Sir Lewis Hamilton?

[knighty]

Sir Lewis Hamilton?......

So, if Hamilton wins his 4th world drivers championship, will he get Knighted?......surely he will, I think he deserves it, Like Jenson said, he can be a bit of a weirdo at times, but his achievements behind the wheel are beyond question, when Lewis turns up to a track with his A-game, everyone else is fighting for 2nd........even Lauda is now gushing about him.

[GregUK]

Dear God, please not ......

[S griffin]

Wait till he’s in his 40s

[GregUK]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Wait till he’s in his 40s

Please wait until I'm older enough not to care anymore.

And only then after some of the lifeblood volunteers that make our sport happen have themselves been gonged up.

[VIVA GT]

I just hope that regular poster Bauble is suffering from a broken computer at the moment and that it's not mended until this thread is off the first page of the forum.
If the old boy spots this thread title he'll be needing to quadruple his medication!

[RWill2073]

Do brits still care what the "royal family" is up to?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

Do brits still care what the "royal family" is up to?

What do you mean by this? Honours in the UK are decided by a committee that meets in Downing Street, and most are politically based.

For example, Jackie Stewart's knighthood was granted because of his charity work and work to bring about racing safety as much as it was for his racing exploits.

The Queen's only real involvement in the granting of honours is in the choice of certain people to join certain Orders, which are always limited in the numbers that can be appointed.

[RWill2073]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

What do you mean by this? Honours in the UK are decided by a committee that meets in Downing Street, and most are politically based.

For example, Jackie Stewart's knighthood was granted because of his charity work and work to bring about racing safety as much as it was for his racing exploits.

The Queen's only real involvement in the granting of honours is in the choice of certain people to join certain Orders, which are always limited in the numbers that can be appointed.

My fault. I assumed it was mainly the royal family deciding that stuff.

But I have been wondering lately, do people still look up to the royal family?

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

For example, Jackie Stewart's knighthood was granted because of his charity work and work to bring about racing safety as much as it was for his racing exploits.

On that basis, Hamilton could get one for his contribution to raising the price of gold.

[GregUK]

Originally Posted by Tim Falce

On that basis, Hamilton could get one for his contribution to raising the price of gold.

Yes, LH seems flagrantly to breach the regulations every time he races.

ISC, Appendix L, Chapter II, Art 2.2.1

It's as bad as breaching track limits!

[E.B]

Originally Posted by GregUK

Yes, LH seems flagrantly to breach the regulations every time he races.

ISC, Appendix L, Chapter II, Art 2.2.1

It's as bad as breaching track limits!

Indeed, I recall a dozen years or so ago Christian Klien and Tony Liuzzi were ordered to remove their (ear) piercings and jewellery pre race. I recall Liuzzi joking about getting a tattoo instead of an eyebrow piercing on the grounds of they can't ask him to remove that.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by RWill2073

My fault. I assumed it was mainly the royal family deciding that stuff.

There are many misconceptions about the British monarchy, and no she/ they don't chose who the recipients are except in very, very exceptional cases. And contrary to the myths about her, Mrs Queen also sits on the throne just like us, and possibly takes a magazine with her to read in the little room while contemplating her navel.

In truth, the Monarchy have virtually no power whatsoever, and are mainly decorative. They are very good at shaking hands with people whom they are likely to never meet again, and Brenda, Mrs Queen, signs a lot of papers from the elected government that are put in front of her - well, delivered to her daily in a red briefcase (just like all the ministers in the government who carry all their official stuff in red briefcases called Red Boxes).

And contrary to popular opinion, the Royals no longer get paid by the British taxpayers; well, certainly not in a direct fashion. They are paid a fixed percentage of the taxed income generated by their estates and businesses, most of which are very profitable. So for example, the more visitors that go to Buck House, so the Royals get paid more. However, it must be noted that in the last audited figures for 2015, the Royals had a really successful year and so received a bumper pay-out, some of which was actually returned unspent to the Treasury at the year end.

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

And contrary to the myths about her, Mrs Queen also sits on the throne just like us, and possibly takes a magazine with her to read in the little room while contemplating her navel.

I remember when I used to deliver skips to the palace daily, Liz would quite often come down in her dressing gown wearing an old worn out pair of slippers with a cup of tea for me. Go in the royal stables though and it's a different world with all the carriages and top class tack with everything immaculately polished and clean.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

And contrary to popular opinion, the Royals no longer get paid by the British taxpayers; well, certainly not in a direct fashion. They are paid a fixed percentage of the taxed income generated by their estates and businesses, most of which are very profitable. So for example, the more visitors that go to Buck House, so the Royals get paid more. However, it must be noted that in the last audited figures for 2015, the Royals had a really successful year and so received a bumper pay-out, some of which was actually returned unspent to the Treasury at the year end.

