Value for money royals ........... pfft & harrumph :-(

 
The taxpayer is spending £100million a year ­protecting the ­Queen and TWENTY other ­members of the Royal Family.
 
While frontline police services across the country are facing 25 per cent cuts, 1,000 officers are being used to guard the royals and their homes around the clock.
 
Most of those under guard are not considered at specific risk or to be terror targets – but still have individual protection teams. All of them have armed ­officers keeping watch on 16 properties around the country.
 
Those being guarded include Prince Edward’s children, the Queen’s cousin Princess Alexandra and Princess Michael of Kent.
A Sunday Mirror investigation can reveal the true cost of the royal security bill just a week after Buckingham Palace claimed that the cost to each taxpayer for homes and staff for the Queen and her family is just 62p a year – ­£38million in total and “value for money”.
 
But they failed to mention the cost of police protection.
 
While no official figures are available, sources say the cost of looking after the royals is at least ­£100million more – ­leading to a total bill of around £140million a year, or £2.25 for each man, woman and child in Britain.
 
The full extent of the bill for making sure the royals can sleep peacefully at night comes just a week after Scotland Yard’s most senior anti-terror officer, ­Assistant Commissioner John Yates, ­described planned cuts to police services as “eye-watering”.
 
And Shadow Home Secretary Alan Johnson said: “We will all be in greater peril and the streets will be less safe if these measures are introduced.”
 
The Royalty Protection Squad of ­London’s Metropolitan Police, known as SO14, consists of around 120 people ranging in rank from a sergeant earning £50,000 to chief superintendent on £80,000-plus.
 
A third of them earn a “special allowance” bonus of up to £15,000 a year after passing the rigorous selection process.
The remaining two-thirds are support officers and civilian staff, who can also claim big ­allowances and ­overtime.
Aside from senior royals such as the Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles and his sons William and Harry, personal protection officers are also given to minor members of the family.
 
They ­include the Queen’s cousin ­Princess Alexandra and Prince Edward’s two children Lady ­Louise Windsor and James, Viscount Severn.
 
Each royal has up to five ­highly-trained armed officers to look after them.
 
There is also an “intelligence unit” to assess any threat from terrorists and “fixated persons” using information from other police forces and the ­security services.
 
The Met devotes 400 more officers to ­guarding royal ­residences in London, ­including Buckingham Palace, St James’s Palace, Kensington Palace and Clarence House.
 
Thames Valley Police also has a royal protection squad as part of its operations department, consisting of 120 uniformed ­officers who guard the outside of Windsor Castle and Prince ­Andrew’s home, Royal Lodge. The Met provides officers inside the castle.
 
When the Queen visits ­Balmoral for two months every summer the Met sends dozens of uniformed officers to Scotland. Grampian Police also have their own patrols and armed ­response vehicles, while each royal who visits brings their ­personal protection officers with them.
 
A similar arrangement is in place at Sandringham, which is ­permanently guarded by around 20 ­officers and dedicated armed ­response teams.
 
Charles’s Gloucester home at Highgrove has 30 or 40 local ­officers looking after it, with a unit billeted at Camilla’s personal home Raymill House just a few miles away.
 
Other royal residences guarded around the clock by local police include Edward’s Bagshot Park home in Surrey and a ­cottage in North Wales rented by William and girlfriend Kate Middleton.
 
The last serious incident ­involving a royal was 36 years ago, when deranged Ian Ball tried to kidnap Princess Anne in The Mall and hold her to ransom. Her personal bodyguard and driver were shot in the attempt.
 
A spokesman for the Met said: “We do not discuss matters of security and protection.”
 

here it is, and it's even on the internet so it must be true
 
http://honey.nine.com.au/2017/03/13/06/07/james-hewitt-says-he-is-not-prince-harrys-dad/?ocid=nann170313
 
 

jamesg1213
I'm not a fan of the Royals, Steve but..
 

A Sunday Mirror investigation can reveal...

 
That would equate to some bloke in a pub told some other bloke 'what he reckoned', wouldn't it?
 

 
 

 

Is it only American politics that we aren't allowed to talk about? There are far greater political issues than the Queen to discuss, like human Cheeto's in public office.

ampfixer
Is it only American politics that we aren't allowed to talk about? There are far greater political issues than the Queen to discuss, like human Cheeto's in public office.

Under British rules our Royal family is apolitical, they are basically a living tourist attraction that brings more money into the country than it costs to maintain them.  "Stories" like the one re-posted in the OP are simply to cash in on the tinfoil hat brigade and sell more newspapers, thus making more money off the back of the very people they're complaining about...

My favorite Osborne
 

BobF
My favorite Osborne
 

here's mine
 

SteveStrummerUK
Do you honestly believe that cities such as Venice, Paris, Rome, Moscow, Dublin, New York or Vienna suffer any lack of tourism because their countries have long seen fit to abolish their respective monarchies? 

Well, New York does have Queens so that has to be even better than only having one (Charles doesn't count). 

Loving the Hector's House avatar mate!

"Enfin je me rappelai le pis-aller d’une grande princesse à qui l’on disait que les paysans n’avaient pas de pain, et qui répondit : Qu’ils mangent de la brioche." - Jean-Jaqques Rousseau