Sarah, Duchess of York Current Events 17: June 2011-December 2013

[rcra]

Does members of the royal family need passports? I mean, I know Sarah is not a HRH, but is she still considered a member? She does have the title: Sarah, Duchess of York. Does that even mean anything?

 

[sliver_bic]

She isn't considered a member as she is divorced. As for the passport, yes she would need one, even the other members have passports. Not sure about the Monarch because of her position as head of state but the others have to have them. The princes and princesses usually use name of the land in their father's title as last name i.e. William Wales or Beatrice York.

 

[rcra]

Thanks for the info!

 

[NGalitzine]

The Queen is the only person not to require a passport when travelling abroad.

 

[Diarist]

As NGalitzine says, only the Queen does NOT require a passport. All other royals are issued with one - and if they are going on an official visit abroad, the Private Secretary usually has custody of the passport to present it if required. [usually, host nations of royal visits do NOT require sight of the passport].

British Passports are now produced in a form common to all EU Nations - they are machine readable, with personal details towards the back of the document. Until EU passports were issued, the British Passport was a slightly larger document, with a dark navy cover, non machine-readable, and with the holder's name handwritten on the front, and various personal details - height, hair colour, eye colour etc handwritten on a page near the front of the document. One very significant change between the EU style passport and the traditional old navy blue passport is that on the old document, the holder's Title was shown: in the new EU style passport, no details of the holder's title are given [to the dismay, it must be said, of many British nobility!] Thus, I presume that Sarah's passport will read 'Sarah Margaret York' (i.e. with NO reference to Sarah, Duchess of York) although her maiden name [Ferguson] will also be shown.

Hope this is of interest


Alex

 

[Diarist]

It depends on the visa Sarah has. Some require that you leave every so many months and then you can re enter. I 'm not sure if or what visa Sarah would need. If she working there I would think she would need a green card. But if she plans on living there she needs some good high paying work because I don't see her living just anywhere in the US and it's expensive. They are huge sticklers on credit ratings etc so Sarah will need to be a lot more careful.

I agree with everything that you say Meadow. From personal experience, I believe US immigration formalities are amongst the toughest in the world. British nationals travelling to the US on vacation can generally get what is called a 'visa waiver', which excuses one from applying for a formal visa. I have in the past had to obtain a business visa for the US, not to work in the US on a permanent basis, but just to undertake the type of activities that a 'normal business person' would undertake. I had to apply by completing a fairly comprehensive VISA application form, and from memory I had to produce financial details and also proof in the form of a letter that I 'had a job that I would be returning to' in the UK. It was all very strict - and here is the interesting thing - the 'business' I was going to the USA to undertake was NOT a commercial activity, but was government-sponsored civil service work. On arrival at Dulles Airport, I was closely questioned again by an immigration officer.

To work in the USA on a long-term basis, Sarah would need a green card, and these are harder to obtain for UK citizens than for some other nationalities [from memory, Irish Citizens used to have a far easier time of it]. You do have to fill in fairly lengthy financial disclosures [unless the system has changed] and I think that Sarah would find some of her earlier financial 'situations' as quite challenging - the USA needs to know that you are debt free and will be able to support yourself etc etc. Another hurdle that Sarah might find is to do with where she proposes to reside: many appartments and condominium associations vet their prospective residents VERY carefully in order to guard against any possible disturbance, any financial issues etc. Many residents like to enjoy a quiet and private existence, and the possibility of the National Enquirer and the like 'keeping tabs on Sarah' could in my opinion make some communities and asssociations reluctant to have her resident on a permanent basis. Sarah has, I believe, rented property in the US before, so I assume that the obtacles are not insurmountable, but there again, the possibility exists...


Alex

 

[Mirabel]

That's an easy one to answer, Russo. The Queen [like anyone else] could easily set up a trust with Andrew [and his heirs] as a beneficiary. In exactly the same way that the Queen has already set up a trust [following Sarah and Andrew's divorce] to benefit Beatrice and Eugenie. The Queen could either set up a trust by buying property, the income of which could be used by Andrew [exactly the same principle on which the Duchy of Cornwall operates, although that was of course set up way back in 1337 by Edward III for his son and heir, Prince Edward, in order to provide him with an income from its assets.] Alternatively, the Queen could simply provide a large sum of money [rather than real estate], which the trustees could then invest in stocks and shares or even real estate, in order to produce an income to pay regularly to Andrew.

Alex

The Queen could, but would she, especially in the current economic climate?

She is very astute and generally knows which way the wind is blowing; I realize she's indicated her support for Andrew in the past, but just imagine the flap if she were to do this right now!
I don't see her flouting public opinion in this way. She is generally more cautious than that.

