The condition of the stone-work on sections of Buckingham Palace is concerning and deplorable. Richard Kay has written an article about it today in his column.
This has been a gradual process over many decades. Buckingham Palace, unlike Sandringham and Balmoral, is a State building; and, consequently, ought to be cared for by the State.
Is the Government seeking to extract some sort of "deal" from the Royal Family, whereby the Palace is kept open more often to paying visitors? Is State assistance conditional on some sort of concessions?
Doesn't the State look after other historic royal palaces, like the Tower of London and Hampton Court? Since Buckingham Palace is still inhabited, its preservation ought to be doubly important.
I'm sure that our national museums and galleries are well cared for. Surely Buckingham Palace, renowned the world over, deserves similar attention?
3 comments :
Or it'll end up like Ballygawley House...
...perish the thought.
They should flog it off. Some Russian would buy it. They could all move into the Queen Mother's old
Post a Comment