'monarchy brings in tourists'

Apparently the queen attracts so much tourism that the tens of millions it costs to protect her and her family is nothing as the cash is made up by this, could someone provide a link or source to the data which shows that the queeny alone brings in enough tourists to make up for how much she costs, ta.

The only real backed up piece of information I can find is this extract:

Tourism revenue is not only irrelevant to a debate about our constitution, the suggestion that the monarchy promotes tourism is also untrue. There is not a single shred of evidence to back this up. Of the top 20 tourist attractions in the UK only one royal residence makes it: Windsor Castle at number 17 (beaten comfortably by Windsor Legoland, in at number 7). Royal residences account for less than 1% of total tourist revenue. Indeed, the success of the Tower of London (number 6 in the list) suggests that tourism would benefit if Buckingham Palace and Windsor castle were vacated by the Windsor family.

So I challenge you, give me the proof they bring more money in than what they cost the country and I'll switch sides.

(edited 11 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

ed-

I doubt the tourism revenue generated by the monarch would be enough to cover the money she uses. It would be impossible to calculate anyway.
I don't think that's a reason to oppose the monarchy though ... if you're concerned about money, there's a hell of a lot of government money wasted elsewhere

Reply 2

marsman13

It's all commerical now especially for the 2012 games. But it brings in money so its all good. :smile:

Reply 3

User257034

Original post by TheHansa

The "royal familly bring in money via tourists" thing is a load of crap.

I have long said that if the royal familly were gone, people would still visit Buckingham Palace etc, we still get tourists if the royal familly are in a nother country.

I hate the royal familly. Spongeing ****s.

Reply 4

travoot

Traitors to the crown will not be tolerated.

Reply 5

TheHansa

Original post by travoot

Traitors to the crown will not be tolerated.

Good thing the crown is technically owned by the government which is voted for by the people.

Reply 6

travoot

Original post by TheHansa

Good thing the crown is technically owned by the government which is voted for by the people.

I was being tongue and cheek. However, if you want to get into technicalities, you belong to the crown (Queen). Therefore if the crown (object) is technically owned by the people, and the people are technically owned by the Queen - then the Queen owns the crown, not 'the people'. :cool:

Reply 7

Herr

Most evidence don't support this.

If you look at all the attractions in UK, the only royal palace that makes it to the top-10 is Windsor Castle of which it is ranked 8th and there is little to suggest that it is visited because it is a royal palace.

Reply 8

prog2djent

If we stripped the whole royal cult of all their assets then that would generate much more money than tourism.

Reply 9

patrickinator

Original post by ras90

You have a chinese and spanish flags on your thing so your opinions is worthwhile, WHY?

Reply 10

Fires

Original post by prog2djent

If we stripped the whole royal cult of all their assets then that would generate much more money than tourism.

If they were all sold at the same time they wouldn't - the price of castles would hit rock bottom and bejewelled armour would be a complete giveaway.

Reply 11

Fires

Original post by ras90

"Hate" is a bit strong isn't it?

On the main point, I would suggest the Monarchy are part of a general mix of ideas about Britain - the kind of "concept of Britishness" that many people overseas find attractive. You can see this when the Queen or William/Kate for example visit almost any country - a mix of awe and adulation. There is something going on there about reinforcing Britain's historic role as Imperial power, even though the power has gone, the kudos hasn't. I'm not saying I support the monarchy as an institution, but those are things to think about. We probably gain quite a lot economically from them.

Reply 12

TheHansa

Original post by travoot

The Crown (not the object) is held in a kind of trust not owned by Lizzie Windsor if she loses her position she loses much of her estate, she doesn't own me by herself this Crown thing does, she's like a sort of lazy chairman.

Original post by Fires

The places formerly in the empire hate us and the Queen adds to this and the countries in the Commonwealth are starting to want out and the rest just see it as a joke.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 13

username739587

Original post by ras90

Spongeing are they? You do know that supporting the entire royal family costs less per person than a mars bar. I'm quite happy paying 60p in taxes per year to help support them.

Reply 14

Fires

Original post by TheHansa

The places formerly in the empire hate us and the Queen adds to this and the countries in the Commonwealth are starting to want out and the rest just see it as a joke.

Which former-Empire countries are you talking about? Your statement is simply not borne out by the facts. Many surveys have shown that Britain is still exceptionally popular in large parts of the ex-empire, despite the activities of some politicians. India is a classic example - a recent survey there showed that, astonishingly, something like 40% of respondents would be happy to see India being run from Britain again!

I am not out of sympathy with the argument that the monarchy should end as a reigning institution, but the arguments need to be intelligent, not based on nonsense.

Reply 15

Bobifier

My instinct is that absolutely nobody in this thread has any idea how the finances of the royal family work. Unfortunately, this has not stopped everyone from acting like they think they're experts on it.

Reply 16

travoot

Original post by stroppyninja

Spongeing are they? You do know that supporting the entire royal family costs less per person than a mars bar. I'm quite happy paying 60p in taxes per year to help support them.

This. There's really no point throwing away such a quintessentially British tradition and needlessly morphing into a republic. Especially if the argument is that it costs 'too much money'. If we were living in a system in which parliament was actually inferior to the Monarchy, in practice, then I'd understand. The simple truth is that in terms of legislative authority parliment is completely sovereign, therefore to remove the monarchy on purely philosophical grounds is pointless.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 17

Super Cicero

What country has the most tourists visit it each year?
Answer: The French Republic

In 2010, France had 76.8 million tourists visit it, while the UK only had 28.1. France, like Britain, has a rich historical heritage, but France hasn't had a monarchy since the 19th century. So would the numbers of tourists visiting the UK really decline if Britain became a Republic like France?

Reply 18

TheHansa

Original post by stroppyninja

Spongeing are they? You do know that supporting the entire royal family costs less per person than a mars bar. I'm quite happy paying 60p in taxes per year to help support them.

per taxpayer

The value for money of no other government body would ever be assessed by taxing this £40,000,000 figure and dividing it by 60,000,000, this does not take into account that many people do not pay tax, children for example.

This £40,000,000 is far too low anyway as it does not take into account security which is where the bulk of the cost comes from which is estimated to be £100,000,000 which alone is already more than the total cost of the irish presidency there are a few other bits and pieces which only run into the tens of millions visits etc.

Reply 19

User257034

Original post by patrickinator

You have a chinese and spanish flags on your thing so your opinions is worthwhile, WHY?

The Spanish flag is a glitch where TSR wont let me change the flag. Pls my flags make no difference.

Original post by stroppyninja

Spongeing are they? You do know that supporting the entire royal family costs less per person than a mars bar. I'm quite happy paying 60p in taxes per year to help support them.