[BBC News] Four get honours in New Year list

[Newsbot]

Four men from the Isle of Man are honoured by the Queen in the New Year Honours.

 

Source : http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/...man/7162783.stm

[bluemonday]

Nice to see Pete Geddes recognised. I spent a fair bit of my spare time this summer on Bradda head and contacted him with questions on a number of the mines still surviving there and their history, in particular the North workings. He was extremely helpful and very knowledgable. Nice to see that he and the LMRG have been acknowledged for their work.

[Pat Ayres]

'Queens award', very apt, for some.

[cheesemonster2005]

Stuff the awards. Do these people really intend to accept an award for hard work from a lady who's never done a days work in her life and lives off the taxes of her subjects? Any true Manxie would refuse an honour from the British crown.

[macmannin]

Bit of a pisstake really....Noel Cringle gets his for his services to the community for being a highly paid government employee as does Mr Culverhouse....Would they have done their respective jobs for pittance,would they fuck....And the soon to be retired copper loves the fraggle too.....Oh cornaa

[triskelion]

Stuff the awards. Do these people really intend to accept an award for hard work from a lady who's never done a days work in her life and lives off the taxes of her subjects? Any true Manxie would refuse an honour from the British crown.

 

Oh come on, surely you can't think the Queen has had an easy life? If anything, her life has probably been one filled with more mindless repetative tasks than most peoples. And she hardly lives off the taxes of the people. The Duchy of Lancaster, these days essentially a property company, which is worth in the region £310 million, funds the privy purse, with a surplus that goes to the Treasury. Similarly, the civil list is funded by the Crown Estate, which is worth over £7 Billion and has its revenues controlled by the Treasury.

 

So in fact, the monarchy subsidises her subjects, not to mention the amount of tourism it brings to the country or the prominent role the royal family plays in promoting the UK.

[Max Power]

Stuff the awards. Do these people really intend to accept an award for hard work from a lady who's never done a days work in her life and lives off the taxes of her subjects? Any true Manxie would refuse an honour from the British crown.

 

Oh come on, surely you can't think the Queen has had an easy life? If anything, her life has probably been one filled with more mindless repetative tasks than most peoples. And she hardly lives off the taxes of the people. The Duchy of Lancaster, these days essentially a property company, which is worth in the region £310 million, funds the privy purse, with a surplus that goes to the Treasury. Similarly, the civil list is funded by the Crown Estate, which is worth over £7 Billion and has its revenues controlled by the Treasury.

 

So in fact, the monarchy subsidises her subjects, not to mention the amount of tourism it brings to the country or the prominent role the royal family plays in promoting the UK.

 

Totally agree.

 

I am not in favour though, of vastly overpaid public servants being honoured in this way. Their salary is their reward!

 

Does the poor guy who opens his newsagents shop at 6am and closes at 10pm get an MBE, or the guy who diligently services your car for years on end charging reasonable money get any recognition? No, they are looked on as money grabbing tight arsed so and so's who's reward is the money they recieve for doing it!

 

People like Peter Geddes deserve their award as they devote their life to an interest that benefits others and gain little if any financial benefit.

[VinnieK]

Oh come on, surely you can't think the Queen has had an easy life? If anything, her life has probably been one filled with more mindless repetative tasks than most peoples.

 

Maybe so, but she performs those tasks in luxurious (bordering on the obscene) surroundings and thanks to the system of monarchy rewarding people for an accident of birth, without significant worry about the material prospects of her children and immediate family. I disagree with the statement that no "true manxies" would accept an award from the Queen, but the idea that the she has a "hard life" due to the repetitive nature of her duties is absurd.

 

And she hardly lives off the taxes of the people. The Duchy of Lancaster, these days essentially a property company, which is worth in the region £310 million, funds the privy purse, with a surplus that goes to the Treasury. Similarly, the civil list is funded by the Crown Estate, which is worth over £7 Billion and has its revenues controlled by the Treasury.

 

And yet still she and her family claims subsidies from the CAP amounting to over a million pounds a year, and receives over £34 million direct from the taxpayer per year, and is lobbying for more money to be given to maintaining her palaces and residences. Let it also be remembered that the Queen is exempt from paying many forms of tax (including inheritance tax), and that the vast majority of the royal family's holdings are the rewards of an absurd fuedal system that was obsolete 300 years ago, never mind today. Also, the Crown Estate, which you mention, is owned by the monarchy, but paid for in its entirity by the public, so if it does benefit the economy it is less the royal family subsidising their subjects than it is the people benefitting from their own investment, with the royal family leeching off the proceeds and millions wasted on the upkeep of this perculiar arrangement.

