Again, there's nothing like a bit of truth to balance the scales, thanks for the clarification. The money that will be brought into the British Economy on the back of such a Royal Wedding will drown anything paid out for the event itself.

I might be wrong here... but aren't William and Catherine also tax payers and not only by what they spend, by way of PAYE... you know, paying tax on what they earn due to them working for a living!! :spin:

Apart from that, as I mentioned earlier though. It means everyone will be kept happy. Those who want to moan about it, will have something to moan about, those who want to enjoy and celebrate it, will do so. Every one is happy!

Still think there will be a few names on the guest list that will be interesting when the time comes! Yeeehaa !

We were all happily dicsussing Ben and his ITN interview to give his views on Wills and Kate's engagement etc; :) And suddenly it gone off track onto the wedding which is a way off from the engagement and taxes somewhere earlier in the thread :conf: What has that to do with Ben's interview anyway? :conf: How did the thread get taken off track to that :conf:

I suggest all of you get back on track or i'll close this :) Also stop with the tit-for-tat digs at each other.

Exactly right. I'm sick of hearing people whingeing about the Royal Family when you consider what great ambassadors they are for this country, and the tourism trade they bring. When Heads of State visit a Royal reception is the most coveted invitation - I think they are excellent value for money. The Royal Wedding will give the economy a massive boost apart from lifting all our spirits amidst all the doom and gloom.

Eeehhhh? See posts 75, (yours), post 77 (mine) and then post 78 (LauraC's) which brought in the taxes and lead to it going off topic. In fairness: given that threads evolve, an interview with Ben, concerning a Royal engagement would inevitably lead to discussing who may be invited to the wedding - in which Ben,the person being interviewed was also mentioned may have been considered as a guest - which is what posts 75 and 77 were about.

but back strictly on topic. The interview that Ben was asked his opinion of. Makes me wonder why they did choose Ben, and not some other random person who would also have been at St Andrew's university with the Royal Couple. After all, there would have literally have been hundreds of students who would have come into contact with the couple. Does Ben have more than a 'loose' connection to the Royals than we may know about.

Sorry then, if it was mine as well. I should know better. Will stay firmly on topic now :)

I don't know why out of many Ben was asked :) But I'm glad he was :)

Well said. The Royal Family bring so much money to this country through tourism and the wedding will bring a lot of money for London.

I think Ben will always be discreet about the Royals as it is frowned upon to talk without the nod;)

Which possibly is why Ben didn't make much of a mention about his association with the couple on Big Brother, but given that he was sought out, from the hundreds of other students who would have been there at the same time- does give rise to WHY Ben was chosen to be interviewed! ;)

I suspect there is more to Ben being asked to give an official comment on the engagement, and more to why he was SELECTED to do so, than we may be aware of. :)

Agree.:hugesmile:

hmm I think you are on to something there, he does have a look of prince charles (ears) and Camilla (hair) could he be their secret love child?

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgur...ed=0CDUQ9QEwBw

Nice theory, but he's far too good looking to be a spawn of those two.

I know what Prince Charles and Camilla look like. ;) As for ears,..... if anything, there's a certain Mario who has ears that Prince Charles would be proud of!! LOL

You're notion is a funny one. Complete rubbish, but funny nevertheless. Camilla's hair goes in the wrong direction ;)

But let's get strictly back on topic. I have no doubt that there is more to Ben being selected for interview other than him a 'nod in the passing'. Wouldn't surprise me at all.

no ben and Chales have very similar ears except bens are slightly larger at least one of them is :hugesmile:

Sorry, what has that to do with the topic of the thread - you know, about Ben's interview? :conf:

that he might be the love child of Charles and Camilla because he couldn't possibly be asked for an opinion because he's posh and went to the same school as William and was on a reality tv show, it must be something more! you know...

I believe the thrust was less to do with that and more to do with the fact that Ben may possibly have much more of an invovlement in knowing the couple at St Andrews, and that is why he was invited to comment on the engagement. :dance:

Ben was name dropping all throughout bb if there was more to it than a nod we would all know

It's a whole different story when it comes to revealing too much that one might know about members of the Royal family. ;) It's called protocol and good breeding.

the interview was just shown again on ITV2. :) Nice to see a re-run of it.

erm his gossip about knowing William involved him pulling his hat down when riding back on his bike after spending the night with Carly
Massy-Birch, you could hardly call that discretion and good breeding more like curtain twitching

You really need to accept it, Ben was asked to comment on this engagement, because he had a connection, whether you like it or not. Rubbish it all you want, but the truth is there for all to see - Ben was deemed important enough to be asked, that's it in a nutshell.

[QUOTE=lauraC;3922830]he nodded at him once or twice, it would be like asking my aunty for a quote on how she feels about the death of diana because she shook her hand once.
Kate is Kate not Catherine so it is pretentious to call her Catherine when noone else does. And when william was at univercity ben said he was dating someone else, ben commented on that, try them nuggets![/QUOTE]

You do have an interesting turn of phrase - even 'try those nuggets' would be a suggestion I had never actually heard before - it is interesting and extremely unusual - I rather like it - a 'different' turn of phrase - I am all for innovation in the language

But back to the main thrust of the thread - the only reason I referred to William and Catherine in the first place was that it had been mentioned quite a few times at that point that from now on she would be known as Catherine rather than the shorter version, so when the time comes she will be Princess Catherine and ultimately presumably Queen Catherine - there was no more to it than that - and so it is far from pretentious - just factual as they are going to use her full given name officially from now on - it won't take all that much getting used to - it is not really all that unexpected - and it makes sense to most people, I think

:xyxwave:

Ben being quoted in the daily mail today talking about Kate's change in voice when interviewed on tv.

Both Diana and Margaret Thatcher had voice coaches.

:xyxwave: