Nov 13 2012
God save our tight arsed Queen/ Big ears is in the shit… Nearly/ And I’m not sure how to describe the third story.
The Daily Mail
Queen under fire for paying Windsor Castle cleaners at 78p below hourly ‘Living Wage’
The Queen and the Royal estate have come under attack from campaigners after advertising for cleaners at Windsor Castle 78p below the recommended livable wage.
This week is Living Wage Week and comes just weeks after Labour leader Ed Miliband set out his party’s agenda for ensuring employers pay a wage that meets the cost of living.
Campaigners want to see employees paid at least £7.45 per hour outside of London and £8.55 in the capital. However, an advert recently published on the Buckingham Palace website is offering £6.67 per hour.
The role is paid just 47p above the national minimum wage – a salary equivalent to £13,000 per year. It has been reported that no accommodation is provided with the job which includes vacuuming, mopping, dusting and general household maintenance.
The role requires a 30 hour week between the hours of 8am and 1pm daily.
Graham Morris MP, a Labour campaigner for the Living Wage said this advert is setting a bad example.
‘This looks really bad.’ he told the Daily Mirror.
‘Since the Queen receives considerable support from the public purse she should pay a living wage, not just barely a minimum wage.
‘She’s setting a bad example to other employers. Windsor is one of the 12 most affluent boroughs in the country, so you would anticipate the cost of living would be much higher.
‘I would hate to see a return to the Victorian days where a privileged elite preside over the unwashed masses and just pay the bare minimum.’
A spokesperson for PSC Union told Mail Online: ‘It’s shocking that in this day and age these sorts of jobs are still not taken seriously and still receive this kind of wage.
‘This particular example really points up the stark and glaring inequality in the whole system.
‘You have people on very low wages cleaning the houses of one of the richest families in the country, and these house bring millions of people to Britain every year.
‘It’s a situation that really needs to be dealt with and it should be obvious in this day and age.’
A spokesman for Buckingham Palace refused to comment on the charge that the Queen is setting a bad example to other employers.
‘We are reviewing a our policies in regard to the living wage,’ the spokesman said.
The spokesman also denied the claim that this particular job came with no accommodation.
He added:’All cleaning jobs come as an employment package which includes housing being provided.’
Anti-monarchist, 74, arrested for ‘planning to throw bucket of manure at Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall during visit’
A 74-year-old anti-royalist protester was arrested moments before Prince Charles and Camilla arrived to greet thousands of people as part of their New Zealand tour.
The pensioner was named by One News as Sam Bracanov and they reported he was arrested after he was allegedly captured on CCTV in downtown Auckland preparing to commit an assault.
Bracanov has admitted planning to throw a bucket of horse manure over the Prince and Camila.
‘I was going to mix it with water, stir it around and make it easy to throw and then throw it at them,’ he said.
‘Royalty smells, so what difference does it make if I hit them?’
But if he tries anything like it again he will go straight to jail for disobeying a magistrate’s order to stay at least 500 yards from the royal couple.
When Charles and Camilla arrived they made their way along the crowds shaking hands and a small group of protesters could be seen holding up placards.
One read ‘Get a Job Royal Bludgers’ – New Zealand slang for someone who avoids work.
A statement on the New Zealand Police website said the man from the Mangere suburb of Auckland was arrested at 12.40pm – around 50 minutes before the royal couple arrived.
It added: ‘Arresting officers had identified the man as a known anti-royalist who was, when arrested, at a royal itinerary venue although neither of the royal visitors was in the vicinity at the time.’
Scroll down for video
The Prince and Duchess are on a seven-day Diamond Jubilee tour of New Zealand.
Meanwhile Prince Charles had some close encounters during the final stop on his and the Duchess of Cornwall’s Diamond Jubilee Tour.
- Next stop, New Zealand: Charles and Camilla touch down on final leg of their tour and receive Royal salute
- Prince Charles reveals Harry has phoned him three times from the front line in Afghanistan to catch up with life back home
- I feel a few sausages short of a barbie! Charles jokes about jetlag after arriving in Australia
The Royal couple are on the last leg of their tour visiting New Zealand where The Prince of Wales broke protocol by hugging a rugby player.