 

[PrinceS]

Hi Everyone

I've searched around for info about Sarah's room at Royal Lodge and I have a question that I hope someone might be able to answer. How large is the living space she occupies? Is it a room? A suite of rooms? Are there any photos?

Just curious. Thanks!

 

[Lord_Royal]

Hi Everyone

I've searched around for info about Sarah's room at Royal Lodge and I have a question that I hope someone might be able to answer. How large is the living space she occupies? Is it a room? A suite of rooms? Are there any photos?

Just curious. Thanks!

This question is probably best for the Royal Lodge thread, but my understanding is that it's a suite of rooms. You'll definitely not find photos, though I do think a few scenes from "Finding Sarah" were filmed in Fergie's living room.

 

[yvr girl]

I read that the Queen set up 1 million dollar for trust funds for her children when they were born (Andrew and Edward - perhaps later for Anne as she wasn't Queen when she was born) If you go by the principle that money doubles every 7 years, then those trust would be worth substantial amounts now. I'm sure they wouldn't have been touched at all until the recipients were at least 21.

 

[iceflower]

___________________


Sarah, Duchess of York, attended Tamara Ecclestone's annual fundraising dinner in aid
of Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital Charity at One Marylebone on November
14, 2011 in London.



** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 ** Pic 3 ** Pic 4 ** gettyimages/daylife ** gettyimages/filmmagic **

 

[HRHHermione]

She actually looks quite nice. Not her outfit so much- but she looks happier than she has in awhile. Her smile seems sincere.

 

[Lord_Royal]

I think she looks the best she has in a long time, definitely lost some weight and she seems relaxed and happy. Lovely to see.

 

[Irish Eyes]

It was announced at the weekend that Sarah has been appointed "International Not for Sale Ambassador to combat Human Trafficking".
She acknowledged she still has a lot to learn about the issue, but said she will give it her full commitment. I really hope they manage to make a difference.

 

[Diarist]

Perhaps the title is a little unfortunate, bearing in mind that, strictly speaking, [access to] the Duke of York was 'not for sale', and Sarah was actually caught on camera trying to do just that!

To be serious, I do think that it is a bit of a mistake for Sarah to be involved in such an issue. The reason is because, IMHO, her presence actually serves to 'cheapen' what is a vital, vital cause.

IMHO, Sarah never really has shown herself to be committed to charity for the sake of the cause. Granted, she set up 'Children in Crisis', which is of course a very worthy cause, but I always get the feeling that Sarah has an agenda with her causes and her charities: a fellow forum member here quoted from Dr Starkie's book about Sarah 'using' charity as a 'front' when she wanted to go chasing after some professional sportsman or other.........and, alas, during her time as a 'serving' royal member of the BRF, Sarah acquired a reputation for extreme laziness when it came to 'general' charitable work.

I posted previously about my conern as to how serious Sarah is about human trafficking and mentioned that it is 'the latest fashionable cause'. To me - and I am sorry to say this - Sarah's involvement seems to be have been brought about by the machinations of an astute PR, rather than any great concern for the issue. Yes, I am sure that Sarah abhors trafficking, but I suspect that was not the prime motiviator for her current involvement.

Let's hope she does a good job. And that any forthcoming antics [and I am afraid there will be some] on her part do not serve to taint a vitally important cause. And I hope that she does not over-claim on her expenses either! If it is 'first class flights and 5 star hotels all the way', I hope that neither the charity nor some governmental organisation pays.

Just my thoughts, and as usual, not meant to offend,


Alex

 

[Meadow]

I think she looks happy but sorry those shoes look as bad as they did the first time around. Why does she keep doing that with her leg? It does nothing for her. I agree with you Diarist this issue has been around for years so I am a little dubious of Sarah and her reasons behind it. Let's hope she doesn't go the first class route because if she does the press will have a field day. I do think they need to rethink her title though cause that just doesn't sound good connected to Sarah. We should start hearing and seeing Sarah talking about it more and I don't mean the talkshow circuit. I mean going to the places and talking to the victims and getting a good understanding of how and why this happens. We will just have to see how long it lasts and if she decides to take the girls along.

 

[Diarist]

___________________


Sarah, Duchess of York, attended Tamara Ecclestone's annual fundraising dinner in aid
of Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital Charity at One Marylebone on November
14, 2011 in London.

Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital is a wonderful cause..............but again, I have grave concerns about this 'appearance' of Sarah as well.

Tamara Ecclestone. Hmmm. Her father, Bernie Ecclestone, a multi-billionaire has avoided - albeit quite legally - paying his fair share of income tax for years. He puts his money in off-shore trusts, and also put most of his billions in the name of his then-wife Slavicia. Because of a quirk in UK tax laws, foreign nationals can live quite legitimately in the UK for years, but can count themselves non-resident for tax purposes. In other words, they can benefit from all the benefits offered by living in a stable society, but contributing nothing towards it - schools, police, security, the NHS etc.

