Royal Yacht

Posted by: Don Atkinson on 19 January 2012

Question Time asked whether a new Royal Yacht should be gifted to the Queen to mark her Diamond Jubilee.

 

I think a new ship would be a good idea. Use the Jubilee as a catalyst. Main benefit, as with the previous Royal Yacht, would be promotion of British interests abroad.

 

Canada has already pledged £10m. £1 per head from the UK and we are there. Seems like a good investment to me.

 

Cheers

 

Don

Posted on: 19 January 2012 by TomK

A completely privately funded royal yacht is fine by me. Anybody who feels it's appropriate would be free to contribute. Perhaps we could yet see Sir Mohamed Al-Fayed 

 

However the idea of it being publicly funded as suggested by Michael Grove, particularly in the current economic climate, is the most out of touch, lunatic thing I've heard in many a year.

Posted on: 19 January 2012 by BigH47

Best idea from Question time was privately funded Royal Family, think of al the sponsorship spaces available on all those uniforms  and fancy dress.

Posted on: 19 January 2012 by Tony2011

Richard Branson is willing to sponsor the royal yatch after pulling out of F1.

Sounds good to me!

Tony

Posted on: 19 January 2012 by Don Atkinson

Tom,

 

As with most politicians, Gove isn't very good as explaining the real benefits of a project. they tend to play to emotion.

 

Britannia was a real asset in promoting British business and interests abroad and as a result, the nation was more prosperous. Seems to me quite reasonable that we should all contribute if it can be demonstarted a new ship could generate similar benefits. In the big picture, £60m doesn't seem a reckless punt even in the current climate, in fact IMHO, quite the opposite.

 

Cheers

 

Don 

 

 

Posted on: 19 January 2012 by winkyincanada
Originally Posted by Don Atkinson:

 

Britannia was a real asset in promoting British business and interests abroad and as a result, the nation was more prosperous.

 

Bollocks. "Oh yeah, I'll invest in or do  business in/with Britain because their monarch has a nice boat." Load of codswallop.

Posted on: 19 January 2012 by TomK
Originally Posted by Don Atkinson:

Tom,

 

As with most politicians, Gove isn't very good as explaining the real benefits of a project. they tend to play to emotion.

 

Britannia was a real asset in promoting British business and interests abroad and as a result, the nation was more prosperous. Seems to me quite reasonable that we should all contribute if it can be demonstarted a new ship could generate similar benefits. In the big picture, £60m doesn't seem a reckless punt even in the current climate, in fact IMHO, quite the opposite.

 

Cheers

 

Don 

 

 

And as with many tory politicians you talk down to the plebs as though they're incapable of realising when they're being patronised and on the verge of being ripped off. Sorry if that offends guv, tugs forelock while backing respectfully out of the room and making sure the clogs don't make a mess.

 

I'll bet not much business has ever actually been done solely because of this bunch of inbreds floating round the world in such luxury. That's also very patronising towards our potential customers.

 

Now who should we buy from? Mmm the Germans have their usual Teutonic quality and precision, the Japs have such innovation and commitment to delivering on schedule, and the Yanks just have the might of the most powerful nation on earth behind them. What about the Brits? They've got a bunch of toffs floating about on a publicly funded boat. Yeah let's go with them.

 

Give us a fecking break.

 

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Mike-B

Royal yacht IMO is harking back to flag waving pageantry of the 19 & 20th century. Nostalgia for this is all well & good & for sure when the brits do this kind of thing it done well & the old royal yacht was the best of the best in that regard.

But Its time to move into the 21st century; who else in the world has a "Royal" yacht, (ship) (boat) (floating exhibition) today. No one has yachts, flag waving is done with trade exhibitions & embassy events.  Those days, as great as they were, are over.  

 

Next thing is to consider the time line; if the build gets started now it will be 3 years before its ready.  Then with the best will in the world the queen will not be around much longer or at least not up to travelling to give the yacht some meaning & for UK Ltd to get the benifit.

Then when Charles takes over, the world respect for the British royal family will take one whole step backwards, what value a royal yacht then.

 

 Sir Mohamed Al-Fayed )  

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by rodwsmith
The King of Norway has three yachts (very keen sailor). The royal family of Spain has one (which surely must me a target for 'asset stripping' these days). All the middle eastern royal families have flotillas of 'em, including Al Mirqab, which was the biggest in the world until Abramovich got jealous. Sweden's got one. In fact I think every royal family apart from Britain has one, although many of these are so-called privately owned, I think we can guess where the money came from originally.

I suspect the problem is not whether the royal family has a yacht, but rather whether the country has a royal family.

If it can be made to make a profit, then it's a good idea, but otherwise she can probably afford her own. Saddam Hussein's yacht is, perhaps not unsurprisingly, still unsold. I'm sure they'd take an offer.
Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Don Atkinson

Winky, Tom,

 

Many thanks for your most gracious responses.

 

I admit that the last time I was invited aboard Britannia was a few decades ago and no doubt things have changed slightly. The first time was in Abu Dhabi in c.1970. The abount of business that came out of a few days in port was staggering. Probably paid for the ship in a single visit.

 

No doubt your experiences on board were far mor recent and significantly different,, hence your lack of enthusiasm.

 

As I said, if there is a business case for a Royal Yacht, get on with it. Of course it will take three years to build, thats after they have spent five years bidding and have decided to place the order in a Chineese ship yard...........

 

Cheers

 

Don 

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Tony Lockhart
At least a nice boat would give the terrorists something large to aim at, as in Mountbatten's little tub. Tony
Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Exiled Highlander

Don,

 

Pigs are flying.  I agree with you 100% on this one.

 

Jim

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Don Atkinson
Originally Posted by Exiled Highlander:

Don,

 

Pigs are flying.  I agree with you 100% on this one.

