Government spending £8 million on portraits of the King for schools, police stations and council offices

[MattA7]

After reading various news articles about public buildings gets portraits of King Charles to display. Surely I can’t be to only person who thinks this has connotations of dictatorship.

Pictures of the head of state in public buildings is a classic example of what you see in such countries and appears to be one of many worrying actions of the government in recent years. Not to mention the fact that £8 million could be spent on other more resourceful things such as improving NHS services etc.

 

[swt_passenger]

After reading various news articles about public buildings gets portraits of King Charles to display. Surely I can’t be to only person who thinks this has connotations of dictatorship.

Pictures of the head of state in public buildings is a classic example of what you see in such countries and appears to be one of many worrying actions of the government in recent years. Not to mention the fact that £8 million could be spent on other more resourceful things such as improving NHS services etc.

It has been completely normal to have a picture of Queen Elizabeth II in public buildings since about 1952? I hardly think that it was ever seen as a sign of a dictatorship? I also think they wouldn’t always be in public areas…

 

[MattA7]

It has been completely normal to have a picture of Queen Elizabeth II in public buildings since about 1952? I hardly think that it was ever seen as a sign of a dictatorship? I also think they wouldn’t always be in public areas…

I don’t think I have ever seen a picture of the monarch in public buildings but maybe it’s different down South in England. Either way it’s isn’t exactly something that should be encouraged or have taxpayers money thrown at. If a establishment really wants a picture of the monarch they can buy one at their on expense not the taxpayers

 

[yorksrob]

Police stations have traditionally had a portrait of the late Queen (certainly on telly programmes).

Not noticed one in Civic Hall though.

 

[dosxuk]

If a establishment really wants a picture of the monarch they can buy one at their on expense not the taxpayers

If we're talking schools, councils and police stations, all of their income is from the taxpayer anyway - it makes no difference if there's a central government pot to fund this from or it comes out of reducing spending on something else from their locally controlled budget, it's still coming from you and me.

 

[birchesgreen]

After reading various news articles about public buildings gets portraits of King Charles to display. Surely I can’t be to only person who thinks this has connotations of dictatorship.

Pictures of the head of state in public buildings is a classic example of what you see in such countries and appears to be one of many worrying actions of the government in recent years. Not to mention the fact that £8 million could be spent on other more resourceful things such as improving NHS services etc.

Pictures of the head of state are pretty common in EVERY country in the world.

 

[Ianigsy]

To be fair, this should have been budgeted for years ago. You could quite easily set up a sinking fund to cover it, as it’s been a foreseeable expense for at least the last 15 years.

 

[birchesgreen]

£8 million sounds like a lot of money to you and me but to government budgets it's nothing.

 

[XAM2175]

I'm also struggling to think of times where I've seen one in the flesh, so to speak, but they definitely pop up in the backgrounds of documentaries and the like. As @swt_passenger notes, they're not necessarily in public areas

I don't have any particular attachment to the concept, but it's certainly not new.

 

[Fleetmaster]

Surely I can’t be to only person who thinks this has connotations of dictatorship.

I dare say there are others.

They're called Republicans here, and are generally ignored as a fringe group with fringe views.

Oppressive shows of statehood is gladly something we don't do, compared to say, America, which is famously a Republic founded on the principle that Britian sucks. Politicians here are quite rightly viewed variously with deep suspicion or simple mirth if they even stand behind a Union Flag for no discernable reason (such as being at an international summit).

Imagine if the SNP got Independence! You'd have Andy Murray's mug staring down at you from every granite wall. Nightmare.

 

[Busaholic]

No state money for Air Ambulances, only for a photograph of an old man: why? (I'm the same age as said old man btw.) Maybe in police stations it could be a reminder of who's going to prosecute you if things take a turn for the worse.

 

[gswindale]

I seem to recall somewhere in the region of 15 years ago, travelling across the border from the US to Canada and spending the best part of an hour in what could best be described as a portacabin which had a pic of Liz up on the wall.

 

[AlterEgo]

After reading various news articles about public buildings gets portraits of King Charles to display. Surely I can’t be to only person who thinks this has connotations of dictatorship.

Pictures of the head of state in public buildings is a classic example of what you see in such countries and appears to be one of many worrying actions of the government in recent years. Not to mention the fact that £8 million could be spent on other more resourceful things such as improving NHS services etc.