However later the same evening Charles behaved with royal grace and kept his distance as he greeted Dame Kiri Te Kanawa at a reception and dinner for the Diamond Jubilee Trust in Auckland.
Entrance: Prince Charles and Camilla arrive at the Diamond Jubilee Trust reception and dinner in Auckland, New Zealand
Earlier today the Prince of Wales had a much closer encounter with a female rugby player during a visit to New Zealand’s national training center for high performance sports, in Auckland.
Upon meeting Charles, Linda Itunu ignored protocol and took an unconventional approach to the standard handshake and curtsey and hugged the Prince.
The 27-year-old sportswoman was delighted when Charles hugged her back but had to help him wipe his forehead once they let go and apologised to the royal for leaving him a little damp.
As Camilla chatted to Olympic medallists Charles headed over to the women’s rugby sevens team and held out his hand to Ms Itunu but got a hug instead.
Jersey accountant who claims to be illegitimate son of Princess Margaret restarts legal battle to see her will
A Jersey accountant who believes he is the secret son of Princess Margaret is renewing his legal battle to ‘prove it’.
Robert Brown, 57, said he was prepared to pay up to £100,000 to get access to documents relating to her will.
Mr Brown, of St Lawrence, Jersey, said he has now appointed solicitors to obtain secret court papers about royal wills drawn up around the time of Margaret’s death in 2002.
He has appointed the law firm Christian Khan, which prides itself on taking on ‘larger organisations, including the state’.
Brown claims Princess Margaret gave birth to him in 1955, and he believes his father could be Robin Douglas Home, a Scottish musician who Margaret had a well publicised affair with, the Guardian reports.
He died in 1968.
Mr Brown believes that the Princess hid the later stages of her pregnancy by using body doubles and that he was sent to Kenya to be brought up as the child of Cynthia and Douglas Brown in Nairobi.
He claims the documents will reveal that Buckingham Palace, the attorney general and a senior judge colluded to keep secret her last testament, which he believes contains details of his birth.
The case has previously been dismissed by lawyers for the royal family as that of ‘a fantasist seeking to feed his private obsession’.
But Mr Brown insists he has the right to find out if the Queen’s sister is his mother.
Records confirm Brown was born on 5 January 1955 in Nairobi, Kenya, but his birth was not registered until 2 February.
A privy council meeting was held on the day he was born, a fact Brown believes is important.
Later in 1955, Princess Margaret called off her wedding to Peter Townsend.
Brown’s parents, Cynthia and Douglas Brown, are both now dead, but he said Cynthia had been a model working for Hardy Amies, a designer who the princess was said to be a fan of.
Mr Brown told the Guardian: ‘I can’t get it out of my head that I am right. I can understand people are sceptical because it seems to be childhood fantasy stuff, but it is not like that with me.’
He first went to the high court to seek disclosure of her will in 2006 and 2007.
‘Parents’: Brown believes his father could be Robin Douglas Home (left) and that Princess Margaret (right) kept her secret by using ‘body doubles’
He lost the case, but Brown is now fighting under freedom of information laws.
He said: ‘It is constitutionally wholly inappropriate for the palace and private lawyers with the assistance of the attorney general to enter into utterly secret formal arrangements, to reflect Her Majesty’s wishes, with senior judges.’
A spokesman for the Queen said the palace would not comment on the allegations made by Mr Brown.
He said he had long believed he was not his parent’s natural son as they were distant compared to the way they treated his supposed siblings.
He claims his birthday would sometimes be forgotten altogether, and his birth was not discussed with him.
He has also looked into whether he was related to Edward VIII, before considering whether Prince Philip might be his father.
Last month, Dominic Grieve, the attorney general, put an absolute block on the publication of 27 letters between Prince Charles and ministers, because the letters held the ‘most deeply held personal views and beliefs’.