Bed and Breakfast at Buck House

Last week, that pathetic woman ran to Washington to hail Trump and, in her panic, offered him bed and breakfast at Buckingham Palace: One P (this time P stands for palace) he has not yet grabbed. In return, Trump supports Britain’s efforts to break up the EU.

The Queen has – I believe – no say on who gets invited to Buck House. She could – of course – have to wash her hair on the night of Trump’s stay.

David Cameron's Platitudes

Zara Phillips, Princess Anne’s daughter, one of the Queen’s eight grandchildren, has today given birth to a daughter. This is, I am sure, wonderful news to the family, but totally irrelevant to Britain. That is, unless you get excited by the 16^th in line to the throne.

Why does the British Prime Minister think it necessary to come out with a statement, and a banal one on top?

"It's wonderful news and I'm absolutely delighted for the couple. I know them a little and I know they'll be absolutely devoted and delighted parents, so happy news all round."

So Cameron knows them “a little” and judges that - unlike other parents - they will be “absolutely devoted and delighted parents”. Must be that blue – rather diluted by now – blood. 

Rejected by Her Majesty

The Queen is giving me the silent treatment: Her Majesty has not bothered to react to my suggestion that she give her art collection as a present to the nation to celebrate her sixty years on the throne.

This probably means that I am unlikely to be knighted for this idea. Shame. I liked the sound of "Sir David".

The Queen and I

It has been reported that the British government is pushing a plan to buy a new yacht for the Queen as a present to celebrate her 60^th anniversary on the throne. Prince Charles – not surprisingly – is all for it.

The Queen does not have to try to be popular – she is popular. She is generally liked as well as respected by her subjects. But, if the Queen would take my advice, instead of that of her ministers, she would be doing the right thing. Right for her and right for us.

Instead of getting the taxpayers or some rich sponsors to buy her a yacht, the Queen should make a substantial present to us, to her subjects, to show her gratitude for being allowed to reign over us.

What I want is the Royal Collection: 7000 painting, 40,000 water colours and drawings and 150,000 old master prints. That is all. This enormous art collection is not privately owned by the Queen but held by her in trust, as the sovereign. So, it would not really cost her or her children anything.

The time has come for all those works of art to be openly and freely available to everyone. They should not be locked in the royal residences and only shown occasionally and partially at the Queens Gallery, where the Queen actually charges entrance fees.

So how about it, Ma’am?

Culture and Politics – III

There is a wonderful Thomas Lawrence exhibition at the National Portrait Gallery in London. Go, if you haven’t been. It ends on 23 January.

Various owners, including the Metropolitan Museum in New York, the Gemäldegalerie in Berlin, the Tate, as well as the Queen lent paintings to the Portrait Gallery for this exhibition.

I was surprised to see that the only paintings that had a © sign attached and shown in the catalogue are those owned by the Queen. None of the other owners felt the need to secure their copyright over the art they own.

According to the Queen’s own website the art is “held in trust by The Queen for the Nation.” In a country in which most museums are free, the Queen charges a hefty £9 for visits to the Queen’s Gallery. Most of “her” art is never seen by the public.

Should not all this wonderful art be placed in freely accessible public museums instead of being locked up without access at Windsor, Buckingham Palace and other Royal residences?