Our air cadet squadron had a picture of Queen Elizabeth II as the head of the Armed Forces. It’s quite the mind virus to think having a portrait of the head of state is like a dictatorship, although you can give me the personal rule of Charles III above living with the Tories any time.

 

[simonw]

To be fair, this should have been budgeted for years ago. You could quite easily set up a sinking fund to cover it, as it’s been a foreseeable expense for at least the last 15 years.

Really a sinking fund for something smaller than a rounding error in government spending?

 

[Darandio]

Prisoner Cell Block H always had one in the governors office!

 

[peri]

If the new king wants his portrait pushed forward then it should be at his expense.

 

[AlterEgo]

If a establishment really wants a picture of the monarch they can buy one at their on expense not the taxpayers

Where do you think a public organisation’s “own expense” comes from?

 

[Revilo]

It’s completely normal for a country to celebrate its head of state. I have seen the monarch’s portrait in plenty of Council chambers.

 

[AlterEgo]

It’s completely normal for a country to celebrate its head of state. I have seen the monarch’s portrait in plenty of Council chambers.

Indeed, France has 50,000 portraits of Macron in its public buildings.

 

[GusB]

Perhaps they could save a bit by distributing a digital portrait, have someone print off a copy locally, then take a couple of quid out of the petty cash to purchase a cheap frame from Home Bargains. Job done!

 

[tbtc]

£8 million sounds like a lot of money to you and me but to government budgets it's nothing.

Really a sinking fund for something smaller than a rounding error in government spending?

I agree with the above two comments

I’m a Republican (having one family rule over the rest of us beings to Fairy Tales, or medieval history), but what’s eight million quid between tens of millions of us? A Freddo each? It’s an irrelevant sum

I mean, I’d rather that the money was spent on me personally, but it’s not like the government are blowing the entire Welfare budget on this, eight million pounds barely pays for a couple of feasibility studies for the proposed reopening of rural branch lines these days!

Criticise the monarchy all you want, I know I do, but don’t pretend that eight million pounds was a deal breaker on any other government expenses, they probably spend more than that each year on paper clips

 

[nlogax]

but what’s eight million quid between tens of millions of us? A Freddo each? It’s an irrelevant sum

I agree. It could be argued that it may not be worthwhile considering Charles is 74 years old but it doesn't feel like there's much to get worked up about here.

 

[Meerkat]

How much is that per picture, because you would only save £8M if you left QE2 up or left that bit of wall blank.
The picture, like the person, represents the nation. In a public building it demonstrates that they have the authority of the state. I like it as a concept - politicians come and go, the civil servants serve the nation, embodied by a King/Queen.
I think it matters most to the military, who I reckon appreciate having a figurehead boss to serve who isn't a politician.

 

[greatkingrat]

I agree. It could be argued that it may not be worthwhile considering Charles is 74 years old but it doesn't feel like there's much to get worked up about here.

Maybe they should print double-sided pictures, with William on the back, then when Charles goes, you just have to turn the picture round!

 

[duncanp]

I think it matters most to the military, who I reckon appreciate having a figurehead boss to serve who isn't a politician.

It isn't just the military.

I appreciate having a head of state who isn't a politician.

 

[swt_passenger]

Going back to the original point about such photos being a sign of a dictatorship, I think I was somewhere in east Africa in the 80s and every business including small shops and bars etc did have to display a prominent picture of the president. Would that possibly have been in Kenya under Arup Moi?

 

[Meerkat]

It isn't just the military.

I appreciate having a head of state who isn't a politician.

Sure, but the military actually work for the King. He is 'the boss'

 

[lachlan]

I agree. It could be argued that it may not be worthwhile considering Charles is 74 years old but it doesn't feel like there's much to get worked up about here.

Half of a new railway station. Sure per person it’s a small amount but it’s still an unnecessary expense and isn’t a good look when libraries are closing, bus services being withdrawn, etc. i wouldn’t say it’s a massive deal but I’d rather the money was spent on more important things.

 

[adc82140]

If we were a republic, we'd likely be debating about portraits of a President Boris Johnson now. I'd sooner go for the man who talk to plants.

 

[102 fan]

Would the same amount of bile be directed at a Presidental picture?

Remember the golden rule, they who have the gold make the rules!