Most definitely, but who would want it? It's on a main road!!!! I'd hate that!
2007-02-20 04:01:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ladyfromdrum 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
And the biggest. Excellent old building. Leave the Monarchy alone, why not? Unless, of course, the Americans offer us a good price - for the monarchy not the building. Red Ken would dearly love to move in otherwise.
2007-02-20 10:49:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by michael w 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
we all pay for the city of manchester stadium, the most useless council house in Britain
Anyone seen that ad- it might just be in Manc, but its
"do you have the right to buy your council house" and some muppet with a spanner goin "aaaaahhhv got the raahht"
2007-02-20 03:53:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by chrisbowe82 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well, considering the Queen isn't even allowed to voice her opinions on political matters or lobby for positions and the like, I agree. Unless she has a more active role in the government, what's the point?
2007-02-20 03:55:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Dont forget.
10 Downing Street is a council house as well..
2007-02-20 06:52:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by knowitall 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
why should we be paying for mps houses? or for the upkeep of historical building in genral. in fact why should we even pay for normal council houses? get a job you bums!
2007-02-20 03:56:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by drunkredneck45 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
We have already paid for it and we only pay for the upkeep and staff, which is a cheaper option than before
2007-02-20 11:07:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by K. Marx iii 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think they should move Mr Prescots department into it, it fits the same porpose
2007-02-20 05:09:09
·
answer #8
·
answered by smithy 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Probably - but the rent is astronomical.
2007-02-20 03:54:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by Froggy 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
BECAUSE it is part of our history,
and in the end it pays for its self.
2007-02-20 03:53:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