Wednesday, 13 November 2024
August 21, 2024: State Opening of Parliament 2024 / Britain’s new leader Keir Starmer is determined to reform the archaic House of Lords — but it could come with a hidden price.
The last
of the Lords
Britain’s
new leader Keir Starmer is determined to reform the archaic House of Lords —
but it could come with a hidden price.
The
hereditary peerage is an anachronism which Britain's newly-elected Labour
government says it's determined to end. |
August 21, 2024 4:00 am CET
By Esther Webber
LONDON — “I was frightened,” says Hugh Trenchard, as he
recalls being told as a boy that he would one day take his father’s place in
the U.K.’s House of Lords.
Trenchard is speaking over a fine-china cup of coffee in the
British parliament’s oak-paneled Peers’ Guest Room. Visitors may enter such
spaces only if accompanied by a member of the House of Lords.
Nobody here refers to Trenchard as “Hugh.” To staff, he is
“my Lord;” in correspondence “the Viscount Trenchard.”
The moniker was earned when Trenchard’s father died in 1987
and Trenchard inherited the viscount title. The peerage had been created in
1930 for his grandfather, a former head of the air force, by King George V.
“I remember I didn’t like being ‘the honorable,’” he says,
referring to the courtesy title bestowed upon the sons of viscounts within
Britain’s archaic aristocracy.
“I just wanted to be the same as the other boys. Children
don’t like being different, do they?”
But this accident of birth entitles Trenchard to help make
Britain’s laws. Indeed, he has voted on legislation and sat in the U.K.
parliament’s unelected upper chamber for most of his life — one of 92 remaining
“hereditary peers” who inherited their seats directly from their fathers.
Democracy does not get a look-in.
It’s an anachronism which Britain’s newly-elected Labour
government says it’s determined to end.
But House of Lords reform — described by the political
historian Peter Hennessy as “the Bermuda triangle of politics” — is a
notoriously difficult task. And new Prime Minister Keir Starmer could get more
than he bargained for as he takes it on.
Unfinished
revolution
Starmer is picking up a baton last dropped by his Labour
predecessor Tony Blair back at the turn of the millennium.
When Blair swept away the vast majority of hereditary peers
as part of a major Lords shakeup in 1999, he boosted the number of so-called
life peers to replace them.
Just like the hereditaries, these lawmakers receive a
permanent place in the Lords without a democratic vote, but are hand-picked by
senior politicians and then rubber-stamped by the monarch.
Essentially, they are political appointees — and crucially,
they do not inherit or pass on their title when they die.
Yet Blair’s was an unfinished revolution. He struck a deal
with more traditionally-minded Conservatives to let 92 aristocrats keep their
seats in the upper chamber. The remaining 800-or-so hereditary peers around
Britain who missed out on seats now jostle it out for limited places when one
of their existing number dies or retires.
Blair’s intention was always to do away with the hereditary
peers eventually — but no prime minister since has had the stomach to take on
the challenge of such thorny constitutional reform.
Successive attempts since the Blair years have foundered.
And even the current, reinvigorated Labour Party — riding high after a
landslide election win in July — has scaled back its ambitions since Starmer
vowed two years ago to abolish the unelected Lords altogether.
Starmer’s election-winning manifesto pledged to get rid of
the remaining hereditary peers in parliament, impose a mandatory retirement age
of 80 for life peers and hold a wider consultation on the future of the
chamber. Yet only the first measure made it into Labour’s legislative program
for its first year in office.
Many peers themselves acknowledge they are on borrowed time.
John Attlee, whose earldom was created for his grandfather,
the Labour prime minister Clement Attlee, admits: “Like every hereditary peer
since 1911, I thought the system would change before it was my turn.”
‘Studs
first’
Part of the reason it has proved so difficult to
reconstitute the overpopulated and anachronistic upper chamber, however, is
that while almost everyone says this should happen, hardly anyone can agree on
how to do it.
The opposition Conservatives have not yet adopted an
official position on Labour’s reform plans, though the party’s shadow leader in
the Lords, Nicholas True, greeted the proposals with deep ambivalence in a
debate last month.
Those opposed to the idea — which, unsurprisingly, includes
most hereditary peers — complain the plan is incomplete, partisan (because most
hereditary peers are Tory) and gives too much power to the prime minister.