 

Jim


don't let this become a habit...........

 

Cheers

 

Don

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Don Atkinson

Rod

 

Opportunity for a master sommelier ?

 

cheers

 

Don

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Guido Fawkes

>£1 per head from the UK and we are there. Seems like a good investment to me.

 

Should be optional, I do not want to contribute, as I doubt I'll see any return on my investment. 


Just put out a collection box and those that want to can contribute. 


Business cases (do people still write those, this is the next century and Queen Victoria is not around any longer) ... no thanks, not interested - I'll keep my £1 thanks. 


The cost of the security alone negates any benefit. 


Sorry, but if I was at the crossroads then I'm afraid I'd emerge still not being able to play the guitar. 


By the way did the American Department of Justice buy the Internet on a boat? 

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Guido Fawkes

OK I've changed my mind, but only if it has turnstiles on the gang planks so all the businessmen and businesswoman pay on entry and that the takings are returned to those that that funded it. 

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Don Atkinson
Originally Posted by Guido Fawkes:

OK I've changed my mind, but only if it has turnstiles on the gang planks so all the businessmen and businesswoman pay on entry and that the takings are returned to those that that funded it. 

Seems fair. ...........provided  these businessmen don't have to pay any taxes on business generated through yacht contacts.

 

Cheers

 

Don

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Guido Fawkes

I'd put them on performance related pay so doubt they'd pay any tax.

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Richwleeds
This all really depresses me ...how can supposedly intelligent people still be debating handing ever more obscene amounts of wealth to a family with absolutely no democratic mandate ... All in order To impress dictators and despots in the middle east. And we get Charles next ... No choice, no election - absolutely laughable
Posted on: 20 January 2012 by Jonathan Gorse

My sentiment has been turning somewhat against the Royals in general in recent years largely because what I see is a whole bunch of excess for a minority being paid for by the hard working and long suffering majority.  The straw that broke the camels back for me was an interview with Prince William some years ago in a newspaper when he was still a student and he was asked what was his usual tipple and he replied 'Pol Roger Cuvee Winston Churchill champagne', well I'm afraid this taxpayer is no longer prepared to fund his taste in fine wines.  He should have been living like every other student on beer...

 

I simply have no idea whether there is truly a business case for the monarchy or their yacht at all and it strikes me that its defenders rather over-egg the amount of tourism or income the trooping of the colour or a boat brings in.  I'm convinced that people would still come to London in their millions to see one of the world's great cities and I'm far from convinced the monarchy is much of a driving force.

 

I concur that the pomp and circumstance of it all adds a degree of national colour but I find the extravagant behaviour of the Royals pretty obscene at a time that millions of people in this country can't afford any of the nice things in life.

 

As another example when the Duke of Edinburgh was taken ill I suspect he received rather better and more expeditious treatment than any relatives of you or I would at the hands of the NHS which grates on me.  

 

I do think I surprised some of my Southern Irish inlaws at Christmas with my slightly tongue in cheek suggestion we should hang the bloody lot of them!!  After the royal visit last year they seem to have become monarchists...  but as I pointed out they don't have to pay for them.

 

Jonathan

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by winkyincanada

Another thing that annoys the crap out me with the royals is Charles' bugnutty crazy support for homeopathy and other sorcery. We should, as a society, be outraged by the whole "alternative medicine" scam. It diverts so much money from true health care, and costs so many lives it is a disgrace.

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by TomK
Originally Posted by Don Atkinson:

Winky, Tom,

 

Many thanks for your most gracious responses.

 

I admit that the last time I was invited aboard Britannia was a few decades ago and no doubt things have changed slightly. The first time was in Abu Dhabi in c.1970. The abount of business that came out of a few days in port was staggering. Probably paid for the ship in a single visit.

 

No doubt your experiences on board were far mor recent and significantly different,, hence your lack of enthusiasm.

 

As I said, if there is a business case for a Royal Yacht, get on with it. Of course it will take three years to build, thats after they have spent five years bidding and have decided to place the order in a Chineese ship yard...........

 

Cheers

 

Don 

Don I know you're at least partly at the wind up but is there really a business case for it? Produced by an independent body? Really? If that's the case why wait until now, when we're going through the worst economic conditions in modern times to propose this? It's nought but a load of shite as they say. Otherwise let's see it.

Similarly let's see proof that tourists actually come here to see the royal family. Most tourists don't get anywhere near them anyway and come to see the beautiful buildings and ceremonies, none of which actually requires the royal family. They could easily be replaced by a much more intelligent, interesting, photogenic and cheaper bunch.

 

Incidentally you're right. My only visit to Britannia was after she was berthed in Edinburgh and I was dragged by my wife and predictably embarrassed her by going on loudly at length about disgusting displays of opulence and privilege while people had no jobs, etc etc, yawn yawn. You've heard it and ignored it before I'm sure. I wondered about the "DA was here" scratched on various bannisters etc. I guess now I know.

Posted on: 20 January 2012 by naim_nymph

Well i think the royals should have their yacht,

 

and the whole useless lot of 'em get on board it...

 

Posted on: 21 January 2012 by jfritzen
Sorry, no British interests over here in Germany, but audiophile interests. So I'd prefer collecting money for a yacht for Paul Stephenson instead.
Posted on: 21 January 2012 by Jonathan Gorse

Well, he's done far more for most of us in terms of enhancing our lives than that shower of inbred toffs ever have and it really would provide a splendid venue for the annual BBQ!!

 

Toodle-pip,

 

Jonathan

 

Posted on: 21 January 2012 by Tony Lockhart
As long as the Naim boat isn't in Bentley colours, I'm up for the barbecue. (I'm not a footballer). Tony