 

So in fact, the monarchy subsidises her subjects, not to mention the amount of tourism it brings to the country or the prominent role the royal family plays in promoting the UK.

 

I've never placed much faith in the old chestnut regarding monarchy's vital role in tourism and national promotion. There are plenty of republics (as well as countries such as Australia and Canada that have the Queen as a figurehead, but do not have her as a resident monarch or glorified PR spokeswoman) that have healthy tourist industries and international business relations. Of all the Americans I've known who've visited the UK, the Queen has never been listed as a prominent source of attraction, and indeed has often acted in the detriment to the UK's international image by symbolising an archaic class structure and hierarchy that in much of the modernized world has long been rejected.

[Stavros]

My one has obviously got stuck in the Christmas post.

 

...from a lady who's never done a days work in her life...

During WWII she joined the Women's Auxiliary Territorial Service, where she was known as No 230873 Second Subaltern Elizabeth Windsor, trained as a driver, and drove a military truck while she served.

 

"Princess Elizabeth changing a vehicle wheel during WWII"

 

From: Wiki: Elizabeth II

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't care much for royalty but you really should check your facts before spouting off the crap that you do!

 

Stav.

[Stu Peters]

I agree with Vinnie and Max - the 'honours' system is a complete sham - although Pete Geddes deserves his gong for being a thoroughly good bloke. The fact that these things are an expected perk in many jobs devalues them even further.

 

I've been watching the BBC Monarchy series, and as figureheads they do a grand job. Hardly onerous drinking tea, making small talk and smelling lots of fresh paint though.

 

That said, I'm quite happy with my knighthood from King Dave. And since I was the first here, and I didn't pay for it, I guess I'm now a First Knight and can wear armour and slay dragons, unfettered from the normal tiresome Health and Safety constraints.

[mollag]

Stuff the awards. Do these people really intend to accept an award for hard work from a lady who's never done a days work in her life and lives off the taxes of her subjects? Any true Manxie would refuse an honour from the British crown.

 

Oh come on, surely you can't think the Queen has had an easy life? If anything, her life has probably been one filled with more mindless repetative tasks than most peoples. And she hardly lives off the taxes of the people. The Duchy of Lancaster, these days essentially a property company, which is worth in the region £310 million, funds the privy purse, with a surplus that goes to the Treasury. Similarly, the civil list is funded by the Crown Estate, which is worth over £7 Billion and has its revenues controlled by the Treasury.

 

So in fact, the monarchy subsidises her subjects, not to mention the amount of tourism it brings to the country or the prominent role the royal family plays in promoting the UK.

 

 

Really a nice bit of spin. so the Queen now pays us the subject and is no way a burden on the public purse, now forgive me for thinking the exact opposite was the case.

 

As to tourism, the no1 destination for tourism in europe is Paris---sans Royalty. It can be done it seems.

[Pat Ayres]

I agree with Vinnie and Max - the 'honours' system is a complete sham - although Pete Geddes deserves his gong for being a thoroughly good bloke. The fact that these things are an expected perk in many jobs devalues them even further.

 

I've been watching the BBC Monarchy series, and as figureheads they do a grand job. Hardly onerous drinking tea, making small talk and smelling lots of fresh paint though.

 

That said, I'm quite happy with my knighthood from King Dave. And since I was the first here, and I didn't pay for it, I guess I'm now a First Knight and can wear armour and slay dragons, unfettered from the normal tiresome Health and Safety constraints.

Off to Peel at the weekend then?

[Wake Up Call]

Guys and girls,

 

Before slagging off all and sundry about this topic, send a letter to Government House and ask for an application form for a recommending a 'community award'. It may open your eyes a little on how this process works.

 

I am not saying who is and who isn't worthy of such an award, but quite often the winners are commended for actions that you or I will never be aware of. Some people are modest about what they do behind the scenes.

 

Tricky one to comment about really when you don't know the full facts.

[blueberrypocket548]

Well. CONGRATULATIONS to Peter Geddes anyway. So deserves some serious recognition for all the work he's done voluntarily!!!