Conservative peer Thomas Galloway Dunlop du Roy de Blicquy
Galbraith, better known as Lord Strathclyde, is a former leader of the Lords
who helped secure the 1999 deal to save a rump of hereditaries.
He is no fan of Labour’s drive to shake things up. “As a
result of this, for the first time ever the House of Lords will be a creature
of statute appointed by the prime minister, and I am very uncomfortable with
that,” he said.
Jim Bethell, another Conservative former minister who sits
in the Lords as an hereditary peer, said: “To go in studs-first from the outset
in order to try to improve the electoral maths of this government is a shame,
and marks a change in tone in the relationship between the Commons and the
Lords.”
Even within the House of Lords itself, it’s hard to find
anyone willing to defend the hereditary principle. But there are deep
misgivings at the idea of a wholly-appointed chamber, particularly with a more
fundamental overhaul punted into the long grass.
Bad
blood
Regardless of the viscounts’ grumbling, Labour’s bill is all
but guaranteed to pass, thanks to a longstanding convention that the House of
Lords cannot block a government manifesto promise.
In a sign of the party’s seriousness about taking on the
thorny issue, respected constitutional affairs expert Jess Sargeant has moved
from the Labour Together Starmerite think tank, to a civil service role within
the Cabinet Office to lead on Lords reform.
Yet Labour is being put on notice. Several peers warned that
expending time and good will on expunging the hereditaries would severely limit
the appetite on all sides to execute Labour’s more sweeping Lords reforms.
“These constitutional things are always more complicated
than they first seem,” Strathclyde said. “I don’t doubt if they really want it,
it will happen. But it may have an impact on other bills.”
A cross bench member of the Lords, granted anonymity to
speak frankly, predicted axing the aristocrats would “cost the government a lot
of time and cause an awful lot of bad feeling, which might threaten other
things they want to do.”
Labour figures insist they are not intending to use
abolition of the hereditary peers as window dressing and say they are committed
to further reform of the Lords.
One person involved in drawing up the plans pointed out that
Lords reform is attractive to the new government for a number of reasons: it is
popular, cost-free, a unifying cause for the Labour Party and contains a
pleasing whiff of class warfare.
But above all that, they said it chimes with Starmer’s
desire to rebuild trust in politics. “It’s not just about changing the people
who are operating the system. Some changes to the system are needed.”
Time may be running out for Trenchard and his cohort — but
don’t expect them to go quietly.
Emilio Casalicchio contributed reporting.
Tuesday, 12 November 2024
From Teddy Boys to the Tardy Book: What Eton was really like in the Good Old Days
Features
From Teddy
Boys to the Tardy Book: What Eton was really like in the Good Old Days
Nicky
Haslam, who attended Eton in the Fifties, recalls the days of beaks,
fag-masters and dames
By Tatler
13 August
2018
Eton in the
Fifties
https://www.tatler.com/article/obsoletonians-eton-in-the-fifties
We were a
fairly uniform lot, the intake to Eton in the first years of the 1950s. Echoes
– even visions – of the war shaped our youthful minds. Bomb damage still
blighted cities, tattered blackouts still flapped on buildings, rationing was
still in force. The angular modernity of the Festival of Britain had barely
pierced our teen consciousness. Perhaps, assimilated from our elders, we hoped
against hope that the future would return to a version of a not-yet-forgotten
past.
So there we
were, fresh out of boys’ school, overawed by the size and splendour and age of
our new surroundings, by a sense of self, of horizons and of space – your own
room, from day one, after regimented, dingy confines in sandy Surrey. One might
be scared or lonely, miss Nanny or one’s dog, but soon came a visceral
challenge, to grapple with emerging adulthood.
We quickly
learned the rules, or rather customs. We dutifully prepared our Saying Lesson
before Lights Out, we got up at seven for Early School, went to Absence (in
fact, presence), then Chapel. We ate revolting Boys Dinner in the allotted 20
minutes before doing battle on the Playing Fields of Sixpenny, or dragged
padded grey-flannel shorts down to Boats. We noted the swagger of sixth-form
boys, seemingly wildly grown-up, and were careful to do nothing that might
single one out to the gods of Pop. We skeltered to Boy-Calls, we skivvied for
Fag-Masters, we cleaned their Corps boots, we flattered Tutors, we oiled up to
dames, we ‘capped’ all beaks. And we were drunk with relief on graduating from
Remove to Upper School.
