One rule for the royals’ finances, another for their subjects’
|
Version 0 of 1. Palace privacy | Ambiguous school reports | Raab’s budgie smugglers | Sudan evacuation | Local elections You report that “Buckingham Palace … has a policy of refusing to comment on the personal finances of royals, insisting they should ‘remain private, as they do for any other individual’” (Revealed: King Charles’s private fortune estimated at £1.8bn, 20 April). If they feel so strongly about being just like everyone else, could they please publish the wills of Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth, and also pay inheritance tax, as everyone else must over a certain amount?Alice HudsonChâteauneuf-du-Faou, France One-word pupil reports would not be new (Letters, 24 April). Years ago, a colleague used to write the single word “trying” for parents to interpret as they could. This was only surpassed in ambiguity by my late brother’s art report at the age of about 14: “A natural primitive.”Jennifer HighwoodSwallowfield, Berkshire I love reading John Crace’s politics sketches, but on 21 April he went too far. I now can’t get the frightful image of Dominic Raab in sequinned budgie smugglers out of my head. I’m on a two-week waiting list to see my GP for anti-emetics.Liz SperlingThornton-Cleveleys, Lancashire Whatever happened to women and children first (UK armed forces evacuate British diplomats from Sudan after threats, 23 April)? Is this the new equality? Diplomats before subjects? Something is wrong.Richard GibbsSnettisham, Norfolk In this former Tory stronghold, I have yet to see a single “Vote Conservative” poster displayed in the run-up to the local elections. Have they all changed their allegiance or are they ashamed to admit their voting intentions?Alison HallumTonbridge, Kent Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section. |