Anybody else irritated by the current Royal tour down under?

kippeh · 11/04/14 - 09:07

I don't normally lay into the royal family as a rule, but for some reason, William and Kate grinning their way around New Zealand is really annoying me. No different to any tours by past royals of course, but I do wonder just what the reciprocal benefit is to the UK versus what it's costing.

Jason · 11/04/14 - 09:10

doesn't irritate me in the slightest as i haven't paid a jot of attention to it

batgirl · 11/04/14 - 09:17

I've been abroad where there is zero coverage of it so haven't seen a thing. The only reason I know baby george has been working extremely hard and will need a holiday soon, as will his parents, is because of a DS thread a couple of days ago. Sounds like they're all grafting and I really think that people who are prepared to walk and talk, or indeed pick up a toy, for a living ought to be given a million pounds a minute and 380 days off a year. God bless 'em, every one!

molliepops · 11/04/14 - 09:19

No it hasn't bothered me at all what has irritated a bit is the negativity about it, if people don't like it or them why not just ignore it ?

jarryhack · 11/04/14 - 09:21

Why would it bother anyone?? It's not as if there is wall to wall coverage?

coughthecat · 11/04/14 - 09:21

kippeh wrote: »

I don't normally lay into the royal family as a rule, but for some reason, William and Kate grinning their way around New Zealand is really annoying me. No different to any tours by past royals of course, but I do wonder just what the reciprocal benefit is to the UK versus what it's costing.

My understanding is that New Zealand is paying for the trip.

From a recent article in the Daily Express ...

"Their visit, which will cost New Zealand taxpayers an estimated £500,000, will throw the international spotlight on the nation ..."

netcurtains · 11/04/14 - 09:22

I didn't even know they were touring New Zealand! I don't take much notice of their holidays really.

kippeh · 11/04/14 - 09:23

molliepops wrote: »

No it hasn't bothered me at all what has irritated a bit is the negativity about it, if people don't like it or them why not just ignore it ?

Well I watch the news and read the news websites etc, so when I do, they invariably pop up meaning that my best efforts to ignore them are for nought. So I see them grinning and pointing, and I just think, "Hey, there's Kate in her contrived nautical themed top for a nice day out on a boat no less" and then immediately afterwards "Who is paying for this lot?" i.e. taxpayers.

farmer bob · 11/04/14 - 09:23

Doesn't bother me.

LostFool · 11/04/14 - 09:27

It's a blessed relief from the endless wall-to-wall coverage of the Pistorius trial.

gashead · 11/04/14 - 09:28

kippeh wrote: »

I don't normally lay into the royal family as a rule, but for some reason, William and Kate grinning their way around New Zealand is really annoying me. No different to any tours by past royals of course, but I do wonder just what the reciprocal benefit is to the UK versus what it's costing.

Royal visits aren't necessarily about promoting the UK or doing it for the UK's benefit. On this occasion it's to promote NZ which, as part of the Commonwealth, is part of the remit of the Royal Family. As such the tour is being funded by the NZ Govt. (read: taxpayer). So, no reason for you to feel at all irritated really. (Unless you pay tax in NZ, I suppose.)

CravenHaven · 11/04/14 - 09:29

it really gets my hakas up

kippeh · 11/04/14 - 09:35

Seems like the tour has gone down a bit better than my thread then

"MODS!!"

Gneiss · 11/04/14 - 09:37

gashead wrote: »

Royal visits aren't necessarily about promoting the UK or doing it for the UK's benefit. On this occasion it's to promote NZ which, as part of the Commonwealth, is part of the remit of the Royal Family. As such the tour is being funded by the NZ Govt. (read: taxpayer). So, no reason for you to feel at all irritated really. (Unless you pay tax in NZ, I suppose.)

I have nothing to add really, this just about covers it....

It is also quite obviously beneficial to maintain strong ties to other countries in that part of the world and these visits help cement that relationship.

kitty86 · 11/04/14 - 09:39

I love all the pictures of little George, he's such a cutie.

LostFool · 11/04/14 - 09:40

gashead wrote: »

Royal visits aren't necessarily about promoting the UK or doing it for the UK's benefit. On this occasion it's to promote NZ which, as part of the Commonwealth, is part of the remit of the Royal Family. As such the tour is being funded by the NZ Govt. (read: taxpayer). So, no reason for you to feel at all irritated really. (Unless you pay tax in NZ, I suppose.)

Indeed. This trip is getting headlines around the world. It's the sort of global promotion of NZ that is priceless and shows that the country isn't just full of hobbits and dwarves.

Gneiss · 11/04/14 - 09:41

LostFool wrote: »

Indeed. This trip is getting headlines around the world. It's the sort of global promotion of NZ that is priceless and shows that the country isn't just full of hobbits and dwarves.

At least not all the time...

Croctacus · 11/04/14 - 09:42

kippeh wrote: »

Seems like the tour has gone down a bit better than my thread then

"MODS!!"

Haha!

Dont go turning into one of them sad sacks now!

RandomSally · 11/04/14 - 09:44

There are people on Facebook commenting on a photo of Kate holding George and criticising what her elbow looks like!

Seriously WTF?!

Hugh Jboobs · 11/04/14 - 09:48

LostFool wrote: »

It's a blessed relief from the endless wall-to-wall coverage of the Pistorius trial.

Totally agree. If Reeva Steenkamp had simply taken a shit with the door open, then none of this palaver would be happening.

RandomSally · 11/04/14 - 09:50

Hugh Jboobs wrote: »

Totally agree. If Reeva Steenkamp had simply taken a shit with the door open, then none of this palaver would be happening.

I'm not convinced that would be the case myself......

molliepops · 11/04/14 - 09:50

kippeh wrote: »

Well I watch the news and read the news websites etc, so when I do, they invariably pop up meaning that my best efforts to ignore them are for nought. So I see them grinning and pointing, and I just think, "Hey, there's Kate in her contrived nautical themed top for a nice day out on a boat no less" and then immediately afterwards "Who is paying for this lot?" i.e. taxpayers.

I do the same but somehow manage not to get irritated by the Kardashians and other celebs I just don't read past the headline. As for who is paying I believe NZ is so it's not something we need to worry about although looking at how many people are getting joy out of their trip it wouldn't bother me if we were paying for it.

Hugh Jboobs · 11/04/14 - 09:57

RandomSally wrote: »

I'm not convinced that would be the case myself......

Meh, take it up with garrygwizz on Sickipedia.

RandomSally · 11/04/14 - 09:59

Hugh Jboobs wrote: »

Meh, take it up with garrygwizz on Sickipedia.

Meh to you too!
My son quite likes that site. But in his defence he is only 19

[Deleted User] · 11/04/14 - 10:01

I change channel as soon as I see their grins pop up.

I have nothing against the royal family but I wish they'd go away.

Jesse Pinkman · 11/04/14 - 10:05

molliepops wrote: »

No it hasn't bothered me at all what has irritated a bit is the negativity about it, if people don't like it or them why not just ignore it ?

And stop paying them with OUR money?

If they wish to be private then live privately and don't take public money or else people will have a vested interest in what it's being spent on.

Hey there!

Quick Links

Anybody else irritated by the current Royal tour down under?

Comments