What all
this taught us was to be polite, have good manners, to show respect. Even so
vast an institution was essentially intimate: we formed a mutual bond, didn’t
feel superior, although we scoffed slightly at Tugs (scholarship boys), jealous
of their cleverness rather than snobbism. This bonding was essential as there
was almost no recreation besides sports – except, thank God, the Drawing
Schools. There were no foreigners, though one raven-haired beauty was rumoured
to be half-Egyptian. ‘Crumbs! Egyptian!’ we whispered as he passed. There was
no swimming pool, no theatre (concerts, or plays, usually Shakespeare, were
desultory affairs in School Hall), no cinema, no medicines (my dame believed in
a scant thimble of brandy as a cure-all), no cameras or Coca-Cola, no radios,
TV or gramophones, and most certainly no drinking or smoking – sackable
offences.
These
privations weren’t exclusively because we were at Eton. There wasn’t, anywhere,
pop music, nor young singing idols (though we knew girls who swooned at Johnny
Ray and later jiggled about to Bill Haley), no new humour, no dark Nouvelle
Vague films, no Going Abroad, put paid to by a £50 take-abroad limit: the
theatre was Anna Neagle comedies, artists were in Paris; nightclubs were for
one’s parents’ friends, smooching to Edmundo Ros; clothes hadn’t changed in
decades, jeans were unheard of. There was no street life we yearned to emulate
(though Teddy boys did have a certain allure), no social level to step down to.
Drugs were unknown; Du Maurier cork-tips made one dizzy; whisky in quantity
unexpectedly made one sick, putting a sticky end to that fumble with the deb we
were trying to delight. Thus we had no good reason to believe holidays would be
a panacea of excitement, just more huntin’/shootin’/fishin’ and going to the
circus at Christmas, along with finding out that we were even more tongue-tied
with girls, Nanny wasn’t indispensable, and your sister had adopted your dog.
And beyond?
There was no gap year. Instead National Service loomed, then Oxford or
Cambridge beckoned the brainier, a Guards regiment the rest, and – to the very
few – the unmentionable thrall of a more lilac life in an almost club-like gay
milieu. For four or five years, Eton consumed our whole being. But some of us
understood that we had a lifetime ahead in which to roll, and rock, in the
gutter.
Monday, 11 November 2024
A Gentleman’s London, Episode Twentyone: E.B. Meyrowitz
Heritage
Rich History
Since 1875
https://ebmeyrowitz.com/pages/about-us
Emil Bruno
Meyrowitz, born on the 20th October 1852 in Greifenhagen, Prussia, was the
founder of the eponymous oculist. E.B. Meyrowitz henceforth began its rich
history in 1875. Stores were opened in London, Paris and New York over the
course of the next twenty years retailing not only spectacles but all manner of
optical goods, devices and instruments. Over one hundred and forty five years
later the name of Meyrowitz lives on in its own unique spirit still evoking
memories of a brand playing a key role in the early days of aviation, motor
racing and mountaineering.
Racing
Pedigree
From humble beginnings in the 1870's E.B. Meyrowitz
had soon built a reputation for itself as not only a pioneer in all things
optical and ophthalmic but had also extended its prowess to the motor sports
arena. Many land speed records were broken between the 1920's and 1950's behind
the brand's infamous Luxor Goggles including those set by Sir Malcolm Campbell,
Sir Henry Seagrave and John Cobb. The first Le Mans 24 Hours in 1923 was won by
André Lagache using the very same goggles. Each subsequent race until 1940
crowned winners donning such eye protection including Woolf Barnato, Luigi
Chinetti, Glen Kidston and Jean-Pierre Wimille racing across Bentley, Alfa
Romeo and Bugatti. Countless more feats were achieved behind the brand's racing
apparel with numerous wins at the Monaco Grand Prix, The Indianapolis 500 and
Mille Miglia.
