Author Topic: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3  (Read 254330 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Lindelle

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #690 on: August 04, 2010, 12:27:46 AM »
Some reports are wondering why Camilla wasn't there as well.
I say, why should she.
The queen isn't her mother and she probably had more interest in her grandchildren.
How come the queen had to have a welcoming committee?

Offline heavensent

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #691 on: August 04, 2010, 04:17:52 PM »
I dont think Camilla missed much... I bet they froze to death
and got soaked into the bargain...
Cruising is for the Med and the islands of Greece.

Offline Grace

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 3126
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #692 on: August 04, 2010, 05:10:32 PM »
Some reports are wondering why Camilla wasn't there as well.
I say, why should she.
The queen isn't her mother and she probably had more interest in her grandchildren.
How come the queen had to have a welcoming committee?

What do you mean "a welcoming committee"?  As to Camilla, I'm sure when she married Charles, she'd have been fully aware of her obligations to the royal family.  They don't exclude her own family but the royals get together at certain times of the year for traditional royal breaks - they always have - and that's not going to change whilst Her Majesty is around.

Offline Lindelle

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #693 on: August 04, 2010, 06:05:23 PM »
By 'welcoming committee', I mean it was just a holiday, does one need the tabs to be there and speculate?
But I say good on Camilla for taking a stance in putting her family first.
I know I would.
It was never said she had to be there to greet the mother-in-law on her return from a holiday, that's not a duty or public obligation.

Offline Patrick M

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #694 on: August 04, 2010, 09:23:59 PM »
If I choose not to go to lunch with my mother-in-law (or, um, mother-in-civil-unionship-recognized-by-my-state-but-not-my-country ...) that's fine. But my mother-in-law is not HM The Queen. Camilla's mother-in-law is also her sovereign. If the sovereign invites you, you go, especially if you're married to the heir.

But maybe that's just me ...

Offline Lindelle

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #695 on: August 05, 2010, 12:08:03 AM »
For private family hols I disagree, MY family comes in accordance with the family I married into.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #696 on: August 05, 2010, 02:12:18 AM »
If Camilla decided to marry the heir to the throne and then decides to pick and choose which official and semi official occasions she will attend, then she should be cut off the civil list.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #697 on: August 05, 2010, 10:02:38 AM »
It would be difficult to cut her off the civil list because she is not on it in the first place.

Offline Alexander1917

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
  • I Love YaBB 2!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #698 on: August 05, 2010, 06:12:30 PM »
It would be difficult to cut her off the civil list because she is not on it in the first place.

is'nt she not on the Civil List at all, because of her husbund. as I know the PoW get his money exclusivly from the Duchy of Cornwall, and so he is also not on the CL.

Offline Lindelle

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 345
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #699 on: August 05, 2010, 07:50:27 PM »
That's right, neither of them get anything from the civil list.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #700 on: August 05, 2010, 11:37:13 PM »
Well then I would make sure that the Duchy of Cornwall was subjected to death duties from the time that Charles inherited it.  Prince Charles may not be on the civil list but I am sure that the Camilla is receiving something of a stipend from the Queen's civil list entitlements.

Offline Adagietto

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #701 on: August 06, 2010, 04:51:40 AM »
Oh, so death duties should be imposed retrospectively on the Duchy of Cornwall just because you don't like the Duchess of Cornwall; isn't this all getting a bit silly?

Offline Alexander1917

  • Graf
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
  • I Love YaBB 2!
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #702 on: August 06, 2010, 04:56:06 AM »
I think this is the same treatment like the RC or other things which were held in trust by the sovereign.
I suppose the Duchy of Cornwall is connected with the title of PoW, and there are no death dutys.
I further suppose that Camilla didn't receive any income from HM. I think Charles pay her from his income. when I remeber right, also Diana didn't receive any income from the civil list, or the HM but from the trusts of the PoW.

maybe one of the british members could clear this.

Constantinople

  • Guest
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #703 on: August 06, 2010, 06:12:52 AM »
Well one of the reasons for continuing the avoidance of death duties is to maintain the prestige of the heir to the throne.  As Camilla by her actions and her deportment clearly detracts from the prestige of the heir to the throne, then the death duties shoujld be clawed back.  they are applicable to every other citizen of the UK so why not?

Offline Robert_Hall

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6648
  • a site.
    • View Profile
Re: Queen Elizabeth II Part 3
« Reply #704 on: August 06, 2010, 06:20:34 AM »
The PoW would have to die, for death duties to even  be an issue.  As they generally  become king,  there is no death involved.
Life may not be the party we expected, but while we are here, might as well dance..

Do you want the truth, or my side of the story ?- Hank Ketchum.