Crown Princess Victoria in New York

Crown Princess Victoria in New York

Crown Princess Victoria was in New York City this entire week, September 19-23, as part of her work with the United Nations and Agenda 2030.

**Note: William and Kate’s Canada tour starts today, September 24. The royal party is scheduled to arrive at 4:00PM PT. Time conversions: 7:00PM ET USA; Midnight on September 25 in London; 9:00AM on September 25 in Sydney; Noon on September 25 in Auckland, New Zealand. I will do my best to get the post up as soon as possible.**

A photo posted by swedennewyork (@swedennewyork) on

Victoria started the week on Monday with a visit to the Capsule Fashion Trade Show where she met with Swedish brands and designers who were showing their products.

Victoria wore a new zebra print dress from Whyred called the “Loise Print” ($312), and earrings from Ebba Brahe Jewellery. It’s cute and looks good on her. The black By Malene Birger sandals aren’t so cute.

Victoria then moved to UN Headquarters where she attended the high-level meeting Summit for Refugees and Migrants. Sweden co-chaired Round Table 5 “Global compact for safe, regular and orderly migration: towards realizing the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development and achieving full respect for the human right of migrants”.

In the afternoon, Victoria attended the meeting “Mobilizing action to implement SDG 14 in the run-up to the UN-Conference on Oceans in 2017” which was held at the Swedish Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York.

Victoria’s second outfit is a top and skirt by Baum und Pferdgarten (Victoria wore the top in a photo with Oscar from back in March). Her pumps are By Malene Birger and her bag is Valentino.

Day 1 of Victoria’s week in New York ended with a reception for the Global Deal held at the Consul General’s residence. She wore a Fadi el Khoury dress.

victoria-at-global-deal-reception
[Government Offices]

Victoria was photographed out walking with Prince Oscar early in the week.

On Tuesday, September 20, Victoria attended the opening of the UN General Assembly’s 71th session and for the initial general debate, which had the theme The SDGs universal push to transform our world.

Victoria also took part in the High Level Meeting Urban Food Systems: The Nutrition Challenge organized by EAT Forum in cooperation with the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Victoria’s dress is a repeated Oscar de la Renta, and her earrings are from Kreuger Jewellery.

In the evening, Victoria attended the 2016 Global Goals Awards Dinner at Gustavino’s. Queen Rania also attended the event.

Victoria wore a black shirt and Baum und Pferdgarten floral skirt. She wore her Lara Bohinc “Saturn” earrings (which Princess Sofia may have borrowed back in June), and the “Lunar Eclipse” necklace ($851) and “Solar Eclipse” bracelet ($586.50) from the company. Vic chose black Marchesa “Stella” heels which Princess Madeleine wore in nude to Vic’s birthday in July.

On September 21, Victoria attended a high-level conference on antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and met with the chairman of the UN World Tourism agencies. Victoria attended the launch of the Global Deal, and met with UN Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson for a meeting at UN headquarters.

A photo posted by Kungahuset (@kungahuset) on

On Thursday, September 22, Victoria had meetings with the ambassadors of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Advocacy Group. Victoria said:

    “As always, it is very rewarding and inspiring to attend the Youth Week here in New York. In my meetings with the other SDG ambassadors I have specifically raised questions concerning water and health, which is the goal I will follow and work extra to come. UN global sustainability affects all of us. In order to manage to meet them requires not only a high tempo, but also to all sectors of society involved. Sweden is probably one of the countries fastest can cope with targets, but there remains a lot of work for us.”

Vic’s dress is Ralph Lauren and her earrings are Kreuger Jewellery.

A photo posted by Kungahuset (@kungahuset) on

In other Swedish royal news, Member of Parliament Robert Hannah wants to cut the appanage for the Swedish royal family down to just the monarch and heir. From aftonbladet:

    “During the next year, the royal family will receive a grant of just over 137 million [Editor’s note: about 16 million USD], the amount is expected to increase 145 million [Editor’s note: about 16.9 million USD] in 2020. About half of the sum goes to maintenance and management of buildings and heritage, while the other half is used for the royal family’s representative, state visits, trips and living expenses. The royal family has grown from six to twelve people in recent years and the cost of safety, weddings and baptisms have been increasing.
    “Member of Parliament Robert Hannah (L) want to see that appanage restricted to apply only to the Head of State and the heir to the throne. ‘It is unreasonable that the state should support such a large royal family when they have the ability to feed themselves. Swedish taxpayers’ money makes much greater benefits, for example through support and services to people with disabilities or lone parents than to one of Sweden’s wealthiest families’ he wrote in a motion to parliament.
    “How the appanage is regulated is not currently regulated by any law – it is the king who decides. Robert Hannah writes in the motion that he thinks it is poor management of taxpayers’ funds. ‘The system needs to be reviewed and clear rules about who gets part of the appanage and what it will go to need to be developed. Taxpayers should not pay for the royal family shopping sprees.’ He says in the motion that just because the royal family’s number has doubled, it does not mean that their mission and the workload has increased. ‘Only the head of state and the heir to the throne should be supported by the state through appanage. The appanage should also be reduced significantly.’

In 2015, the Swedish royal family received 127,384,000 (about 14.9 million USD), and in 2016 135,378,000 (about 15.8 million USD).

In Hannah’s plan, only Carl Gustaf and Victoria would receive funds, Silvia, Daniel, Estelle, and Oscar (plus Carl Philip and Madeleine and their families) would not. Not sure whether or not Hannah expects anyone other than Carl Gustaf and Victoria to do royal duties.

70 thoughts on “Crown Princess Victoria in New York

    1. She is excellent: poised, intelligent, present, prepared, engaging, courteous. I love the black and white skirt/black top ensemble; she looks beautiful and professional.

  1. I agree Cathy. Victoria is so enthusasitc and it is always such a pleasure to read about her work. I like the Zebra print dress and Victoria’s role from business woman to mother in those photos shows her dedication to her job and her role as a mum.

  2. Robert Hannah’s comments are fair and reasonable. Funding Carl Gustaf and Victoria’s upkeep would to some extent (ie living expenses) include Silvia, Daniel, Estelle and Oscar anyway. Madeleine lives in another country and is supported by her husband, as are their two children. Carl-Philip, Sofia and Nicholas are the problem, I’d say, with Carl Gustaf clearly wanting to give his son a financial ‘cushion’ but expecting taxpayers to fund it. Perhaps he could do that from his private funds. Taxpayers should not be considered a bottomless pit that can be routinely dipped into when ‘royals’ want more for whatever reason. There are competing demands for taxpayers funds particularly to those who need it rather than those who want it. Carl-Philip is capable of working.

    Hannah’s suggestions to fine-tune/regulate what royal duties comprise and financial compensation is excellent. Everyone would know where they are, who gets what and where boundaries lie. In other words, funding monarchy becomes more transparent.

    If it goes ahead, let’s hope the UK government follows that lead. Spending on and by the BRF is way, way out of control, with insufficient controls and public audits; too much gaming of the system by the BRF.

    1. I don’t think that the UK governement will follow : I think that in the UK the press lacks critical view about the royal. I with you about the BRF way out of control.

      1. Clem, I must sadly agree with you re. the BRF funding arrangement. And yes, the UK press is largely uncritical – they don’t dare lose access to the BRF so ‘toady’ to them on demand. Sigh.

        A critical eye can be cast over the Canadian trip. If meeting people on an airport tarmac counts as an engagement, as do 15-20 minute unveiling of statues, and drop-ins of similar length, maybe there isn’t much point in having a monarchy. Maybe the questions should be:
        1. Why is this relevant to the UK and Canada?
        2. What is the value to Canadians of spending millions of their money on this?
        3. Why does a 12-member staff need to accompany a couple for this level of activity?
        4. Why drag two small children (and nanny) to another continent to attend a party of probably an hour’s duration?

        The answers are: it’s not, none, they don’t, piss poor parents.

        1. W&K’s hatred of freedom of speech really bothers me. Did you hear their staff has asked people waiting around to meet them at engagements to NOT take pictures? WTF? Smacks of their insane protocol requirements with the NYC visit.

          1. No, I had not heard that! WTF indeed. I don’t think W+K would have a leg to stand on with such a request, particularly if it was in a public place. If you recall, they forbade photos to be taken at the airfield for a particular event, citing security. Then again, last week’s judgement re. those photos of George on the police bike do embolden W+K. They are ridiculous.

          2. They won’t be able to enforce this in Canada. While some of the media gets stupid when they visit, there is far less desire to kowtow to these numpties by the press. It is not like Canadian media needs to rely on kissing the Royal ass for their careers.
            And they are in public here by the grace of Canadian taxpayer money… it is not a private situation while outside.
            I thought I read no selfies but if they start taking phones away then the public will turn on them. These two are celebrities, not anyone special.