Flight of
Fancy
World firsts were not however confined only to the
track. E.B. Meyrowitz goggles were the choice of many a prominent aviator and
aviatrix over the years. Charles Lindbergh completed his pioneering
transatlantic flight behind his Luxor visors as did Amelia Earhart on her
maiden voyage. These same goggles were also used in the first aerial expedition
over Mount Everest attempted by Sir Douglas Douglas-Hamilton and David
McIntyre. During WW2, such visual aids were also the choice of many prominent
fighter pilots across the globe.
Sunday, 10 November 2024
Prince Andrew finds £3 million / Sick King Charles Can’t Control Prince Andrew and Prince William POWERLESS
Royalist
Sick King
Charles Can’t Control Prince Andrew and Prince William
POWERLESS
Prince
Andrew successfully defied the king in refusing to move out of Royal Lodge. Now
Prince William sets out his plans for a monarchy with more “empathy” and
“impact.”
Tom Sykes
European
Editor at Large
https://www.thedailybeast.com/sick-king-charles-cant-control-prince-andrew-and-prince-william/
Updated Nov.
10 2024 10:27AM EST /
Published
Nov. 10 2024 8:39AM EST
Elderly and
sick king revealed as powerless
Cancer-struck
King Charles looked an isolated monarch Sunday as he attended a pivotal
veterans’ memorial event in London without his wife, Queen Camilla, who is
fighting a chest infection, after a series of casual humiliations inflicted by
his brother, Prince Prince Andrew, and his son, Prince William.
William, in
an intervention that would have been unthinkable before the king‘s cancer
diagnosis, set out plans for a dramatic change of tone in his reign, implicitly
criticizing Charles, in an astonishing blow to the authority of the
cancer-struck monarch.
The contrast
between William’s and his father’s fortunes was made all the clearer by the
triumphant presence of Kate Middleton.
Britain's
Catherine, Princess of Wales, attends the Remembrance Sunday ceremony at the
Cenotaph on Whitehall in central London on November 10, 2024. Remembrance
Sunday is an annual commemoration held on the closest Sunday to Armistice Day,
November 11, the anniversary of the end of the First World War and services
across
Charles was
already smarting from his brother, Andrew, comprehensively winning the
so-called “Siege of Royal Lodge” this weekend. Andrew, who was kicked out of
the royal family over sex assault allegations, has successfully defied his
brother’s attempts to eject him from his palatial home, Royal Lodge Charles
threw in the towel this weekend after a two-year whispering campaign, the
existence and ultimate failure of which has inevitably served to make him look
weak, politically obtuse, and powerless.
Charles cut
a lonely figure Sunday as he led Remembrance events in London. The impression
of vulnerability was starkly exaggerated by the absence of Camilla by his side.
Palace
sources have insisted there is no cause for alarm and said she will be back on
duty next week. However, the diagnosis has done little to project an image of
monarchical strength, especially given an emotional reaction Camilla had when
they were on tour in Samoa, after Charles said he hoped “to survive” long
enough to visit the region again. Palace sources have said she was laughing
because of a technical snafu, but pictures suggested a different story.
Now, in an
astonishingly explicit reminder of the collapse of discipline and the
pre-succession era which the monarchy has entered since Charles announced he
had cancer, William, 42, fresh off the triumph of his Earthshot Awards in South
Africa, openly discussed his vision for changing the monarchy with the Sunday
Times royal correspondent, Roya Nikkhah, saying he was going to “do it
differently, for my generation.”
He added:
“I’m doing it with maybe a smaller ‘r’ in the royal, if you like. So it’s more
about impact, philanthropy, collaboration, convening and helping people.”
He said:
“I’m also going to throw empathy in there as well because I really care about
what I do. It helps impact people’s lives and I think we could do with some
more empathetic leadership around the world. So that’s what I’m trying to
bring, that’s what Catherine is trying to bring as well.”
Charles laid
a wreath of poppies at the Cenotaph in London at 11 a.m. Sunday, local time, in
memory of those killed and injured in war.
Princess
Kate attended the ceremony, as well as attending a Poppy Day event Saturday
night. It was just her fourth public appearance of the year, after recovering
from cancer. William said he hoped she would return to a fuller program of
engagements next year.
The war is
lost, now the recriminations begin
The reaction
from both sides keeps rolling in after Andrew’s stunning victory (as mentioned
above) over his brother in the matter of his living arrangements at Royal
Lodge. While the palace is refusing to comment officially, some of Charles’
friends are furious, saying that he has been badly advised—and calling for
heads to roll.