You'll have to excuse my ignorance on the subject - I generally know very little about the Royals, and certainly not as much as you know!

But isn't it a lot more complex than that? Didn't the Queen get a massive pay rise, which essentially means less of that money goes to the government, to fund a refurbishment? (not a great source, granted!) Being able to manipulate your own tax rate like that (and therefore what you contribute to the government) seems a bit iffy.

I'm not anti-monarchy (or pro, I'm not that fussed really - it seems harmless and kinda nice and historical to me), but I imagine if I stopped paying the government set taxes that I have to pay, and used that money to paint my living room, I'd have a court date pretty soon. Normally I'm not fussed what the family are up to, but that one did raise an eyebrow here.

[FIRE]

Does it matter? Don't understand the British obsession with these titles.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

But isn't it a lot more complex than that? Didn't the Queen get a massive pay rise, which essentially means less of that money goes to the government, to fund a refurbishment? (not a great source, granted!) Being able to manipulate your own tax rate like that (and therefore what you contribute to the government) seems a bit iffy.

That piece is so disingenuous, it smacks of both envy and certainly bias. I only needed to read the first couple of sentences to know that it was highly misleading, so I stopped reading it.

Fact is that an agreement was reached that the Civil List, as it was then known as, was discontinued and in it's stead was created a new formula, which was that the Monarch would receive a fixed percentage of income generated by the Royal Family's businesses, including the Duchy of Cornwall and all the royal farms, etc. They also pay income tax on their income plus all other taxes that us mere mortals pay.

However, as far as Buck House is concerned, it belongs to the State, that's you and I, and not to the Royal Family. We, through our elected parliamentarians, agreed that the Palace would act as the London home, and head office as well, for the Monarch. Truth be known, Brenda doesn't even like staying in Buck House which is why she spends most of her time when not officiating in London in Windsor, which the Royal Family actually do own. As far as Buck House is concerned, it requires massive renovation work, and it was Parliament that decided that they need to spend those millions on protecting the UK's asset. I doubt that Her Maj actually cares very much, and Brian, assuming he accedes to the throne, has already stated that he doesn't wish to live in the place.

In a nutshell, the public purse is paying to protect a public asset.

[Adam43]

Bringing it back to someone who is in an overly privileged position. Getting four titles in any sport does not constitute a reason for a knighthood. If they use that position to promote their sport, their country and help others then a knighthood can be a nice, and to be truly deserving, unintended consequence of success in a sport.

Anyway, as the US hasn't been part of the commonwealth for a long time now I don't think Hamilton qualifies?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Tim Falce

I remember when I used to deliver skips to the palace daily, Liz would quite often come down in her dressing gown wearing an old worn out pair of slippers with a cup of tea for me. Go in the royal stables though and it's a different world with all the carriages and top class tack with everything immaculately polished and clean.

Most of them are pretty decent people.

[Adam43]

Most people are. Apart from when talking about Verstappen on the internet. I assume the Queen doesn't do this.

[MGDavid]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Bringing it back to someone who is in an overly privileged position. Getting four titles in any sport does not constitute a reason for a knighthood. If they use that position to promote their sport, their country and help others then a knighthood can be a nice, and to be truly deserving, unintended consequence of success in a sport.

Anyway, as the US hasn't been part of the commonwealth for a long time now I don't think Hamilton qualifies?

Getting 4 titles while wearing the Union Jack and being proud of it does deserve some sort of recognition.
I take it from your last sentence that you're a hater?

[wnut]

Originally Posted by MGDavid

Getting 4 titles while wearing the Union Jack and being proud of it does deserve some sort of recognition.
I take it from your last sentence that you're a hater?

wholly fitting that a Mercedes Benz ambassador should have a knighthood, excellent stuff!

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by MGDavid

Getting 4 titles while wearing the Union Jack and being proud of it does deserve some sort of recognition.
I take it from your last sentence that you're a hater?

No, I'm a joker. Very different.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by wnut

wholly fitting that a Mercedes Benz ambassador should have a knighthood, excellent stuff!

Not quite sure why working for Mercedes-Benz for part of your career should rule you out of having a knighthood, or seen as negative. Is it just MB you have a problem with, all German, or all foreign companies?

It shouldn't rule out the one from Stevenage, or indeed any recognition of those working in Brackley or Brixworth.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by wnut

wholly fitting that a Mercedes Benz ambassador should have a knighthood, excellent stuff!

Coulthard and Hamilton both have MBEs, and are both Mercedes brand ambassadors so not sure why it's an issue?

[Adam43]

Traitors, both of them, they should be locked up in the tower.