        2. W&K’s NYC trip cost
          Per DM article: “William and Kate have stayed in some of the best hotels in the world on official foreign tours. In Manhattan they were housed in an £8,000 a night suite at The Carlyle which had its own butler.”

          Isn’t that an obscene amount of money to spend? They were supposed to be promoting some cause for their University. It makes me wonder if the expenses they racked up were more than the money they raised for the cause.

          I have to laugh at their itinerary for Canada. I thought it was a family trip, hence, why are W&K taking a night off by themselves, and to do what? This whole Royal stuff is mind boggling to me. They spend other people’s/countries money as if it grows on trees and they only have to shake them and money falls off. There is such a wanton disregard by them for other people’s hard-earned money

          I don’t think I’d ever want to be rich if it makes me oblivious of the fact that my way of life is attained by exploiting others.

          1. W&K’s NYC trip cost
            Per DM article: “William and Kate have stayed in some of the best hotels in the world on official foreign tours. In Manhattan they were housed in an £8,000 a night suite at The Carlyle which had its own butler.”

            Isn’t that an obscene amount of money to spend? They were supposed to be promoting some cause for their University. It makes me wonder if the expenses they racked up were more than the money they raised for the cause.

            I have to laugh at their itinerary for Canada. I thought it was a family trip, hence, why are W&K taking a night off by themselves, and to do what? This whole Royal stuff is mind boggling to me. They spend other people’s/countries money as if it grows on trees and they only have to shake them and money falls off. There is such a wanton disregard by them for other people’s hard-earned money

            I don’t think I’d ever want to be rich if it makes me oblivious of the fact that my way of life is attained by exploiting others.
            Reply

    2. Yes, this. Bringing up Madeleine is silly because she only gets expenses paid if she is on some royal engagement. Otherwise, she does her own thing and Chris financially supports the family.

      Carl Philip and Sofia though are those who want to take, take, take from the royal coffers. Sounds like W&K in Britain, to me, except they’re even more useless…

      I agree, royal spending is out of control, period. The BRF needs to change things. I hope it will change when Charles is king with his intentions of slimming things down to be at least somewhat cost-effective. Maintaining a head of state will always be expensive but they take it to the hilt.

      1. Charles wants to have the Duchy of Cornwall – a public resource – transferred to the BRF ownership and live off that. It is ludicrous and utterly greedy. His point is that this would solve all funding issues. But of course, it would not. I would prefer to see buildings occupied by royals have their upkeep transferred to a public body who oversee it; no Queen to access funds for other purposes. I would like to see duties divided into categories of ceremonial on UK soil, representative of the UK overseas (diplomatic only, no fun trips), and charitable events. Financial remuneration pulled down enormously to cover living expenses, etc per Swedish concept. Basically, a pro rata payment for a pro rata job.

        1. I think that’s a good idea actually.

          I mostly like Charles, but I don’t like that idea of the Duchy of Cornwall becoming BRF ‘property,’ so to speak.

          I wonder what would happen to the Duchy of Lancaster which provides funds for the monarch and so on.

          1. I like Charles, too, but he does have the reputation of living the most extravagant lifestyle in the royal family. So I don’t think he will be the one to bring financial transparency or sense to the BRF.

          2. Charles AND the Queen have successfully argued and been granted exemption from FOI requests and to keep their financial affairs private.

            It means that you can’t ask for greater audit of their financial affairs even where they release records to the public such as their annual accounts.

            They really fought for these 2 things because of the furore over their refusal to pay tax until they were forced to, and the furore that accompanied any extravagant expenditure eg Charles giving a somewhat more detailed accounts of his expenditure on WHK and the fact that he got it all back on tax, has now led to their expenditure being listed as an overall total of entire expenditure and only as one or two line items in his accounts.

            He wants the two duchies and the crown estates to become personal properties of the Windsors with the excuse that it will help with the funding issue which is so much BS i can’t see how he has the balls to even suggest it.

            Sadly, there are many people who believe the lie that they once belonged to the Windsors and that’s why they have the right to be state funded.

            Thank goodness Charles was knocked back on the issue of the Crown Estates and Lancaster, but he is still pushing for Cornwall.

          3. Surely, the DoC proposal is a matter that needs to be publicly debated with full disclosure? That is, not acquiesced to by sycophants in power? The more the BRF is given, the more it is emboldened to ask for more, particularly in the face of institutional weakness. Why do the British people allow this? The Brexit vote (to my Antipodean eyes) seemed to signal sectors angry with the establishment; there were mutterings that the monarchy was next. Not a good reason for change in itself but you can understand, to a point, their thinking.