The story
has sucked up a remarkable amount of royal time and energy since reports
Charles wanted Andrew to leave first began appearing in U.K. papers in early
2023, just after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle had been booted out of Frogmore
Cottage in a kingly fit of pique over Harry’s depiction f the family in his
memoir Spare.
Now, 18
months later, the king’s camp have been forced to admit what Andrew’s side have
told The Daily Beast and others from day one; they don’t have a legal leg to
stand on and Andrew and his heirs are entitled to stay at the fabulous,
ten-bedroomed, crenelated mansion on 90 acres until his lease expires in…2078!
One friend
of Charles and Camilla’s said: “Whoever advised the king to set off on this
road and keep going down this road has very serious questions to answer.
Charles loathes incompetence above all else. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if
some people quietly clear off at Christmas never to be seen again.”
Another
friend of the family said: “I’m afraid it’s another reflection of the family’s
fundamental dysfunction. Normal families don’t have these kinds of arguments.
The king’s aides were foolish to wash the family’s dirty linen in public in
this way.”
Charles’
camp have consistently briefed the U.K. media in pompous terms about how Andrew
would be forced to leave the property. As recently as September this year, one
told the Times Andrew was “taking longer than desirable to recognize the
reality of the situation, even though it is clearly the most sensible course of
action.”
They added:
“It can be done tidily or untidily. It can be done with grace and dignity or it
can be forced upon him. It’s all rather sad. But as things stand, life at Royal
Lodge is set to become increasingly cold and uncomfortable for the duke. The
only question now is when he will realize that he has become a prisoner of his
own pride.”
Friends of
Andrew told The Daily Beast this weekend they were happy for the disgraced
duke.
One said:
“We are thrilled for Andrew. Andrew has a cast iron lease on the property so
god knows why Charles chose to pick this battle. He has been comprehensively
humiliated. It’s hard to imagine anyone would have any interest in where Andrew
is living if Charles’ aides had not spent the past year banging on about it. He
was never going to just walk away from the property; the lease is a valuable
asset he intends to leave to his children, and maybe William will be glad of
having Eugenie or Beatrice there in years to come.
“It’s a
great result for Andrew and Sarah. It’s absurd that Charles wasn’t dissuaded
from launching this campaign against them in the first place, but then to
continue it this year, when the king has been so ill, was, frankly, nuts.”
Royal
round-up
Also
happening in the royal firmament this week, as reported in The Daily Beast and
further afield: William revealed his daughter Charlotte started crying when she
first saw his beard. William also said 2024 was the hardest year of his life
dealing with the double cancer battle in his family. President-elect Trump
praised King Charles as “beautiful” in his Tucker Carlson film.
Plans are
already underway in the U.K. to try use Trump’s reverence for the monarchy and
love of state visits to the U.K. to leverage a better deal for Britain in the
coming global tariff wars. Also, Prince Harry may live to regret boasting about
his drug use in his memoir if it gets him deported by the Trump administration.
This week in
royal history
Happy
birthday King Charles, who turns 76 on Nov. 14. On the same day in 1973,
Princess Anne married first husband Captain Mark Phillips.
Unanswered
questions
Will anyone
be obliged to carry the can for the bitter failure of attempts to get Andrew
out of Royal Lodge, or will Charles decide the fault is his and spare his
staff?
Saturday, 9 November 2024
‘If you’re not hungry, don’t go’: London restaurateur fights back against cheap diners
‘If
you’re not hungry, don’t go’: London restaurateur fights back against cheap
diners
Chef Hugh
Corcoran had enough of ‘window dining’ after seeing an increase in guests
splitting main courses
Morwenna
Ferrier
Sat 9 Nov
2024 03.00 EST
Shortly
after opening his north London restaurant, Hugh Corcoran noticed a pattern
among some of his diners: large groups ordering tap water, starters and mains
to share. So, he took to social media. “Restaurants are not public benches,” he
wrote on his Instagram last week. “You are there to spend money.”
By the
weekend, his post had accrued 150 comments, some accusing him of being tone
deaf, others in agreement. Either way, a discourse was born.
