy I can say it is a real British asset and has some history to it.

Again, I have no idea why you are complaining about the costs of the British Monarchy compared to the costs of the EU on Ireland for example.

[ifuseekamy]

You honestly can't be saying that the Royal Family are politically neutral? Sure, they might say they are... but obviously they're going to be Conservative and save money for the country. Hey, surely the proof is on their list of wedding invites? David Cameron, Nick Clegg, John Major and Margret Thatcher all received invites; Tony Blair and Gordon Brown didn't. Good on them I do see where you're coming from though in terms of being "political" or not (as opposed to political parties). Interesting and I agree.

Major and Thatcher are members of the order of the garter which is why they were invited. The Queen was widely known to have hated Thatcher and even considered to be the one who got her to resign.