[triskelion]

Maybe so, but she performs those tasks in luxurious (bordering on the obscene) surroundings and thanks to the system of monarchy rewarding people for an accident of birth, without significant worry about the material prospects of her children and immediate family. I disagree with the statement that no "true manxies" would accept an award from the Queen, but the idea that the she has a "hard life" due to the repetitive nature of her duties is absurd.

 

No, I said she doesn't have an easy life, not that she has a hard life, which would be absurd. My point was that being the British monarch is hardly a playboy lifestyle as it is dominated by ritual, expectation and arbitrary duty. Whilst it may not lack in luxury, it is an existance devoid of much in the way of freedom or choice. The idea that there is such a thing as 'an accident of birth' is ridiculous.

 

And yet still she and her family claims subsidies from the CAP amounting to over a million pounds a year, and receives over £34 million direct from the taxpayer per year, and is lobbying for more money to be given to maintaining her palaces and residences. Let it also be remembered that the Queen is exempt from paying many forms of tax (including inheritance tax), and that the vast majority of the royal family's holdings are the rewards of an absurd fuedal system that was obsolete 300 years ago, never mind today. Also, the Crown Estate, which you mention, is owned by the monarchy, but paid for in its entirity by the public, so if it does benefit the economy it is less the royal family subsidising their subjects than it is the people benefitting from their own investment, with the royal family leeching off the proceeds and millions wasted on the upkeep of this perculiar arrangement.

 

The royal family is perfectly entitled to claim subsidy under the CAP, and is probably a lot more deserving than many French farmers are. The idea that rich people shouldn't be entitled to benefits is absurd. Perhaps you did not fully understand my previous post, but the Queen does not receive any money direct from the taxpayer. She (and her family) receive money from the Treasury through the civil list, but as I explained, this is financed through the Crown Estate. The Crown Estate generates more revenue than is used by the Civil List. The rest of the royal family's income comes its various other lands under the Duchy of Lancaster, which also produces a surplus that goes into the Treasury.

 

The Crown Estate is not 'paid for by the public,' it is administered by the Treasury and is in fact self funding, generating £190 million a year. In 2000, the Civil List was only £8.9 million of this.

 

Let us not also forget that many of the Queen's 'palaces and residences' are historical buildings and should arguably be preserved anyway for heritage reasons.

 

Far from being a 'perculiar arrangement,' Britain's constitutional monarchy has many centuries of precedent behind it and has in fact proved to be one of the most stable systems of administration in the entire World. It is certainly not a perfect system, but criticisms of the UK's constitutional structure rarely highlight having a monarch as the main problem.

 

I've never placed much faith in the old chestnut regarding monarchy's vital role in tourism and national promotion. There are plenty of republics (as well as countries such as Australia and Canada that have the Queen as a figurehead, but do not have her as a resident monarch or glorified PR spokeswoman) that have healthy tourist industries and international business relations. Of all the Americans I've known who've visited the UK, the Queen has never been listed as a prominent source of attraction, and indeed has often acted in the detriment to the UK's international image by symbolising an archaic class structure and hierarchy that in much of the modernized world has long been rejected.

 

I did not say the Queen played a 'vital role' in tourism or national promotion. What I said is that she does contribute positively to both of these, perhaps not in of herself, but the monarchy is an instution that interests many people and does bring a uniqueness to the British experience. The Queen does not symbolise a class structure. 'Class' is a concept born out of industrial-era shared experience and identity, something the monarchy was never part of. Those who see the monarchy as part of the 'establishment' have missed the point entirely. The whole reason there is no real republican movement in Britain is that the monarchy, as an institution, transcends all that.

 

There are a number of countries in the modern World that maintain monarchies. Aside from those in the Commonwealth, Spain, Japan and Sweden, among others, still have royal families.

 

Really a nice bit of spin. so the Queen now pays us the subject and is no way a burden on the public purse, now forgive me for thinking the exact opposite was the case.

 

As to tourism, the no1 destination for tourism in europe is Paris---sans Royalty. It can be done it seems.

 

It is hardly spin, but nonetheless I forgive you for being wrong. I never claimed a monarchy was a necessary precursor to tourism, just that in the British case, it helps.

 

--------------------------------

As with all awards, there will always be debate as to who deserves what, so I am inclined to agree with Wake Up Call.