Had Mr Ecclestone - who actually pays less tax annually than your humble Diarist - paid his taxes, there would be no need for Tamara to hold fundraisers.....

Another point: Bernie Ecclestone is currently facing police enquries into corruption allegations, after his admission that he paid a bribe to a Russian. If he is charged, it is not going to look too good when they drag out his proximity to the Royal Family through his 'friendship' with Sarah, Duchess of York.

footnote: I often read how 'Bernie Ecclestone is a friend of Sarah, Duchess of York from her Paddy McNally days'. Wrong; the real position is that at that time Bernie did not care a toss for Sarah. And his daughters were of course far too young / not even born when Sarah was on the scene as Paddy's girlfriend. At that time, Sarah was almost totally ignored by Bernie Ecclestone because contributed 'nothing' to the world of F1. Most women in F1 at the time were beautiful models / important Society girls / Aristocrats / fabulously wealthy. Sarah was rather despised at that time - cruelly and dismissively written off by the 'bitchy' F1 crowd as a fat girl not worth bothering about. Believe me, I was there at the time: many of my male relatives were and are still members of the very pukka British Racing Drivers Club, an organisation that stated life as a very 'upmarket' Club for 'gentlemen racers'. Many of these ageing gentlemen despited Bernie Ecclestone and what he was turning the sport into - but their involvement provided me with an insight into the world of F1 motor racing. Of course, when Sarah: who was previously known as 'Big Fat Fergie / Poor Old Fergie / The Ginger Lump' etc suddenly managed to hook the most eligble man in Britain, Bernie could not get enough of her!

 

[sndral]

It was announced at the weekend that Sarah has been appointed "International Not for Sale Ambassador to combat Human Trafficking".
She acknowledged she still has a lot to learn about the issue, but said she will give it her full commitment. I really hope they manage to make a difference.

sarah ferguson – Search Results – Not For Sale: End Human Trafficking and Slavery
There's no mention of this on the organizations' web site, do you have a link?

Let's hope she doesn't do anything to cause an international incident like she did w/ the "Duchess and Daughters" documentary
Duchess of York may face police quiz over undercover TV documentary highlighting 'plight' of Turkish orphans | Mail Online

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Here's the website:
www.notforsalecampaign.org

 

[Russophile]

Why does she keep doing that with her leg?

I think she thinks it makes her look skinnier.

 

[Zonk]

Just because an issue has been around for years, it doesn't mean that proper attention shouldn't be paid to it now. What if researchers hadn't taken train of thought with the polio vaccine, or those fighting for the end of apartheid, or the women who fought for the right of women to vote, etc.

It just means that the issue has deep tentatcles and its going to be harder to resolve. I am all for anyone bringing attention to this terrible issue.

 

[Diarist]

Here's the website:
www.notforsalecampaign.org

Thank you for the reference, KittyAtlanta.

I have now looked at the site, and after doing a website search have found several articles about 'The Duchess of York' and her recent appearances for the organisation. Mention is made of her philanthropic role over the last 20 years or so. Hmmm.

I don't blame the average journalist, [particularly abroad] for failing to understand that Sarah is no longer the Duchess of York, but I do not think it unreasonable for the actual organisation that Sarah is involved with to get her title right.

The abolition of human trafficking is a vitally important cause; I just feel that despite all the honeyed words, Sarah is not really known for her philanthropy. Indeed, I hope some American Forum Members can help me with my understanding, because I always thought that the main point of including 'philanthropists' on Charity Boards etc was because of the actual FINANCE that they can bring.......

I am quite sure that Sarah is NOT in a position to contribute anything financial to the Organisation; indeed, I fear that she actually will need her expenses covering, and, as we know, she is a bit of a 'first class airfare and 5-Star hotel' gal. If a member of the BRF is involved in a charitable organisation, the costs of particpating are borne either by the Civil List [or its replacement] or the Foreign Office if the work is abroad. Sarah will, presumbably, therefore need 'paying for' by the Organisation.

As I said: Hmmmm

 

[Zonk]

From the American standpoint, someone serving on the Board brings a variety of different things to the Board: if they are a public person they bring name potential name recognition and attention to the cause, they share the same interests and committment to the organization, they do participate in Fundraising and depending on the organization they may or may not be required to pay their expenses. But there is a lot of attention on non profit organizations in the United States, and an emphasis is placed on using monies for the purpose of the organization and not its employees or board members. In addition, there are a signiciant amount of organizations that are watchdogs for these non profits. In addition, with the economy being the way it is.....organizations are keen to be recognized as using the donated sums in a sensible matter.

Not that this doesn't happen of course.

 

[Irish Eyes]

sarah ferguson – Search Results – Not For Sale: End Human Trafficking and Slavery
There's no mention of this on the organizations' web site, do you have a link?

