Forbes:

"According to the latest Sovereign Grant accounts that were published last week, taxpayers in the UK are forking over more money than ever for the Royal Family. The monarchy cost £67 million ($86 million) in 2018-19, a 41% increase on the previous financial year. It has also emerged that the renovation of Frogmore Cottage, the official residence of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, cost £2.4 million of public funding, despite the fact that it was a gift provided to the couple by the Queen."

Viva la revolution.

Hold on . On another thread people of a left wing persuasion were calling £280 million a tiny amount for health tourists.(other estimates put it up to £4.5 BILLION).Now all of a sudden £67 million is a massive amount. At least we get a return for the royal family . Granted some are a waste of space. Make your minds up

Mind? are you seriously suggesting any leftys have salient capacity?

That's a good attempt - but the argument about the health tourism lie, was about the estimated figure, as a proportion of the overall NHS budget.

The "return" for the Royal Family is difficult to quantify, because there are some rather arcane calculations used in most cases; personally, I object to them at a more fundamental level than just the money.

You could always move to a country with no monarchy, I am sure I can set up a go fund me page to help you out.

I was intending to do exactly that, until the gammon uprising removed my freedom of movement.

Nobody has removed any freedom of movement, and the word GAMMON is a slur, stop reading the Mirror, Star.

Maybe try an actual book? You know, one with facts in, I bet you're gutted now Love Island has finished.

Which budget it comes from is irrelevant. The Govt has a pot of money to spend and , among other things,it comes from tax and NI . It's the amount that counts. Now you can argue that you want a republic and that's fair enough but the fact is we spend more on health tourists than we do on the royal family. We can argue till we're blue in the face about the return on the royal family or what the actual cost of health tourism is but the fact remains we spend more on one than the other.

It's relevant to me; as I said, I'm quite content that if someone has a medical emergency whilst in the UK, we treat them - and the numbers who are deliberate co-called 'health tourists' are so vanishingly small, as to not be worth pursuing.

The decision to spend 70 million quid on an inbred, extended family who have inherited wealth and privilege because their ancestors oppressed and enslaved poor people, is an entirely different thing; so aside from the morals of it, you're creating a false equivalence.

True colurs on show, envy, nothing more. Diddums, did they steal your Whippet (in developing news, the earth isn't flat)

I object to health tourists as a matter of principle not just the cash

Although as a human being I get the emergency thing,however it still sticks in my craw that we wouldn't get the same courtesy in other countries I could name.