It's a very weird thing to put out. Especially with the stuff before about the Sandringham walk and security etc. It makes no sense, apart from as some kind of self justification, because he knows it makes him look bad he's trying to style it out as some kind of exposing breaches in security. There is a woman speaking too who says ' I've seen you outside my house' is she just a random neighbour? William is in the right here I think, but he just sounds so odd!
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Does the Royal Family have to have security everywhere they go, or like this occasion they have to be on 24 HR call? What about if the kids go to birthday parties, do the hosts parents have to get vetted & protection team take the kids......what a very sad life to live 
The woman sounded like Kate. I think she was backing William up when he said this man was stalking them. I can’t believe he carried on filming when he’d been asked not to, regardless of whether it’s a private or public path it was obvious William didn’t want to be filmed & was furious his children had been filmed. The man filming sounds & looks like he was trying to provoke a reaction, he’s a complete hole imo!
Well done Will, he sounded livid.
'Don't you people ever learn' poor Will
'Don't you people ever learn' poor Will
I think so, unless they are on protected grounds ie the estates, palaces and so on where there are naturally going to be 24/7 armed guards. When they go anywhere it must be vetted and sweeped. Like US Secret Service.Does the Royal Family have to have security everywhere they go, or like this occasion they have to be on 24 HR call? What about if the kids go to birthday parties, do the hosts parents have to get vetted & protection team take the kids......what a very sad life to live
I don’t know what the photographers agenda is (and the silly little teaser at the end makes it clear he has one) but like others have said, I don’t see how you can’t be on Williams side. Yes as royals there’s a public interest in their family but they give more than their fair share, we see the kids multiple times a year. They have a right to go on a bike ride on a Saturday and not be followed. The way William is speaking about the kids it makes me think this was a little more than a man taking some sneaky photos, it sounds like the photographer was following them and probably scared the kids- what kids wouldn’t be freaked out by a man following them down a quiet lane taking their photos?!
I think it’s easy for us to forget that they have to deal with tit like this, especially as most of the sly pap shots never see the light of day it’s easy to think they don’t get bothered by them all the time.
I found that video quite hard to watch actually, William is clearly very upset and it sounds like Kate in the background saying she saw the photographer by their house too.
I think it’s easy for us to forget that they have to deal with tit like this, especially as most of the sly pap shots never see the light of day it’s easy to think they don’t get bothered by them all the time.
I found that video quite hard to watch actually, William is clearly very upset and it sounds like Kate in the background saying she saw the photographer by their house too.
It kinda makes sense now when Harry said on Oprah 'my dad & brother, they don't get to leave'.......maybe that's one of the reasons for the fall out, William & his family have to be subjected to this sort of behaviour like Princess Di & just got to take it, there's no getaway.
Absolutely bent as duck, the bloody lot of them. 
www.theguardian.com
“A Scottish government memo obtained by the Guardian reveals that “it is almost certain” draft laws have been secretly changed to secure the Queen’s approval.”
“ A Guardian investigation last year revealed the Queen’s consent procedure had been used by the monarch in recent decades to privately lobby for changes to proposed UK legislation. In Scotland, where the procedure is known as crown consent, research by the Guardian identified at least 67 instances in which Scottish bills were vetted by the Queen.”
“Last year, the Queen’s lawyers secretly lobbied Scottish ministers to change a draft law to exempt her private land from a major initiative to cut carbon emissions. The exemption meant the Queen was the only private landowner in Scotland who was not required to facilitate the construction of pipelines to heat buildings using renewable energy.
In July 2021, the Guardian published evidence showing the Queen had vetted at least 67 Scottish acts, including legislation dealing with planning laws, property taxation, and protections from tenants”
“It appears as if, with the willing compliance of Scottish ministers, the crown has maintained a back channel to sneak amendments into legislation in such a way as to leave no way for the public or their parliamentary representatives to ever know that changes had been requested or made.
“This is an astonishing overturning of the widely held principle that the monarch does not legislate for her own benefit.”
Queen’s secret influence on laws revealed in Scottish government memo
Exclusive: Internal memo admits ‘it is almost certain’ laws altered to secure monarch’s consent
www.theguardian.com
“A Scottish government memo obtained by the Guardian reveals that “it is almost certain” draft laws have been secretly changed to secure the Queen’s approval.”
“ A Guardian investigation last year revealed the Queen’s consent procedure had been used by the monarch in recent decades to privately lobby for changes to proposed UK legislation. In Scotland, where the procedure is known as crown consent, research by the Guardian identified at least 67 instances in which Scottish bills were vetted by the Queen.”