The
Belfast-born chef opened The Yellow Bittern three weeks ago. It has three
members of staff, seats 18 people, and is only open for lunch on weekdays. If
you want to book a table, you phone the landline or send a postcard. Curiously,
it’s not on Instagram.
This early
in its life, it should be in no position to change the way we eat. And yet
thanks to its famous pies (“we do pies when we fancy doing pies”), his
predilection for the long boozy lunch, and its old-fashioned set up – it’s also
cash only – Corcoran is attracting and dividing diners who take umbrage with
being told there is a right way to have lunch.
“There’s an
etiquette everywhere – theatres, bars – simple manners. You don’t talk in a
cinema, and you go to a restaurant when you’re ready to eat, as a treat,” he
says. “If you’re not hungry, don’t go.”
His
preference, he says, is minimum one plate per person, “but one starter and two
mains between four, that’s just not acceptable”.
This is a
fraught time for new restaurants. Years of work go into funding. Then there are
soaring food prices. Add to that the current climate for hospitality: an
estimated 60% close within their first year. So why is Corcoran angering his
diners?
He does
reservations by phone because “in London, everyone got into the ‘just in case’
craze – booking online and then cancelling”. The cash-only policy is the last
vestige of privacy. That, and atmosphere. “Cards leave out interesting people
in society who are cash-in-hand. Frankly, I’d also prefer it if clients didn’t
use their phones.”
The real
issue, he says, lies in “restaurant tourism – going to a place to show that
you’ve been to that place, without actually eating”. That, and what’s known as
“window dining”.
Two recent
diners, he says, ordered half the menu, took photographs but didn’t touch the
food. “It all went in the bin,” he says. “We don’t want to force-feed people.
And you can share food. But if I’m going to get stick for standing against
that, so be it.”
Jan Ostle
runs Wilson’s, a small but critically acclaimed farm-to-table restaurant in
Bristol, which opened in 2016. “Sometimes people come in and only order a main,
and all your projections get mangled,” he agrees. “The problem is, people want
to go out and feel rich but they can’t afford to do it.”
“Most
restaurants today have to traverse two lines – firstly as a local restaurant
with regulars, and secondly as a destination one,” says Ostle. “It’s nice to
have both, which we do. But if someone comes in, takes photographs and doesn’t
seem fussed on the food, that’s the modern world. You need a thick skin for
it.”
Annie Gray,
a food historian, blames Covid – and years of austerity – for the divide.
“People have become entitled. Hospitality has been hard hit – Covid, austerity,
cost of living crisis, the overseas labour. But diners don’t necessarily care
because they’ve been through it too, and they’re spending money,” she says.
This is not
lost on Corcoran. In the end, he just doesn’t want to see people eating
nothing, but photographing everything.
Thursday, 7 November 2024
Southport, Connecticut / VIDEO: 658 Pequot Avenue // Southport, Connecticut - Aerial Reel
Connecticut
Southport,
Connecticut | A Historic Coastal Village
Settled in
1639, the beautiful coastal hamlet of Southport, Connecticut, boasts a rich New
England history.
By Jessica
Gordon Ryan
Jan 03 2022
https://newengland.com/travel/connecticut/southport-connecticut/
Southport,
Connecticut, is a beautiful coastal hamlet in Fairfield County, located just
over an hour outside of New York City. The small village, settled in 1639, is
part of the town of Fairfield and evocative of its rich New England history.
Southport was designated a local historic district in 1967.
During the
eighteenth century, Mill River Village was a small community of just a few
houses and a wharf at the mouth of the Mill River. The harbor allowed for farm
products from the surrounding areas to be shipped to ports in New York and
beyond. By 1831, this little community, by then known as Southport, had evolved
into a bustling commercial area with beautiful homes alongside churches,
schools, stores, and warehouses.
As a leading
coastal port on Long Island Sound, Southport enjoyed great economic prosperity.
Soon the railroad would arrive, creating new opportunity while at the same time
competing with the shipping industry. By this time, Southport was well-known
for its high quality onions, grown on Fairfield’s hills and shipped out via the
harbor. During the 1890s, 100,000 barrels of Southport onions were shipping
each year, along with locally grown carrots, potatoes, and other goods. In
addition to its identity as a shipping center, Southport with the only two
banks serving all of Fairfield, was also the area’s financial district.
