Jonathan Prynn of The London Evening Standard writes: "Regina v Darling, or more likely v Osborne, will be one of the more fascinating departmental spending struggles of the coming years. Next summer The Queen's senior courtiers lock horns (or perhaps tiaras) with Treasury mandarins over the future funding of our Head of State. It could be a defining moment for how Britain wants to run its Monarchy. The annual Civil List, the public income used to pay for The Queen's daily costs, mostly staff salaries, has been set at £7.9 million for the past 20 years. It only covers about half of Her spending, the short-fall made up from reserves. The reserves are almost depleted and will be down to a few million by the time The Queen's next 10 year financing cycle starts in Spring 2011."
"Just to keep The Queen's way of life at current levels would mean increasing The Civil List by at least £7 million and more realistically probably £10 million a year. The claim will come against one of the bleakest public spending backdrops in British history. It also comes in a new era when hostility to the taxpayer funding the lifestyles of public servants is more intense than ever. The Queen cannot be compared to those "flipping" MPs of course. The public expects a little Majesty from their Monarch, but prefers humility from their political representatives. Nonetheless the case for the extra money is going to be an unbelievably hard one to make. If anything the public mood could harden over the next two years as the grim reality of deep public spending cuts takes hold. It was anger over alleged "Royal profligacy" that forced The Queen to start paying tax on Her income during Her 'annus horribilis' during the last recession in 1992."
Jonathan Prynn concludes his article by adding this: "We could be approaching the moment when The Monarchy takes another lurch towards a pared down Scandinavian model. Less Majesty it may be but The Queen has finely tuned political attenae. If the alternative means stoking up Republicanism she will happily accept more tupperware and less flummery at The Palace."
Dear subjects of Her Britannic Majesty:
ReplyDeletePlease do not "Scandinavianize" your monarchy! Please!
Hello there Baltzers. I quite agree with your comments - not that there is anything wrong with the lovely Scandinavian model, of course.
ReplyDeleteLet's face it. £20 million per year is a drop in the ocean when you consider the £150 million MPs have spent on their "expenses" in the past year alone. Does anybody seriously believe that a president would not demand £20 million, only to spend it all on duck houses, moat cleaning and the tenth mortgage in his property portfolio? Now, don't get me started on all this other Government waste as well, like MPs salaries. :-)
Majesty does cost - but it is quite priceless.
God Bless The Prince Of Wales!
God Help The Duke Of York!
Do they expect the Queen to take the Tube when performing her official functions? Republicanism through penny pinching.
ReplyDeleteGiven that the government pockets the revenue from the Crown Estate in return for providing the civil list, can teh civil list simply be increased from that and inform the public that theri contribution remains the same?
ReplyDeletenot that there is anything wrong with the lovely Scandinavian model, of course
ReplyDeleteThat's highly debatable, I'd say, sir.
After all the billions poured out on banks and insurance companies, I find it nonsensical to believe that the British will mind. Who will make the point? The utterly discredited political class? Good luck. The press (who make oodles out of royal stories, and whose editors and proprietors covet knighthoods)? Good luck.
ReplyDeleteWe like the Queen, and will be rightly stupefied and indignant if any smooth operator thinks this is a good opportunity to stick the republican-dipped knife in. I would not put it beyond Sky/Times/Sun (i.e. that shameless Murdoch). But the strength of feeling, right now, is that the Monarchy is about the only thing going for us in the Establishment. It really is - not amongst monarchists, but amongst nearly every man and woman on the street or in the office.
"Do they expect the Queen to take the Tube when performing her official functions?"
ReplyDeleteActually they do.
In the newspaper the other day they listed second class train fares as examples of how our Royal Family could save money. Whatever next? Travelling on the roof to save paying the fare?
After we have the Duke of York and Prince Charles riding second class, the Queen with the luggage and the Duke of Edinburgh driving the train, they will denounce this extravagance too. Bicycles all around. Then they'll take away the bicycles. Naturally the first President of Britain will set up shop at Buck House and have an entourage measuring in the hundreds.
ReplyDelete"Majesty does cost - but it is quite priceless."
ReplyDeleteWhy, that is the most profound and honourable thing you've written, Welton.
Thanks - wish I could say the same about you.
ReplyDelete