“Last year, the Queen’s lawyers secretly lobbied Scottish ministers to change a draft law to exempt her private land from a major initiative to cut carbon emissions. The exemption meant the Queen was the only private landowner in Scotland who was not required to facilitate the construction of pipelines to heat buildings using renewable energy.
In July 2021, the Guardian published evidence showing the Queen had vetted at least 67 Scottish acts, including legislation dealing with planning laws, property taxation, and protections from tenants”
“It appears as if, with the willing compliance of Scottish ministers, the crown has maintained a back channel to sneak amendments into legislation in such a way as to leave no way for the public or their parliamentary representatives to ever know that changes had been requested or made.
“This is an astonishing overturning of the widely held principle that the monarch does not legislate for her own benefit.”
The monarch is perfectly entitled to request amendments to legislation affecting the monarch's property or public powers. Parliament still has to vote it through for it to become law, so legislators can't complain if they don't scrutinise proposed statute closely enoughAbsolutely bent as duck, the bloody lot of them.
Queen’s secret influence on laws revealed in Scottish government memo
Exclusive: Internal memo admits ‘it is almost certain’ laws altered to secure monarch’s consent
“A Scottish government memo obtained by the Guardian reveals that “it is almost certain” draft laws have been secretly changed to secure the Queen’s approval.”
“ A Guardian investigation last year revealed the Queen’s consent procedure had been used by the monarch in recent decades to privately lobby for changes to proposed UK legislation. In Scotland, where the procedure is known as crown consent, research by the Guardian identified at least 67 instances in which Scottish bills were vetted by the Queen.”
“Last year, the Queen’s lawyers secretly lobbied Scottish ministers to change a draft law to exempt her private land from a major initiative to cut carbon emissions. The exemption meant the Queen was the only private landowner in Scotland who was not required to facilitate the construction of pipelines to heat buildings using renewable energy.
In July 2021, the Guardian published evidence showing the Queen had vetted at least 67 Scottish acts, including legislation dealing with planning laws, property taxation, and protections from tenants”
“It appears as if, with the willing compliance of Scottish ministers, the crown has maintained a back channel to sneak amendments into legislation in such a way as to leave no way for the public or their parliamentary representatives to ever know that changes had been requested or made.
“This is an astonishing overturning of the widely held principle that the monarch does not legislate for her own benefit.”
If I ever saw a royal, politician or indeed any celebrity out in public, just doing an activity of day to day life, I wouldn’t dream of photographing, let alone filming them. It’s an invasion of privacy, and quite frankly very rude!
Maybe if you stopped tugging your forelock quite so hard you would have read the article properly.
“ the crown has maintained a back channel to sneak amendments into legislation in such a way as to leave no way for the public or their parliamentary representatives to ever know that changes had been requested or made.”
No it hasn't, if MPs dislike the legislation after reading it they can vote it down. Even if changed the legislation has to still pass the House of Commons and House of Lords
Well thats all well and good, if she doesn't then complain about people ' saying but not doing' at Climate change conferences in countries where she has demanded exemptions from environmental legislation! Because it sounds like she expects other people to 'do' so that she and her helicopter and range rover loving family can carry on as normal!
Just my imagination or are the UK press ignoring this story
Attachments
I hope so. The idiot obviously had an agenda so I hope he doesn’t get his 15 minutes!
While I don’t think it’s ethical for the monarch to try to get changes in that benefit the crown or them personally, I have to agree. If parliament thinks it sounds good after reading it doesn’t matter who drafted the last version. It’s their job to read it, think about it and make an educated vote. It’s completely irrelevant of Mr. Smith or BP came up with it. It’s content is what matters. When the only problem with it is, that BP wanted it - that’s a weak fundament to vote it down. The monarch should stay out of it though- especially when it’s only to benefit them.
But the story is pretty much old news. We heard it all last year. Couldn’t they find something new?
Corrupt and dishonest behaviour from a HoS is always relevant though.
I'm actually on William's side for this one. He has had a lot of tit to deal with since the day his mother was chased to death in that Paris tunnel. Yes the driver was drunk but the press are definitely not blameless. William clearly has a rocky relationship with the media and has multiple times asked for privacy for his children. He and Catherine release photos on various occasions and we see the children multiple times a year at various events. I think asking journalists to keep away from their private home is more than fair.
I suspect they are keeping away because they know he looks like a stalker.
- Status