The historic
allure remains today. A drive through the charming village reveals majestic,
tree-lined streets and elegant, stately homes of varying architectural styles –
Greek Revival, Georgian, Victorian, Colonial, Romanesque and Federal – giving
us a view into an historic, bygone era.
The old
village is protected by strict zoning laws, designed to preserve its history
for future generations. The small seaport area boasts a private yacht club, its
own library, two churches, several lovely shops and antique stores, restaurants
and a boutique hotel. The views of the Long Island Sound are positively
breathtaking.
What puts
this small village on the map today is an annual event hosted by the Southport
Congregational Church, “Rooms with a View,” started by interior designer Albert
Hadley two decades ago. This premier design experience, now chaired by Thom
Filicia, celebrates art, architecture and design in vignette form, reflecting a
specific theme. The event, which takes place in the middle of November, has
showcased some of our country’s top design talents and personalities. Over the
past 20 years, “Rooms with a View” has raised over $1,300,000 for the church
and its missions.
Have you
ever visited Southport, Connecticut?
This post
was first published in 2015 and has been updated.
Jessica
Gordon Ryan
Design of a
Country Estate: Purple Cherry Architects & Interiors Hardcover – 20
Aug. 2024
English edition by Cathy Purple Cherry (auteur)
Driven by a
passion for art and architectural design, Cathy Purple Cherry shares the story
of a fabulous, newly built, coastal country estate.
"This
elegant architecture book is not only a delightful visual treat, but it's also
filled with descriptions about how the featured Centreville, MD, country
coastal estate developed and why the design choices were made. This all adds up
to an enhanced reading experience and tour....a diverting read."--Library
Journal
The vision
was for traditional, classic, romantic, authentic timelessness, and
approachable elegance. The end result speaks to all of this and more. Architect
Purple Cherry tells the story of this luxurious country estate (4 full
kitchens, 13 en suite bedrooms) in the Mid-Atlantic--along the Chester River on
the Eastern Shore in Centreville, Maryland--and how the vision came to life.
The main house, guesthouse, and seven outbuildings are dissected in detail so
readers will experience what it is like to develop such a comprehensive
project, from the planning to the execution, and all the steps along the way.
The book
includes an abundance of hard-working information that focuses on the thought
processes behind each decision, whether it is the materials employed or the
location of each building for walkability and use. Rife with inspiration on
every page--whether your dream is a cozy cabin in the woods or an expansive
country estate like this one--this book will appeal to luxury home enthusiasts
and design professionals alike, transporting readers to a real-life fantasy.
Wednesday, 6 November 2024
Tuesday, 5 November 2024
Her Majesty The Queen: Behind Closed Doors | ITV
Queen
Camilla documentary Her Majesty: Behind Closed Doors confirms air date
The
90-minute documentary will see the Queen meeting survivors of domestic abuse
and campaigners working to raise awareness.
James Hibbs Published: Wednesday, 30 October 2024
at 0:04
https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/documentaries/queen-camilla-documentary-confirms-date-newsupdate/
The first
documentary to feature Queen Camilla since her coronation last year, Her
Majesty The Queen: Behind Closed Doors, was announced in August, and we know
now exactly when the 90-minute film will air.
The
documentary, which will see the Queen meeting survivors of domestic abuse and
campaigners working to raise awareness and understanding of the issue, will air
at 9pm on Monday 11th November 2024 on ITV1 and ITVX.
This means
viewers only have a couple of weeks to wait until they can see the documentary,
which will follow the Queen over a year, as she attends official engagements
and never-before-seen private meetings with domestic abuse survivors and change
makers.
The Queen
has been involved in spreading awareness of domestic and sexual violence for
over a decade, and the film is also set to see her hosting roundtables with
teenagers and celebrating International Women’s Day at Buckingham Palace, while
it will explore why perpetrators abuse, asking how we can stop the cycle of
abuse.
The film has
been produced and directed by Angela Byrne and Kerene Barefield, with Barefield
saying when it was first announced: "It has been a privilege to have been
entrusted to produce this film and observe firsthand Her Majesty The Queen's
work in the field of domestic abuse.
"Our
aim was to not only highlight the devastation caused by domestic abuse in the
UK, but also give a voice and re-empower the victims.