Let's hope she doesn't do anything to cause an international incident like she did w/ the "Duchess and Daughters" documentary
Duchess of York may face police quiz over undercover TV documentary highlighting 'plight' of Turkish orphans | Mail Online

Sndral, I mainly read about it via twitter and facebook.

Twitter
The President of the Not for Sale Campaign has a brief post on his twitter page. There is a mention of it on Sarah's own twitter page.
There are a few congrats messages on the Not for Sale facebook page.

It was also reported on the Hello magazine website, but it's not there now. I think they update their news in pictures section regularly.
Sorry I didn't post the link earlier.

 

[sndral]

Thx. Irisheyes, when I saw your post, I did the search on the organization's website, expecting a press release and perhaps more info. on what exactly she would be doing for them and couldn't find one, I'm sure one will surface in the near future.

 

[rmay286]

The abolition of human trafficking is a vitally important cause; I just feel that despite all the honeyed words, Sarah is not really known for her philanthropy. Indeed, I hope some American Forum Members can help me with my understanding, because I always thought that the main point of including 'philanthropists' on Charity Boards etc was because of the actual FINANCE that they can bring.......

I am quite sure that Sarah is NOT in a position to contribute anything financial to the Organisation; indeed, I fear that she actually will need her expenses covering, and, as we know, she is a bit of a 'first class airfare and 5-Star hotel' gal. If a member of the BRF is involved in a charitable organisation, the costs of particpating are borne either by the Civil List [or its replacement] or the Foreign Office if the work is abroad. Sarah will, presumbably, therefore need 'paying for' by the Organisation.

As I said: Hmmmm

Just because Sarah has not been the best philanthropist in the past, does that mean she should never get involved with philanthropy again?

I understand why people are cynical about Sarah, I really do, and I understand that human trafficking is a "fashionable cause", but what is Sarah supposed to do? She has to rebuild her life somehow.

Looking at the pictures from Tamara Ecclestone's fundraiser (and yes, I knew someone would mention her father, but let's ignore that for a minute), I noticed a couple of things: Sarah has lost weight and she is wearing sheer sleeves with her dresses now. This is the second time in the last few weeks that I've seen her wearing dresses with long, semi-transparent sleeves that look like they may have been added to the dress. This tells me that someone has told Sarah that "at a certain age", women shouldn't show their bare arms anymore, and she has listened. Similarly, Sarah may or may not have a good track record as a philanthropist (I think it depends which facts you look at), but campaigning against human trafficking isn't a bad cause to get involved with if Sarah wants the public to start viewing her favorably again. And yes, this could be viewed as a manipulative and self-interested move, but it's also good PR. Again, it seems like Sarah has been offered decent advice and has taken it.

Whatever Sarah wants to do with her life in the future, whether fly around the world on someone else's dime or contribute time and energy to worthy causes, she has to start rebuilding her public image somewhere. And I think she seems to be making a decent start. I'm not holding my breath that there won't be another big scandal in the next few months or years, but I'm not completely pessimistic about Sarah, either.

 

[Osipi]

We also have to remember that we here at TRF are very much in the minority in that we've followed Sarah's tracks over time and have seen her triumphs and her foibles, her good times and her bad times and know of the history with whom she associates.

Regardless of what Sarah's motives are in doing this charity or on who's dime it in on, if there is one more person aware of human trafficking in this world or one more donation to the cause, then it will have been worthwhile.

 

[Russophile]

Indeed, I hope some American Forum Members can help me with my understanding, because I always thought that the main point of including 'philanthropists' on Charity Boards etc was because of the actual FINANCE that they can bring.......

From this Yanks POV: at the end of the day it will be how much Bang for the Buck can Sarah bring to the table. I am sure that this charity will give her a chance to pull strings, make phone calls, cajole, shake the finanical tree down for their worthy cause; however, if she doesn't perform, they will part ways.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I hope that Sarah will be able to help in some tangible way, preferably by "rolling up her sleeves" and doing some hard work. If she does that rather than simply show up at fund-raising events, word of her work will leak out. I do think that this is the key for Sarah to truly build self-worth: to work genuinely hard at something she cares about and to do it in such a way that it's not an obvious benefit to herself.

 

[Diarist]

Thank you for your help, Russo.

I am afraid to say that the thought of Sarah looking to her contacts for financial help terrifies me. Even if it is for charity. I do wonder whether Sarah has any 'respectable' people who would actually finance this sort of charitable work. She does know some millionaires who are above reproach [Sir Richard Branson for one] but whether they would be good for donations to what seems to be basically an American Charity [however worthy and universal its aims] I cannot say. I suppose Branson might be good for a raffle prize of an air ticket or two or possibly a stay on Necker...


Alex