The Unofficial British Royal Family Pages

Sunday 17 October 2004

Can the Monarchy Afford Britain?

Well, the opening of the new Scottish Parliament at Holyrood seems to have come off well, with the Queen of Scots doing a fine job as always.  She also seemed to have enjoyed herself.  I particularly enjoyed one picture where she was leaning forward to see something in the street during the “Riding of Parliament”, but seems to be trying to look up Jack McConnell’s kilt as he sits beside her with knees primly together.  It brings to mind the story of how the late Duke of Gloucester would sometimes sit rather carelessly at Balmoral, and Princess Alice would occasionally have to loudly chide, “Knees, Harry!” 

In the course of one of the occasional excavations of piles of paper in my study, I recently ran across an article I clipped after the Queen Mother’s death, concerning royal finances.  It concerned the fact that at the beginning of each reign since the 18^th century the King or Queen has signed over the income from the Crown Estate to the Government, in return for an allowance to run the monarchy.  The resurrected article notes that in 2001 the Crown Estate earned approximately 148 million GBP (Great Britain Pounds) after taxes, while the Civil List allotment to the senior royals was a mere 6.6 million GBP.  (Roughly that would be a bit less than 300 million U.S. dollars, to about $13 million.) Now of course there are other costs involved in the monarchy – all those castles, the train, etc. – but the disparity between income and expense is still striking.  All the rest of the money goes to the British Government. 

I raise this to point out that despite the regular assertions of politicians and press pundits that the monarchy is paid for by the British taxpayers, the opposite is actually true.  The Crown Estate is providing a cash cow for the Government and, ultimately, for the British taxpayer.  Theoretically the act of each new Sovereign in “voluntarily” signing over the Crown Estate to the Government means that the Sovereign remains the ultimate private owner.   Should a future sovereign choose to do so; he or she could in theory refuse to sign over the estate.  It would of course be a constitutional crisis and might well precipitate expropriation of the estate, if not the end of the monarchy.  (We always seem to try to kill off the geese that lay the golden eggs.)  But it is a possibility. 

It has long been rumored that the Prince of Wales is eager to cut a better deal vis a vis the Crown Estate when he comes to the throne.  And at the very least the next accession will provide an opportunity for reform of the confused status quo.  The simplest and most rational course would be for there to be a reorganization of the Crown Estate into a unified department, with all of the costs of inhabited palaces, trains and transport, ceremonies, security and such paid for by the new entity before any residue is passed on to the Government.  The Prince of Wales’ success as a businessman for charity, and the efficiency and economy of the Royal Household in recent years, suggests that the British public might get even better value for money than at present.  It would also make even clearer that royal “Firm” is just that, and a pretty successful one to boot! 

Meanwhile, the U.S. election is drawing nigh, and we will soon see if the historical anomaly again proves true that the candidate most closely related to the British royals wins.  If so, I understand it will be President Kerry. 

- Ken Cuthbertson