TV1 min ago
Should Taxpayers Be Funding Royals' Expensive Trips?
Travel budget for royals is ballooning. Could the money be better spent elsewhere?
http:// www.dai lymail. co.uk/n ews/art icle-46 41570/G lobe-tr otting- royals- costing -king-s -ransom .html
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Jon_Letko. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.As someone who's worked on the railways, the quote about the use of the Royal train causing 'minimal disruption' (while costing around £20,000 per trip) stands out to me.
Trains normally run with each train occupying one 'sector' of the line. However the Royal train occupies three 'sectors' because the rules state that there must be a clear sector both ahead of and behind it. That causes massive disruption to rail traffic!
For example, I saw a Royal train come through the station I worked at during the mid-morning period. Trains on that line, and on associated branch lines, were knocked out of schedule for over ten hours aftterwards, causing massive inconvenience to tens of thousands of passengers.
A chaffeur-driven car might have taken an extra half an hour for the journey but, it seems, it was perfectly acceptable to alleviate that small delay by costing the tax-paper a great deal of money and delaying the journeys of vast numbers of rail passengers!
Trains normally run with each train occupying one 'sector' of the line. However the Royal train occupies three 'sectors' because the rules state that there must be a clear sector both ahead of and behind it. That causes massive disruption to rail traffic!
For example, I saw a Royal train come through the station I worked at during the mid-morning period. Trains on that line, and on associated branch lines, were knocked out of schedule for over ten hours aftterwards, causing massive inconvenience to tens of thousands of passengers.
A chaffeur-driven car might have taken an extra half an hour for the journey but, it seems, it was perfectly acceptable to alleviate that small delay by costing the tax-paper a great deal of money and delaying the journeys of vast numbers of rail passengers!
For the record
Occupied Royal Palaces, such as Buckingham Palace, are not the private property of The Queen. They are occupied by the Sovereign and held in trust by Crown Estates for future generations.
The Queen privately owns two properties, Balmoral Castle and Sandringham House, which are not publicly funded.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.