"The
Queen is not alone in trying to 'obliterate' this curse, and we have been
honoured to work with charities and services who work on the frontline to
support survivors, rehabilitate victims and campaign for change.
"If we
understand what it looks like, together we will be able to tackle domestic
abuse and make a difference."
This isn't
the only royal documentary set to air on ITV this year. In fact, today
(Wednesday 30th October), a documentary called Prince William: We Can End
Homelessness is set to air, which will focus on Homewards, Prince William's
five-year programme that aims to show it is possible to end homelessness,
starting with six locations across the UK.
Her Majesty
The Queen: Behind Closed Doors will air on ITV1 and ITVX at 9pm on Monday 11th
November.
Monday, 4 November 2024
Nigel Cabourn / VIDEO: - Reveal his secret and his age | GlamUk
Sunday, 3 November 2024
Revealed: King charging millions for NHS to use his land / King and Prince William’s estates ‘making millions from charities and public services’
King and
Prince William’s estates ‘making millions from charities and public services’
Duchies of
Cornwall and Lancaster likely to make at least £50m from leasing land to
services such as NHS and schools, according to investigation
Richard
Palmer
Sat 2 Nov
2024 19.50 GMT
King Charles
and Prince William’s property empires are taking millions of pounds from
cash-strapped charities and public services including the NHS, state schools
and prisons, according to a new investigation.
The reports
claim the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, which are exempt from business
taxes and used to fund the royals’ lifestyles and philanthropic work, are set
to make at least £50m from leasing land to public services. The two duchies
hold a total of more than 5,400 leases.
One 15-year
deal will see Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS hospital trust in London pay £11.4m to
store its fleet of electric ambulances in a warehouse owned by the Duchy of
Lancaster, the monarch’s 750-year-old estate.
The king
will also make at least £28m from windfarms because the Duchy of Lancaster
retains a feudal right to charge for cables crossing the foreshore, according
to an investigation by Channel 4’s Dispatches and the Sunday Times.
William’s
Duchy of Cornwall, the hereditary estate of the heir to the throne, has signed
a £37m deal to lease Dartmoor prison for 25 years to the Ministry of Justice,
which is liable for all repairs despite paying £1.5m a head for a jail empty of
prisoners because of high levels of radon gas.
His estate
also owns Camelford House, a 1960s tower block on the banks of the Thames,
which has brought in at least £22m since 2005 from rents paid by charities and
other tenants. Two cancer charities, Marie Curie and Macmillan – of which the
king is a longstanding patron – have both recently moved out to smaller
premises.
The Duchy of
Cornwall has charged the Royal Navy more than £1m to build and use jetties and
moor warships. It also charges the army to train on Dartmoor but the Ministry
of Defence refused a Freedom of Information Act request asking how much it
costs. The duchy also made more than £600,000 from the construction of a fire
station and stands to get nearly £600,000 from rental agreements with six state
schools.
In spite of
the king and Prince William’s speeches and interventions on environmental
issues, many residential properties let out by the royal estates are in breach
of basic government energy efficiency standards.
The
investigation found 14% of homes leased by the Duchy of Cornwall and 13% by the
Duchy of Lancaster have an energy performance rating of F or G. Since 2020, it
has been against the law for landlords to rent out properties that are rated
below an E under the Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards regulations.
The Duchy of
Lancaster said: “Over 87% of all duchy-let properties are rated E or above. The
remainder are either awaiting scheduled improvement works or are exempted under
UK legislation.”
The royal
estates also have deals with mining and quarrying companies.
The
investigation has prompted calls for a parliamentary investigation and for the
two empires to be folded into the crown estate, which sends its profits to the
government. The king and Prince William pay income tax on profits from the
estates after business expenses have been deducted, but both now refuse to say
how much.
Baroness
Margaret Hodge, a former chair of the Commons public accounts committee, said
the duchies should at least pay corporation tax. “This would be a brilliant
time for the monarch to say, I’m going to be open, and I want to be treated as
fairly as anybody,” she said.
Both duchies
said they were commercial operations that complied with statutory requirements
to disclose information. They also emphasised their efforts to become greener.
The Duchy of
Lancaster said: “His majesty the king voluntarily pays tax on all income
received from the duchy.”