          4. Ray, it isn’t for his personal pleasure, the paintings don’t belong to him.

            Charles is a big supporter of the arts and painting in particular. When he no longer had time to paint on tour, he started bringing along a tour artist. Boost to the artist’s career and promotes UK artists.

          5. Jen: The Public are not paying attention to these things. That’s how the civil list was changed to Sovereign grant without public debate on the matter and without amending other existing laws such as the one where the royaks’ payment can never be less in any given year than amount received the previous year.

            That’s why HM can plead poverty without fear of audits that might show mismanagement such as money earmarked for BP being used for WK’s private apartments’ refurbishments instead.

            It’s frightening that the annual parliamentary committee sittings into govt departmental expenditure aren’t highlighted by the media or that people don’t really care. Those aren’t hidden. And where they can discuss royal expenditure, the rising costs of WK, sometimes surpassing Charles(!) is met with a shrug meanwhile the public is outraged that the less liked, unprotected royals might be spending public money simply because they are at Ascot.

            The apathy of the public is the greatest gift to the royals.

            If republic.org organised itself as well as Brexit and demanded accountability, the public might be roused to demand accountability. Or a Journalist like the one who forced Parliament to publish their expenses despite a concerted govt blockade of her efforts.

      2. I doubt that the ridiculous spending by W&K will stop if, and when, Charles becomes King. Let’s not forget Will’s tantrums, which I suspect causes anxiety for Charles.

        W&K have perfected their idlesome lifestyle by requesting favors from friends and visiting foreign countries without paying a farthing. They’ve got a good game going.

    3. It is a reasonable request from the elected official. As you say, Sylvia and Daniel’s living expenses would be covered by extension. Likely their work expenses would be too, as part of the monarch and heir’s immediate households.

      I agree, Madeleine is not the problem. She works for Childhood, she and her husband support their family, and she only receives reimbursement when she does the occasional event in Sweden.

      The problem is Carl-Philip and Sofia. They continue to live off the taxpayers when they should be earning a living. He owns two houses, a big Stockholm apartment, and she owns the questionable South Africa luxury apartment. Plus he has millions in the bank. The king also handed the cheap rent of Stenhammar to Alexander, when it should have gone to Oscar.

    4. I think you mean Carl Phillip, Sofia and Alexander.

      Wondering how Hannah wants the King’s sisters and extended family to be supported. They are grandchildren of a king, children of the heir too.

      Crown Princess Victoria is truly a special young lady, she looked super different for some reason though. At first I thought it was no make-up in the photo holding Oscar but then in general her face just seemed different, weird.

    5. Jan I completely agree with you. The BFF spending has been out of control for sometime now. Kate and William spent millions on the KP apartment. And then not live there. They did the same with the country home. Oh but I forgot William insist they are just normal people. Yeah right.

  3. Thanks so much for covering Victoria in NYC!

    I often don’t get why a lot of royals are involved with the UN as it seems a lot of them do it for the attention–ie Mary who wants to be some global icon, yeah right–but Victoria seems to be there for the right reasons. She’s so classy and such a great crown princess. I can’t help but think she’s fantastic!

    I also was reading how Sophie’s DoE biking challenge and she is doing well, meeting tons of people along the way and taking pictures and just being, well, awesomely Sophie.

    1. Oh I like it when they’re involved with the UN!=) I don’t know much about Mary so can’t comment on that front. I think it’s good for the royals to do stuff in their own countries and look at the broader picture and act globally as well. I like all Victoria’s causes with them, especially the new water conservation. Letiza does work with them through the FAO and Maxima and the inclusive finance are all great causes that sometime a bigger name can lead to more recognition of that cause.

  4. First and foremost, thank you, KMR, for your coverage of the Canadian trip. It will be a busy schedule and I appreciate your hard work.

    No one can deny that Victoria is hard working and has excellent follow through. I think Sweden has a gem in her. She’s a case study for Kat on how to champion several causes with the same attention and participation. Call me silly, but I love how she had baby Oscar our in a tank, joggers and bare feet. This is what we’re used to babies looking like. He wasn’t wearing a throwback or some overly stuffy outfit. I bet we would never see Georgie and Charlotte like that. As far as those
    Birger sandals, I would rock them. I just think the dress was so busy. I probably would have worn a simple dress to show them off.

