Instead of visiting flood stricken areas to 'inspect the damage', would they be offering to put up the needy for a while at Buckingham Palace, Clarance House etc . . . ?
2007-07-27 04:46:44 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
danelady, I didn't know that, very interesting, so the precedent has been set huh?
2007-07-27 05:04:04 · update #1
. . . cos like didn't the tax payer bail her maj out when windsor castle caught fire? Have they dipped their hands in their pockets or just had publicity pics taken of them caring?
2007-07-27 10:03:13 · update #2
yes, thats right, during the 2nd world war, the queen mutha (gawd bless er) went to visit those in the east end and was supposed to have said that she was relieved once the palace got bombed because it then made her the same as them (bit deluded like).
But I was thinking exactly the same when I saw charlie on the news tonight, thinking, well you've got a big gaff, let em all stay there, or go and get some water for them. Its just show, it does nothing for people.
2007-07-27 08:54:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother did exactly the same thing during wartime. And her kindness and support are remembered to this day. Keeping up morale during a disaster is every bit as important as actual relief work.
Edit - so where is the government? Disaster relief is their responsibility, and they have the proper facilities for taking care of a large number of people.
2007-07-27 11:57:17 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No NO This cannot be done. If this is done , there should be nothing called Royal.They can help in many other ways, which I am sure they have done always
2007-07-27 14:31:37 · answer #3 · answered by chandrasanyal 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
This is a wounderful idea, why hasn't it been done???
2007-07-27 16:56:14 · answer #4 · answered by kim t 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