    Thanks for covering Victoria’s visit, KMR!

    1. I totally agree with you Rhiannon. I think CP Victoria is a great role model for women. On the fashion front I love the outfit with the black top and floral skirt. On its own it is very simple, but the shoes (I want them) and the jewelry really make it pop. I wish the D of C had some guidance from a real stylist on how to pull an outfit together, but I pretty much have given up on that ever happening.

    2. Rhiannon I was just about to write a comment about Oscar just like yours. I agree. He looks like a normal baby in a onesie and bare feet and a binky in his mouth, and she looks like such a loving mother. She kisses her kids all the time. If a person wasn’t familiar with the Swedish Royals they wouldn’t know they saw a prince and princess walking down the street. I have never, not once, seen George or Charlotte really look like normal kids.

    3. Baby Oscar is adorable. Oh, those little dimpled elbows! And, he is dressed like a typical baby! Yay,

      I love Victoria. Such a well rounded individual. Her dedication to her role as future Queen is always impressive. Her role as a loving mom, too.

      She never disappoints!

      Thanks for the coverage, KMR. I also join in on wishing you well with the upcoming Canadian trip of W and K. You will be busy, that is for certain. We will be appreciative, too!

  5. I’m glad that Victoria is the crown princess although I really like her siblings of course, she seems completely trustworthy and takes her duties serious without leaving her children alone. I think that’s how her children will learn that working and doing something for others is important. That’s what missing with Kate and William, they are not really into their work. They seem to do it just because they have to.

  6. I absolutely adore Princess Victoria! She just looks warm and caring and genuine, like she truly has her heart and soul in making the world a better place. ??

    Small detail, but I love how sometimes she wears very little makeup. Her personality comes off the page right at me, not her eyeliner or fresh botox like with Kate. I never remember her outfits or shoes, but I can easily remember what she stands for and where she’s been.

    1. I agree, Charlotte. Makeup should enhance the person who is wearing it, not cover them up. I feel like Kate hides behind her makeup and her long hair. Victoria seems comfortable in her own skin.

  7. I love this post. Victoria appears hard working, focused, and neither overly attention seeking nor secretive.

    Carl Gustav must be muttering and Carl Phillip throwing things around their palatial surroundings in response to a member of Parliament’s wanting to cut the fat. Citizens should not pay for extravagant shopping sprees and lifestyles of global vacations and car racing for a bunch of undeserving, very ordinary people labled as royals. It’s obscene. It’s a con. And after cutting everyone off, put the rest of the royal family on an allowance as other royal families have demonstrated they can’t be trusted to be good stewards of the millions they receive. The BRF has shown that as entitled toffs they misuse and divert earmarked funds received from tax payers money. Yeah for Hannah! Yeah for justice!

    1. Yes, Victoria exemplifies professionalism and decency.

      Agree re. Carl Gustav and Carl Philip: couple of bad seeds. I guess every family has them. But they should not be a burden to the public. Same with the BRF.

    1. I really don’t approve of hacking, but it is sad that if the pics do become public, they will be the best pictures of the kids that we’ve seen.

    2. You know I don’t store any pics of videos on iCloud for this very reason. I no longer have Facebook or other social media accounts that can publicly identify me, because I don’t want my pics and info falling into the wrong hands.

  8. Thanks for another great Victoria post KMR!! As I’ve said before the people of Sweden are very lucky to have her as their Crown Princess and future Queen. While I don’t always care for her fashion choices, I like that she takes risks and always looks well put together and appropriate.

    I agree that the SRF funding probably needs to be streamlined and certain members only get reimbursed for official duties. However I don’t see excluding Queen Silvia and Prince Daniel, as spouses of the Monarch and Heir they really aren’t in a position to “get a job” and the support they give their spouses is invaluable. It appears that it is only this one member of Parliament who wants to see changes made, I wonder if more will jump on board or are these comments being made for his political gain?

    1. I’d hope that Silvia and Daniel would be included because of the partnership aspect of the job. It seems sensible to do that eg Victoria is allocated ‘x’ for royal duties/living expenses and she and Daniel work out how they use the funds to accommodate that workload. Same with Carl Gustav and Silvia. Perhaps our Swedish posters can give their opinions on how the Swedes are reacting to this proposal. I’ve only read that Sweden is a very egalitarian country and royalty sits oddly with this, but I’d like to know more one way of the other.

    2. My take is more that it means “immediate household” of monarch and heir, covering Sylvia and Daniel. But it clearly means getting CP and Sofia off the payroll, and not letting the king hide money he gives them in his own apanage.

      At one point it was announced that Sofia was going to be working for the king somehow. Easy excuse for him to say, “She is part of my staff, she needs X amount in pay” to try to get around the obvious. CP and Sofia need to support themselves.

      1. I just can’t imagine CP and Sofia getting jobs. I read before the baby was born they had moved into the Palace where Vic and Daniel did live. So the taxpayers are paying for their utility’s and home upkeep. Do they also pay for their staff the housekeeping and cooks?

  9. I really respect Victoria: she is someone who exemplifies that true beauty and joy come from within and in helping others.

    I know Sophia and Carl Philip are generally liked in KMR-land and I sometimes felt I was one of the lone voices in calling them out for being a wastrel and questioning their value to the SRF. Glad to see Robert Hannah, a Swedish politician, publicly calling them out and pushing for public money to be saved by streamlining the royal family to the monarch and his immediate heir. I wish him all the success with his bill and I hope that he achieves the result that he is working towards, that there is a growing movement in not only in Sweden, but in other countries that have retained a monarchy, to critically question the role of royalty and cut out the hanger-ons.

    Thank you for your hard work KMR and perhaps treat yourself to a spa date once the Canadian tour coverage is done 🙂

    1. If it makes you feel better I’m not a Sophia fan either. I don’t believe she’s completely changed her ways. Ask me again in a couple years. Cap has enough private properties that he can live comfortably in them, show up for the occasional Royal thing like Madeleine does. I’ve stateD before Sweden is a relatively small country to justify so many working royals.
      Nice to read someone in the parliament has the right idea. It’ll be interesting to follow up on this and we how it goes.

        1. Oh I loved it, especially the snap at the end! Thank you.
          I’m taking my niece to NYC at the end of November and trying to justify the cost of the tix. They do have some available! She’s just old enough, great history lesson, the joy of live theater vs price and most of the original primaries have left. I can always take fewer trips in the new year and eat pasta for awhile.=)
          I finally got the biography that it was based off from the library. 9 month wait!! I should’ve just bought it. I’ve seen your hamiltome at the bookstore. I love the pictures in it.

          1. Lucky you getting tickets! Your niece is very lucky too and i ‘m sure the experience will be impactful. I was thinking earlier this evening about most of the original cast leaving, but you know, a good piece of theatre can withstand and is enhanced by different interpretations and voices. You’ll be seeing a recreation but not a duplication. I have read that Javier Munoz brings a very sexy vibe to the AH role:
            http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/theater/a-word-with-javier-munoz-the-new-hamilton-on-broadway.html

            Brandon Victor Dixon has been a favourite since I listened to and saw trailers of ‘The Scottsboro Boys’. I hope you love the performance; there’s nothing like live theatre. Oh, you are very patient to wait 9 months for the Chernow book! I have not read it yet but will definitely buy it.

          2. Well I haven’t bought the tix yet!! Letting sticker shock wear off. I didn’t realize it would be that long of a wait when I put it on hold! Slow readers=)
            I forgot to add, I don’t think the Danes have streamlined yet. I don’t really follow them but remember reading something about how parliament has come out to say the Danish people shouldn’t be expected to pay for all the Royal children (when they’re older) just the heir. Which I’m for. I could be wrong about the article tho

          3. They’re not cheap!! But it’s a once in a generation show. If I had extra cash available my little dream holiday would be to New York, see Hamilton plus a few others, stay somewhere fabulous like the Greenwich Hotel in Tribeca, go to local delis, and hit the galleries, museums and bookshops. And sit and watch the world go by on glorious late spring/ early autumn days… luckily, dreams are free.

    2. Not a Sofia fan here. She hasn’t changed her ways, but now her fame-seeking, money-seeking are paid for by the taxpayers.

      They needed to follow the lead that Madeleine and Chris put out there. I hope this politician is successful in getting debate started.

  10. I love her! Thanks KMR for giving me a high before the low=) I don’t love the zebra dress but applaud her for wearing it since it’s a Swedish designer so can be forgiven, plus the booties make up for it.
    Were she and Madeleine there together or ships passing in the night type of thing?

  11. Off topic but can’t resist: it’s utterly shocking how difference the demeanor of Kate and William are landing in Canada, having the kids wave, big smiles, etc., and what they do to British citizens. SMH.

Comments are closed.

Back To Top